To the editor:

Having served for 50 years in the Haverhill school system, 28 of which was as school business administrator and also a short period as co-superintendent of schools, it is difficult to read the proposal by the mayor to consolidate certain functions in the school and city departments, namely finance and personnel, reportedly to save money and conserve resources.

No one, especially today, is against putting programs in place to save money. There are consolidations that can be implemented, however, I do not believe that placing programs under the city auditor or others would result in significant savings, but would erode the responsibility and effect of the School Committee and the school system.

During my 28 years as school business administrator and co-superintendent, I had to make some difficult decisions so that the schools during that period would not experience any deficit, which would have resulted in a decrease of educational offerings and reduction of personnel.

It was not easy to accomplish this task, but I was fortunate to have an efficient staff, competent principals to work with headed by top-notch superintendents and school committees that worked hard to make sure we offered the best educational programs within our ability to pay. To accomplish our goals, we also worked closely with the city auditor, Mr. Klueber, the deputy auditor, Mrs. Roope, and the city purchasing agent, Mrs. Burrill.

Our primary goal to stay within budget appropriations was to establish controls for each account, especially large accounts that if not kept within budget appropriations, could cause major damage. These controls were in addition to the accounting system for each budgetary expenditure, which helped us to effect savings. By regulation, copies of our financial statement were sent to the city auditor every month. These controls should be established if not in place and every effort should be made to effect savings whenever possible.

Today, there are major problems that make it difficult for schools to stay within their total budgetary appropriation. First, cities and towns all around us have updated their facilities and parents in our city want their children to have the opportunities available in these new facilities, which has resulted in the city having to pay for the tuition of these pupils, which is subtracted from Haverhill's state aid under the School Choice law.

Second, payment of the per-pupil cost of students attending the charter school comes out of the school's state aid and this amount totals approximately $2 million. While the primary purpose of the charter school was to encourage the educational system to improve its offerings, it has taken away the money the system needed to improve its programs.

In addition, whereas city residents who send their kindergarten children to the regular educational programs have to pay over $4,000 a year, children who attend the charter school do not pay any money. It is subtracted from the aid sent to the public schools, which doesn't seem to be a fair way of assessing this cost.

The state would do better by its public schools if it established a Charter School Account paid out of total state aid for schools and then compute the state aid due communities.

Other costs that have escalated are health costs and programs for special education. The city can be liable for more than $150,000 for just one special education student — more than the budget for an entire school class.

Information about these tuitions is not always available at budget time and when they are charged to the school budget, money to pay the bill has to be found in the current year's school budget.

A concerted effort should be made by school systems together with the Massachusetts Association of School Committees and the Massachusetts Association of Superintendents and state business officials to change the funding for these pupils to the federal and/or state governments as was originally intended when 766 was passed.

It is my personal opinion that Proposition 21âÑ2 no longer works, however, we are in a difficult period when it wouldn't be possible to change the regulation.

One area in which the city could save substantial money is school transportation. Recently, City Councilor David Hall spoke of the small numbers riding the buses around the city.

Several years ago during a difficult budget period, Daniel Harrington, principal and transportation coordinator, and Ellie Marino, his assistant and the district's current transportation coordinator, were also concerned over the small numbers riding the buses and they made a recommendation that we use the MVRTA buses for school transportation, thereby reducing substantially the $2.5 million for school transportation in the school budget.

They did considerable work talking with officials, mapping routes for safe transportation of students on these buses. At the time, the city was being charged $289,000 on the Cherry Sheet to provide these buses in Haverhill. Mr. Harrington and Mrs. Marino worked tirelessly to effect the change. Riders would still be able to ride the buses, since pupils would be riding at earlier times. We were unsuccessful in getting city government to proceed with the change even when we documented the savings that would be realized, including the more efficient use of the city buses.

The city already is being charged a large sum to pay for these buses, which are almost empty. If utilized for both school transportation and transportation of city residents, the city could save a substantial sum in the school budget and the mayor could take the lead to effect this change. The savings would far exceed any savings that would be realized by combinations of certain school and city departments.

One more suggestion to increase funding would be to offer a breakfast program for high school pupils. Currently, a breakfast program is offered pupils from low-income families, but because the school starts so early in the day, I believe a breakfast program for all pupils would be successful and beneficial in many ways.

The governor and state need to address the issue of funding public education as difficult as it would be during the current crisis in funding. There is no more important function in a community than providing for a top-notch educational system.

With assistance from city departments, I believe the school system can function effectively and should remain autonomous, because the success of the educational program is the primary responsibility of the School Committee and the superintendent, together with their competent staffs working with city officials.

Nancy A. Paszko

875 Washington St.

Haverhill