At its meeting on May 27, members of the Park Ridge-Niles School District 64 Board conducted their first public review of the District’s 2008-09 budget.  What they saw should make us taxpayers uneasy, if not queasy, with thoughts of “There they go again.”

According to reports published in our local newspapers, the District’s first big gulp of our 2007 referendum-generated extra taxes will boost District revenues to a shade over $69 Million, up 14.2% from last year’s $60.69 Million.  That’s the “good” news.  The bad news is that next year’s operating expenses are projected to grow to over $60 Million from this year’s $56.78 Million.  That’s a 7.7 percent jump, folks, or almost double the growth in the Consumer Price Index over the past year.  And this year’s $56.78 Million in expenses was a 7.57% increase over the $52.8 Million of expenses in the 2006-07 budget.

Call us conservative, but outspending the rate of inflation by almost 100% does not seem to be sound fiscal policy or management.

What’s causing that big jump in costs?  Maybe it’s the restoration of a number of programs that the District cut over the past several years – totaling $12.2 Million since 2001 – as its finances were coming under increasing scrutiny by the State Board of Education.  The District assured us that those cuts would not affect the quality of education.  But if that is true, what compelling reasons have caused those cut programs to be restored?

Or maybe that big jump in costs is the result of adding five new literacy teachers, another psychologist, a new intervention services administrator, and two more months of salary for a current assistant principal at Lincoln Middle School.  We may have missed a more comprehensive explanation, but the only one we’ve seen from the District to date is contained in the minutes of the District’s Committee-of-the-Whole meeting from February 11, 2008 [pdf], in which Supt. Sally Pryor states that such staffing “is essential to meeting the goals of the District, particularly the mandated EIS/Rtl program, which will add value to learning for all students.” 

Unfortunately, we can’t tell exactly what “goals” she is referencing; and a search of the District’s website for the term “EIS/Rtl program” turns up “No Results.”  We also would like to know what Dr. Pryor means by that feel-good phrase “add value to learning,” but we had no better luck finding that on the District’s website, either.  Which suggests that The Culture of Secrecy is not confined to just Park Ridge city government.

Or maybe the big jump in costs is related to the increased salaries for teachers and teaching assistants, even though we were told by the District – pre-referendum, of course – that the extra referendum tax revenue would not go for teacher salaries and benefits.  Was that not quite the truth, District 64, or are we due for another lesson in the Three Card Monty game known as governmental “fund accounting,” where pieces of various costs are stashed in various funds for reasons known only to politicians, government accountants, and The Almighty (perhaps with the help of a government accountant)?

The reason we can’t tell what any of these things cost, either individually or collectively, is because D-64 apparently didn’t give that information to the newspapers.  And – “surprise!” – we can’t find a draft of the proposed new budget anywhere on the District’s website.  We did find, however, the District’s “FY09 Budget Timeline” [pdf], which indicates that the Board will review “Draft #2” of the proposed budget (where’s “Draft #1”?) at the Committee-of-the-Whole meeting this coming Monday, June 23.

So if you think your eye is quicker than D-64’s hand, you’ll get your chance to prove it Monday night.  But if you’re smart, you’ll keep your wager modest.