Given that the sum total of all budget committee changes in the last 5 years represents only two-tenths of a percent (0.2%) of this year's total operating budget, how would you characterize the need for this committee on a spectrum ranging from unnecessary bureaucracy to absolutely essential oversight?
I think the question is important and deserves its own thread.
To answer you, Gary, I believe Merrimack would be better off without this Budget Committee, but not because it has made few changes to the budgets over the past years. The reasons go deeper than that. Here they are:
1) The Budget Committee is too weak to perform the job it should be able to perform. It was pointed out frequently that cuts, additions and lateral moves of money can all be ignored by the School Board, which is the body charged with managing the school system. Therefore, the only change the BC can implement that they can actually make stick is a bottom line cut that is so deep no surplus can be expected to cover it. I think it is not simply not helpful, I think it is dangerous to have a committee whose only tool is not a scalpel but a machete.
2) The Budget Committee interferes with the voice of the people in the school budgeting process. Sounds contradictory, but because the budget that gets presented at the deliberative session is technically the BC's budget, the BC is the body that holds the only public hearing on the budget, at the very tail end of the process, when it is extremely hard to make any changes. Even if residents made good arguments at the public hearing, sufficient to convince the BC to make last-minute changes, the BC is too weak to enforce those changes if the School Board disagrees. If the BC did not exist, the School Board would be the one to hold the public hearing -- and they are the body that has the power to make changes in how the money is actually spent. People currently have the right to speak to the SB during the budgeting process, but a public hearing is the time officially set aside for the voice of the people, and is the time likely to attract the greatest response from residents.
3) The Budget Committee is anti-democratic by its nature. The predecessor to this School Budget Committee was a Municipal Budget Committee, which had a unique function in town. It was the only one to look at all three budgets (town, school, water district) and make recommendations. But the School BC only looks at the school budget. Residents should have the right to elect the officials who are responsible for taxing us and spending our money. The residents have such an elected body -- it is called the School Board. If the elected BC changes the SB's budget, it is in effect taking away the authority of the elected representatives of the people. And when you stop to think about it, the School Board and the Budget Committee are elected by the same constituency, the same voters, in the same elections -- why would the voters seek different viewpoints on the two committees? Why would they want the two boards to disagree?
4)The Budget Committee is anti-democratic in practice. It is a large, 12-member body in a relatively small town. Over the past 5 elections, there have been a total of 30 seats up for grabs, and almost all of those seats have been unopposed. A representative board should offer the voters a choice of opinions (as I have stated elsewhere) or it cannot be said to truly represent the views of the majority except by chance. The School Board, on the other hand, is a small, 5 member board. Residents treat it as a more important board, and therefore it is extremely rare to have uncontested School Board races. Personally, I would rather put the budget decisions in the hand of the elected board that represents the majority's choice.
Creating the Budget Committee was a reasonable idea in the beginning, but actual practice has led me to the conclusion that the residents and the School District would be better off without it. No change in the membership of the committee would solve its structural problems, and in the hands of the wrong folks, the BC could be a destructive weapon. For the sake of efficiency, democracy, and giving more of a voice to the people in the School District budgeting process, I suggest residents give serious thought to the merits of a change.