To the editor:

Many thanks to the Committee on Appropriations, the Town Council, School Committee, Town Manager Jim Cunha and team, Barrington Public Schools Superintendent Mike Messore and his team and the many others who compiled Barrington's Municipal Budget. 

Barrington must make tough decisions this year and clearly cannot afford to address every concern. Barrington's leadership is doing its best to address the urgent issues while being pragmatic to assure that its investments help preserve the town’s assets while avoiding overburdening taxpayers.

I, like others following this budget process, strongly oppose the proposed $500,000 reduction to the school’s operating budget. The proposed amendment doesn’t account for the demands facing the schools, especially as the majority of the school budget is not discretionary and there must be a commitment to providing level services funding.

I do, however, believe that a different amendment should be considered that could ease taxpayers’ concerns which would reduce the budgeted amount for the schools’ investment in technology. The Technology Request of the school’s capital budget includes technology expansion for the K-3 as well as the costs for the replacement of the existing Chromebooks after only 3 years. 

With the work to get to 1-to-1 for high school and middle school students over the past 3 years and Google's estimate of a 5-year lifespan for Chromebooks we should be at a juncture where the district is seeing a decrease in spending for new devices for BHS and BMS, not an increase. 

An additional request in the budget is for new K-3 devices (both Chromebooks and iPads) signaling an expansion of utilization of devices.

These expenditures are concerning for a few reasons and show an area where further examination is needed. First, the administration is aiming to replace a sizable percentage of devices at least 1 year ahead of their viable lifespan. 

Second, there’s been no evaluation to show that continued investment in 1-to-1 device distribution has contributed to improved academic outcomes for our students. 

Third, ongoing integration of devices in the schools will facilitate a continued need for teacher training to assure appropriate adoption of device-augmented curriculum which does not appear to be budgeted for and obtaining devices prior to training faculty would prove inefficient. And finally, there is a lack of evidence-based decision-making in the expansion of device-assisted instruction in the lower grades.

We know devices are in our lives to stay and our children need to become adept at using them. Our schools would do well to assure that the utilization of technology in elementary schools is informed by evidence and that the expenditures are prudent. 

I recommend that a different proposed amendment be introduced to reduce the budgeted totals for technology. After asking taxpayers to support the BMS building project expenditures in FY17-18, it is critical to re-examine the growth in the capital budget, reduce expenditures and show taxpayers that their voices are heard regarding the continued budget growth and that prudent choices are being made.

Liana Cassar, MPH, MBA

Barrington