Auburn will get an additional $1.6 million in state funding for education.

“Schools get extra millions” read the Feb. 2 Sun Journal headline.

Auburn is indeed scheduled to receive $1,620,000 in additional school funding from the state. A Sun Journal editorial of Feb. 8 then asks: “What are you going to do with that money?” Our honest answer is: We’re going to spend it.

Is this another example of elected officials out of touch with the community? Is this another example of the School Committee’s wasteful fiscal policy? Let’s look at that $1.62 million and let’s look at some of the budgetary realities facing the School Committee, and then you can be the judge.

Of the $1,620,000 figure, $869,243 is already earmarked by the state as payment for the principal and interest for the new elementary school. Auburn is receiving this $869,243 only because Auburn voters approved the construction of the new school and the state is fulfilling its promise to fund that school. We cannot use this money for any other purpose. So we are reduced to about $750,000.

Of that $750,000, $96,500 is already earmarked by the state as the first step in raising the starting salary for teachers. The state is committed to an average starting salary of $30,000; the average starting salary in Auburn is $25,554. Once again, we cannot use this money for any other purpose. So we are reduced to about $660,000.

We understand $660,000 is a lot of money. How does that amount stack up against the budgetary realities facing the School Committee? Salaries, health insurance and utilities account for 80 percent of our budget. How do additional costs in each of these areas affect our budget?

One of the chief tasks of the School Committee is to create a compensation package that will attract and retain good teachers. To this end, on Feb. 15, the School Committee approved a new teachers’ contract that calls for a 3 percent salary increase in each of the next two years. This requires an additional $600,000 for fiscal 2006-07. So we now have a remaining balance of $60,000.

The remaining $60,000 is a lot of money, but less than $1,620,000. The cost of health benefits is unpredictable. The average annual increase for the past three years has been, approximately, 7 percent. This will mean an additional cost of $295,000. So now we have a negative balance of $235,000.

The cost of utilities, heating oil, electricity and gasoline is equally unpredictable. Projecting a modest 5 percent increase in cost adds $50,000. So we end up with a negative balance of $285,000.

We can see the headline now: “Auburn School Committee says that $1.62 million is not enough.” However, we hope that people can see beyond simplistic statements. Each budget season we are faced with the same dilemma. State aid to education does reduce the burden on the local taxpayer. But state aid does not completely cover the increased costs of salaries, health benefits and utilities. Each season we look for savings elsewhere in our budget. Each season we are mindful of the burden on the Auburn taxpayer as we negotiate with the City Council over the allocation of property taxes.

What have been the results of our budget deliberations?

Over the past four years the average annual increase in local property taxes allocated to the schools has been 2.53 percent. Over the past four years the average share of local property taxes received by the school has been 40.1 percent.

We encourage all Auburn citizens to attend our workshops and committee meetings so that they might see that the real headline should read: “Auburn School Committee struggles to create fiscally responsible budget that meets the educational needs of all Auburn students.”

Kathy Constantine serves as chairman of the Auburn School Committee and David Das serves as the committee’s vice chairman.