This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Community Corner

Making Hard Choices on Technology Spending is Making Hard Choices on All Spending

From David Spier

I was discouraged to read Geoff Epstein's April column advocating more public spending, fast on the heels of three not-yet-implemented tax increases, to solve the "problem" of insufficient technology purchases.  I was even more discouraged to read his May column excusing the poor value proposition that Newton Public Schools offers Newton taxpayers and schoolchildren.

 

His financial analysis of the technology program is sound and his intentions are good.  However, his analysis of Joshua Norman’s May guest column has only reinforced the Newton Taxpayers Association’s opposition to the three recent tax increases - overrides that passed in significant part to counter the inadequate fiscal history of Newton Public Schools.  Furthermore, it is rather easy to promote commitments to greater resources and capabilities while failing to grapple with the responsible decision-making needed to prioritize the spending of limited funds.

Find out what's happening in Newtonwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

 

The key question we face is: do we want Newton to be exceptional - run with quality, efficiency and care - or do we want to be bankrupt Stockton, California?  Quality organizations prioritize, adopt efficient operating models and never take for granted the source of their funds - taxpayers.  Newton cries for progress in these areas, and surely all of us hold high aspirations for the City in this regard.

Find out what's happening in Newtonwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

 

During our recent public discourse over three tax increases, prioritization could not be broached as a subject.  We as a city have made unfortunate decisions (read: Newton North High School) that necessarily constrict our future spending options. 

 

Yet fewer than 20% of eligible Newton voters have just approved increased taxes to pay for three more school replacements/renovations.  On an operating basis, our "tough decisions" include: hiring more police to uphold bike laws and adding fifty education staff, following a decade during which the school spending growth rate was six times higher than the enrollment growth rate?  We are failing in our aspirations to make tough, responsible decisions and key leaders have abdicated their fiscal responsibilities.

 

I agree with Mr. Epstein's advocacy of improved technology.  What should we relinquish to improve it?  How about if parents supply the technology to their own children and the City only pays for those economically unable to do so?  That would reduce spending.  If we properly integrate technology into classrooms, should that not create efficiencies that cause us to increase student-teacher ratios and pay for technology through staff reductions (precisely the way that the private sector operates)?  We are a talented, well-educated and ambitious group of taxpayers - where is the creativity and resourcefulness needed to stick with a budget?  Why do set the bar so low for ourselves?

 

I am compelled to remind Mr. Epstein that The Newton Schools Foundation in conjunction with the Newton School Committee floated a three year proposal to raise $6.35M ($2.1M/year) from the sale of naming rights in order to defray the cost of new technology programs.  However, Alderman Lisle Baker and former Aldermen Brooke Lipsitt and Vern Vance led the opposition to this campaign while signing onto the recent package of three excessive tax increases.  Furthermore, Alderman Baker wants to use this override campaign "as a building block to go back to the voters again...for the resources we need". 

 

As a realistic and responsible alternative, Newton Taxpayers Association strongly prefers the naming rights money to be used to help offset the cost of rebuilding Ward, Williams and Pierce Schools.  Technology improvement should be self-funded through efficiency gains.  However given the choice, we rather would see technology program advancements funded by naming rights proceeds than by increased property taxes through overriding Proposition 2½ again in 4-5 years.  I am left confused by Mr. Epstein’s concerns about relying on a donation model for technology while at the same time promoting his interest in connecting into an alumni network for technology funding; the two approaches seem to represent distinction without a difference.

 

Why do we set our education sights so high, yet our governance expectations so low?  Newton taxpayers deserve fiscal responsibility.  If we want more and better technology, what do we want less of?  If we cannot answer that question, we do not deserve technology advancement - or much of anything else.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?