The school board has drafted an agreement to be presented to the Hooksett school district that allows some Hooksett students to attend Londonderry schools.
Hooksett is expected to vote on the memorandum in early December. Up to 40 Hooksett students would be accepted under the agreement.
Called a Memorandum of Understanding, it outlines the agreement between Londonderry schools and Hooksett regarding student enrollment processes, tuition fees, terms of the agreement, reservation of rights, payment of tuition, financial and school records.
Noting that Manchester and Hooksett are parting ways for high school, Londonderry School Board chairman Nancy Hendricks said Hooksett has been inquiring with several districts about tuitioning students. Hooksett previously had an agreement to send its high school students to Manchester.
“We happen to be one of the districts that Hooksett has been looking into,” Hendricks said at the Tuesday, Nov. 19 School Board meeting.
Superintendent of Schools Nathan Greenberg said the agreement is a good idea because it assists in offsetting the loss of adequacy money – money received from the state to assist with education costs; allows the district a higher probability of maintaining present programs and services pre-Kindergarten to grade 12; offsets the possible future loss of stabilization grants; and would not require any additional staff at the high school to accommodate additional students this year or next, although staff reductions will be recommended for the middle school due to anticipated enrollment decline.
He said that if in the future the district had to add or maintain current staffing levels, the agreement would be an excellent return on investment, even with the addition of two teachers. Greenberg emphasized Londonderry, if in the future, the district has to add/maintain current staffing levels, even with the addition of two teachers, would have total control over the number of students admitted.
“Last year FY 13 to FY 14, we lost $1,757,149 in adequacy money, which represents 53 cents per thousand,” Greenberg said. “We tuition in 56 students, which generated revenue of $476,000, which was a plus of 15 cents, so in essence we were able to negate that loss, and the loss was only 38 cents per thousand. So the tuition offset loss was 15 cents per thousand. In FY 14 to FY 15, we anticipate losing another $583,884 in adequacy or roughly 17 cents per thousand. Possible tuition from next year will be, with the current 56 students and the possible addition of 40 students, $1,004,352 which is 30 cents per thousand, so the tuition nets us a plus of 17 cents per thousand, vs. what we would lose next year.”
Greenberg said that over a two-year period, there is a possible tuition revenue of $1,480,501 or 45 cents per thousand revenue to offset a 70 cent loss per thousand due to the decline in adequacy funding.
Greenberg projected the revenue for the years FY 14 to FY 17 and said the cumulative revenue gain over that period would total $4,773,056, or approximately $1.45 per thousand.
The present stabilization grant is $1,295,082, but Greenberg said there is no guarantee the grant will continue. He said the FY 16 tuition of $1,432,352 more than offsets the possible loss of the grant.
“If, down the road, we had to hire two additional teachers because of tuitioned students, at a total cost of $136,000 (salary plus benefits) to generate in FY 16 tuition revenue of $1,432,352, the return on investment would be $1,295,952 – or a 900 percent return on investment,” Greenberg said.
The memorandum has a five-year length, renewable in five-year increments; calls for a maximum of 40 students per grade level moving forward, with a separate process for Special Education students subject to space availability, facilities, programs, staffing and expertise; equal access to all programs; tuition at a first year base rate of $10,290, with the parents charged the difference between the base rate and calculated cost; supplementary tuition from Hooksett in addition to the base rate, for special education services; mutual termination of the agreement at the end of five years, with both sides to meet not less than 90 days prior to the expiration of the agreement to discuss a possible extension; and if a decision to terminate is made, students in attendance can continue through graduation.
Greenberg said the Hooksett school board will hold a public hearing on the agreement Nov. 25, and a vote is scheduled for Dec. 5.
Board member Steve Young asked school district attorney Matt Upton what the difference was between an Area Agreement and a Memorandum of Understanding.
Upton said Area Agreements are covered by statute, while a tuition agreement or Memorandum of Understanding is “basically a contract between two parties.”
Board member John Robinson said the tuition amount was $10,290 but resident student cost of education was around $13,000, and asked Greenberg to explain the difference.
Greenberg said Londonderry is not incurring any additional costs because of tuitioned students and the tuitioned students lower the per-pupil cost due to the revenue. He likened it to an aircraft that was nearly full with full fare passengers but had a few seats unfilled; the airline then reduces the cost per empty seat to fill the plane and thus maximizes its profit.
Robinson clarified that instead of losing $3,000, the district would be gaining $10,000, and Greenberg agreed.
Board member John Laferriere said they had been working for a year to look for creative ways to reduce overhead and produce revenues, “and tuition was a pretty good place to look.
“We looked at what was going on between Hooksett and Manchester and unfortunately we capitalized on a bad situation with Manchester, but I think at the end of the day, Hooksett and Londonderry are going to make out on the deal,” Laferriere said.
Laferriere asked what the agreement does in terms of class size, quality of education and athletics.
“What happens to Billy if Billy gets bumped because a kid from Hooksett makes the team and Billy doesn’t,” Laferriere asked.
Greenberg said once a student is accepted at Londonderry High School, he or she has equal access to all programs and services, which include co-curricular and extracurricular activities.
“We have some sports programs where there are cuts, so it is possible that a Hooksett student might take the place of a Londonderry student for a particular sports team, whether it be cheerleading or basketball,” Greenberg said.
Classroom size would not be impacted, he said, adding that quality of education would be enhanced because of additional revenue, which over the long term would permit the district to continue to run the programs it is running now.
He said that if the district were to keep losing adequacy money and didn’t have tuitioned students, it “would be hard put to maintain staffing levels, which in turn, I think, would have a negative impact.”
Laferriere asked Greenberg about how the building projects expected in town would impact the agreement.
Greenberg said that according to the agreement, the district has control over how many Hooksett students can be accepted, and if there were only two accepted because of an influx of new Londonderry students then that’s how many would be accepted.
Resident Al Baldasaro asked if the school district would charge a special needs student what the state is paying for adequacy and Greenberg said no. Greenberg said that for a hypothetical student getting four units of speech and language services, the district would calculate its cost for speech and languages per unit and that would be added on to the tuition.
“We would not get adequacy for the tuitioned kids; that would go to Hooksett,” Greenberg said.
Board member Leitha Reilly asked what “Right of Refusal,” and Greenberg said the district could refuse students.
Upton said in the beginning of September the district would let Hooksett know how many spaces were available, and Hooksett would give Londonderry a list of pupils proposed for enrollment for the ensuing school year. Londonderry would get access to school records, discipline records and special education records and would confirm the students.
“What would have to happen to make us sorry we ever got involved in it?” Robinson asked
Greenberg said it would be a miscalculation on the number of slots available
Robinson asked if the Hooksett school board would have any say in school operations and Greenberg said it would not.
The Memorandum of Understanding was accepted unanimously. A copy of the Memorandum is available at the Londonderry Times website at www.nutpub.net.