Shelter Island voters face 2nd school budget vote: Temporary solution sought for Pre-K3 students 

When the Shelter Island School District 2025-26 school budget failed to garner approval from 60% of voters in May because the proposal went above the state-imposed tax cap, the administration and Board of Education had to sacrifice its Pre-K3 program. That concerned many residents who have young children.

Word surfaced at the June 9 Board of Education meeting that an exploration is underway by an ad hoc committee to find at least a temporary solution.

It’s hardly a done deal, but an idea that percolated with public school officials involved the private school that runs a Pre-K program at the Presbyterian Church, the Shelter Island Early Childhood Learning Center. This could enable Shelter Island School to offer a program to fill a void, at least through the 2025-26 school year.

What is being called a “brainstorming meeting” is scheduled for June 23 with Superintendent Brian Doelger, Ed.D., Board of Education President Kathleen Lynch, 

Board members of the Early Childhood Learning Center, perhaps a couple of parents of Pre-K-school age students, and two members of the Town’s Health & Wellness Committee, Nancy Green and Bonnie Berman Stockwell. The topic under discussion would be how a program might be structured and funded, and whether it could offer a full-day program for working parents who can’t show up at mid-day to care for their children.

A re-vote on a revised budget for the 2025-26 school year is June 17.

The Board of Education meeting started with Elizabeth Galle bringing up the subject of cutting the Pre-K3 program. Ms. Lynch explained the budget request has already been adopted and is the proposal on which voters will act on June 17. “This is particularly crushing to me,” Ms. Lynch said, noting that 12 years ago, she fought for the program and it is painful for her to lose it. 

Even if voters approve the revised new budget request on June 17, one full-time elementary level teacher has to be dropped from the staff and there are others whose hours of work have had to be scaled back, and an upgraded security system that was to happen in the year ahead has had to be delayed.

Failure of the revised budget to pass would put the district on a so-called “contingency budget” in which the State would mandate what cuts would be made.

The revised budget is $13.298 million, down from the original budget by $556,443. When the administration and Board of Education began making cuts, the first were in materials, followed by cuts that would least affect students. But to lop more than half a million off the original budget of $13.85 million couldn’t be accomplished without some deeper saving, Ms. Lynch said.

There are a number of measures that reflect the effectiveness of the Shelter Island School’s educational programming.

National averages on Scholastic Aptitude Tests, one of the criteria colleges use for admission, are lower than the Island’s:

• In reading and writing the national average was 519 compared with Shelter Island’s 607.

• In math, the national average score was 505 compared with Island students who averaged 609.

American College Testing (ACT) scores provide information on the effectiveness of instruction to student learning. The national average ACT score is 20.2, while Shelter Island’s is 25.85.

Elizabeth Eklund, a Board member of the Early Childhood Learning Center and an elementary level teacher in the Shelter Island School District, talked about possibilities and current limits that would have to be changed to accommodate a full-day program. Currently, the Early Childhood Learning Center can accommodate sessions of about three hours. Cooperation has enabled teachers from the Learning Center to walk students across the street to the school district’s program without their parents having to interrupt work to attend to their children.

And, of course, there’s the money it would take for the program to expand to meet needs, she said. Add to that, it’s difficult to do long-range planning without some indication about how many students would be enrolled year to year, Ms. Eklund said.

Amanda Bartilucci, vice president of the Early Learning Center, said both the public and private school pre-K programs are in jeopardy since “both programs are very fragile.”

Ms. Lynch said if the original budget had passed, the Board of Education expected there would be no need to pierce the tax cap for the next 10 years.

But to restore the district to its previous healthy status, the revised budget needs to pass on June 17. Then, the administration and Board of Education must discuss how to move forward on the tightened budget for the 2025-26 school year as they explore how and when the Pre-K3 program can be activated along with other district needs without overburdening taxpayers.

The Board of Education’s newest member, Molly Kendall, will be sworn in at the re-organizational meeting in July. But she wasn’t shy about the challenges she sees the district facing. Communications need to be stepped up, she said, as many people don’t know what’s happening. Ms. Lynch said she and other Board of Education members are accessible as is Mr. Doelger.

Among matters voters need to consider are what a contingency budget would mean if they reject this revised spending plan, Ms. Lynch and Mr. Doelger said.

A state contingency budget would:

• Not allow any money to be spent on equipment, no matter what the circumstances.

• The tax levy in the upcoming school year would have to be same as it has been for the current school year.

• There could be no use of school property for the community that would affect use of the FIT Center, political forums typically held in the auditorium or other such programs unless organizations totally covered the full costs incurred in making the facilities available, Mr. Doelger said.

Wall Street rating agencies could downgrade the district’s economic outlook, adversely affecting rates for borrowing and other debt costs, he said.

He and Ms. Lynch also spoke about the impact of closing the school and busing students to North and/or South fork schools, pointing out it would not save taxpayers money and have other negative effects.

Ms. Lynch pointed out high costs for transportation already are burdensome. But Island taxpayers would also have to pay tuition to the receiving school districts. At the same time, they would have no say about the tuition rates or other matters that would affect local students. Much would be lost with no recourse, she said.

Voting will take place in the school conference room on Tuesday, June 17, between noon and 9 p.m. with ballots being counted that night.

Applications for absentee ballots had to be filed by June 11 and the ballots must be received at the school by 5 p.m. on June 17.