Upgrade goal in Arlington

Superintendent Levenson faces a spending cap.

A deeply divided Arlington School Committee granted Superintendent Nate Levenson a three-year contract extension in October, over the objections of some teachers and parents who were upset with the way Levenson had handled an e-mail scandal that erupted over the summer.

Now the embattled school chief must prepare to lead the district through another difficult period: In November, the Massachusetts School Building Authority disappointed Arlington's long-held hopes for securing state aid to rebuild the Stratton and Thompson schools, forcing the district to reassess its plans.

Neither of the schools made it onto the authority's priority list for funding. State engineers and architects determined that the problems at the two buildings did not warrant state funding at this time.

The findings offered little comfort to the many Arlington residents who have waited years for improvements at the two schools; the other five public elementary schools in town have already been upgraded.

School Building Authority officials suggested that Arlington consider making very specific repairs to the windows, roof, and boiler at Thompson, rather than rebuild the school from the ground up, and deemed Stratton in good condition, meaning that state money for work at that school is "a long way off," Levenson said.

The district is waiting to meet in February or March with state officials to discuss the Thompson School's needs. At best, Arlington could be reimbursed for about 50 percent of the cost to upgrade the building's major systems.

Levenson and other school officials are trying to maintain a positive outlook.

"We have some money left over from earlier debt exclusions that potentially could be used to do a lot of good things at Thompson," said School Committee member Ronald L. Spangler. "These are moneys we had not spent in the past, because we didn't know what the state would say about Thompson. Now that we have an answer from the [School Building Authority], we can say, 'OK, what do we want to do with that school?' It is not out of the realm of possibility that we could have a like-new Thompson School within five years."

In addition to tackling school construction issues, Levenson will also have to grapple with a budget gap. The school system's fixed expenses are expected to rise 5 percent in fiscal 2009, which begins July 1, but the town can only afford to increase the district's operating budget by 3 percent. The system's day-to-day expenses must be held to $37.8 million in the upcoming fiscal year, up from $36.7 million this year.

An override of the state property tax cap law, Proposition 2 1/2, is out of the question. In June 2005, the town's elected leaders persuaded voters to support a five-year budget blueprint for the town, and the $6 million override needed to pay for it, by promising not to seek another override through fiscal 2010.

"It's a foregone conclusion: In the upcoming year, the district will have less stuff and probably fewer staff," Levenson said. "Still, we remain committed to moving forward."

Brenda J. Buote can be reached at bbuote@globe.com.