Mary Jenkins / The New Pine Plains Herald
Periods of silence filled the room as the Pine Plains Central School District Board of Education considered severe staffing and student program cuts if voters reject a revised $40.49 million spending plan on June 16. A second defeat would trigger a state-mandated contingency budget, which would freeze the district’s tax levy at the current year’s limit — forcing nearly $1 million in additional cuts.
“I acknowledge that these are all very, very difficult decisions that we might be facing,” Superintendent Brian Timm told the school board and a dozen others on Tuesday, June 2, at the Stissing Mountain High School library. “I’m hopeful we’re not going to be facing them.”
The original $40.78 million spending plan for 2026-27 received 51.5% of the vote on May 19, but needed a 60% supermajority because it exceeded the district’s 3.4% tax levy limit by 1.03%.
The board amended its budget on May 26 by cutting three positions: a head school bus driver, a typist, and a dedicated one-to-one nurse assigned to a student. That will save the district $290,569, bringing the proposed tax levy down to the district’s recalculated limit of 3.39%.
The revised spending plan would need only a simple majority to pass.
Board member Fred “Chip” Couse said, “There’s a disconnect between the increase that the district is putting forward and how it translates into a tax increase. If you even conservatively model this out with what’s happened historically with the tax base, we’re talking about a 1 or 1.25% increase to the average homeowner’s tax, not [3.39%].”
The last time the school district was required to adopt a contingency budget was in 2011.
Timm said that if the budget was defeated, an additional $945,789 would have to be cut to meet the 2025-26 tax levy. A contingency plan automatically restricts the purchase of new equipment (currently budgeted for $96,500) and disallows the district’s $100,000 capital outlay projects for building maintenance and repair.
“We would need to subtract $750,000 in ballpark round numbers,” he said.
The list of possible program and employee reductions presented by Timm at the school board’s May 26 meeting included $922,497 in staff cuts — among them, a nurse, social worker, librarian, and an administrative position. Additionally, the district left several teaching positions vacant following recent resignations, including three positions the board approved cutting at the June 2 meeting.
Image courtesy Pine Plains Central School District
Because New York state will likely require districts to offer universal pre-K in the 2028-29 school year, the board may leave the $410,423 program untouched.
Eliminating all sports would save $441,305, according to Timm, while eliminating extracurricular activities would save $268,000.
Timm said that cutting a few clubs or lower-level teams saves very little money because fixed operating costs do not change. “Meaningful savings would typically only occur with broader, more systemic reductions rather than isolated program cuts,” he told the Herald after the board meeting.
For example, $160,000 is earmarked for extracurricular transportation, which includes the 3:30 p.m. late bus and outside trips. “If we run any clubs, it’s only right to have transportation for [them],” Timm said.
Coaching staff stipends total more than $135,000. Timm said that because certified supervision and safety requirements are mandatory, this expense cannot be scaled down proportionally with the removal of a few programs like junior varsity or modified sports teams.
Board member Jim Griffin said, “There are no good choices here,” to which Timm responded, “I totally agree with you.”
In-person voting will be held from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m on Tuesday, June 16 at Stissing Mountain High School cafeteria. Early mail and absentee ballots can be obtained online, at the school, or by calling District Clerk Julia Tomaine at 518-398-7181, Ext. 1408. Tomaine must receive the completed ballots no later than 5 p.m. on June 16.
Why are the residents of Pine Plains unwilling to give their students the very best? Do they not realize, or do they really not care, that these kids need a well- rounded and rich educational experience to best prepare them for a sucessful future?
An austerity budget can mean less access to top notch colleges, it can create a less-skilled group of graduates, who, through no fault of their own, will find the competitive job market that much more challenging.
Failure to do the very best we can for Pine Plains students weakens their prospects for successful lives.
It weakens members of the future generation of Americans on the increasingly competitive global stage. The less-skilled will not be leading the world of tomorrow.
People complain that Pine Plains needs more affordable housing.
Do they not see that what is actually needed is a more skilled, better educated population, equipped to command adequate salaries to construct and rehabilitate homes to be proud of?
Are the tax dollars saved by forcing the adoption of a contingency budget going to be spent on anything even remotely approaching the value of these students’ futures, of our community’s future, and, by extention, our nation’s future?
I think not.
Shame on you, Pine Plains.
Ward: It is unfair and inaccurate to say “Why are the residents of Pine Plains unwilling to give their students the very best?” The facts are that the per pupil spending in PPCSD (over $47,000, which is higher even than in NYC!) is already easily the highest of any school district in Dutchess County, while the student-teacher ratio of 9-1 is also the lowest of any school district in Dutchess County. So, the taxpayer has generously supported the school district.
The problem is on the spending front. For example, the school board proposes to reduce the budget by $290,569 by eliminating three employees: a bus driver, a typist and a nurse. That’s an average of over $96,000 per employee. That sounds like an awful lot for employees of these profiles. Why are employees’ costs so high?
I note that a contingency budget ($39.542 million) still represents a significant spending INCREASE of over $800,000 over the prior year’s budget ($38.712 million). Taxpayers are kidding themselves if they think this is pinching pennies.
The simple fact is that the BOE and Timm need to start doing the hard work of controlling costs, which is going to require consolidating facilities (which the BOE has refused to do, despite dramatic declines in student enrollment). You can’t expect the average taxpayer to continue to endorse budget increases under these conditions.
Thank you,Thomas for correcting some misconceptions.
Awww… Prospects are not shown properly. Letter seems to be trying to make parents be aware of what is being taken away vs. what is being kept. Are we preparing our future generations towards what would be a prosperous future. Now is the time for classes to be oriented towards the practical nature of life. Is the wood working – crafts, etc. being taken away? Is there the possibility that prior admins. had given rights to over hire, etc. Can the ration of nurses to sudents’ be looked at for the ration be “much” less. The voters are not being properly informed as to what the budget actually mean. It discusses how “money was set aside for new busses ea. yr.” Therefore, why are buying new busses ea. yr. necessary. They speak of salt damage to undercarriage of vehicles – there are now very inexpensive locally owned businesses to employ practices to alleviate these problems. Have these been looked into? Does the Town put out the bid to obtain new busses or has this just been in practice for many yrs.? I never see anything about “trade in values”, etc. pertaining to this matter. Do I believe more cutting is necessary??? Being a senior, for tax purposes, yes. However, in actuality, I am more concerned that budgeting education is something for just the Town Board to do. Or the School Board.
Truly if students could be adequately taught in middle school – WHY NOT? Consolidate classes. Don’t know who the school being used now is owned by but should perhaps serve another function. I seem to only have questions that I don’t believe have been transferred info to all residents, parents about the true nature of this budget and who would prosper from it, not threatening parents with the end of sports. I’m not sure but perhaps there is a state mandate about cutting all sports or making other transport (from school system) Parent responsible for their child in sports used to be the way when I was growing up. I believe that the economy right now does not support the budget that is being suggested. I have been tightening my pants which is something that happens now and then in hoping for the best in the future. We need to be vigilant in what we are being told and need to know it’s the TRUTH.
Get rid of the buses and go contractor no insurance or maintenance or to buy 300k in buses