Norwood Approves Pay Hikes for Teachers and Firefighters-July 19, 1974

The special town meeting in **Norwood**, Massachusetts, convened on the evening of July 19, 1974, to address various wage increase requests from the school and fire departments. The meeting was called after a June 26 session failed to draw a quorum, necessitating a second attempt to gather the required 103 member quota.

The finance commission had recommended approval of the pay hikes, which were supported by all members present at the meeting. Despite over 90 minutes of heated debate, the requests passed almost unanimously on a voice vote. The school department’s request for $599,894 in funds was approved, with most of it allocated to cover 6.4 percent salary increases negotiated with teachers.

The fire department’s request for $71,005 to pay for seven percent raises and changes in their work shifts was also approved without discussion. This decision added slightly more than $2 to the yet unset tax rate for the 1974-75 fiscal year, according to FinCom Chairman E. Peter Bamber. Although the commission had initially estimated a $4 increase over the present $39 rate, Bamber expressed hope that it might not reach this high.

The special meeting’s action eliminated the necessity for a September town meeting and the paying of town employees retroactively at that time. Police and municipal employees association workers had already signed agreements for seven percent pay hikes and received town meeting approval for the resultant addition of $180,312 to the annual budget.

During the debate, District 9 member Thomas DiFrancia attempted to halve an allowance for still-unsettled school administrators’ salary increases from $34,662 to $18,000. However, his motion was quickly rejected after school and FinCom officials explained that the remaining money being sought was to maintain existing and expanded programs, not to add extra department personnel.

School Superintendent Philip O. Coakley answered questions from town meeting members regarding his department’s request for wage increases and other salary items. School Board Chairman Charles C. Saraca looked on as Coakley addressed concerns about the school committee’s requests.

The debate became bogged down in comparisons between appropriation and actual expenditure figures in recent years. Although school committee members said the additional requests reflected actual expenditures, Chairman Saraca explained that the new request was attributable to instructional salary increases, administrative salaries, custodial salaries, auxiliary agencies, and cafeteria salaries.

School committee members stressed that they were not asking for a slush fund but rather to maintain existing programs and expand others. They pointed out that savings from teacher turnover had decreased considerably with a tighter job market, and the funds made up from annual surpluses resulting from staff turnover must still be budgeted for future step increases.

District 2 member Eugene J. Doherty asked how there could be such a change from the $55,940 appropriated for coaching at the annual town meeting in May to the new request of $125,877. Explaining the new request, FinCom Chairman Bamber said it was due to instructional salary increases and administrative salaries.

The entire town meeting became bogged down in comparisons between appropriation and actual expenditure figures in recent years. Although school committee members said the additional requests reflected actual expenditures, Chairman Saraca explained that the new request was attributable to instructional salary increases, administrative salaries, custodial salaries, auxiliary agencies, and cafeteria salaries.

School committee members stressed that they were not asking for a slush fund but rather to maintain existing programs and expand others. They pointed out that savings from teacher turnover had decreased considerably with a tighter job market, and the funds made up from annual surpluses resulting from staff turnover must still be budgeted for future step increases.

The debate continued, with town meeting members questioning school officials about their requests. School committee members explained that they were not asking for a slush fund but rather to maintain existing programs and expand others. They pointed out that savings from teacher turnover had decreased considerably with a tighter job market, and the funds made up from annual surpluses resulting from staff turnover must still be budgeted for future step increases.

The school department’s request of $599,894 was finally approved after over 90 minutes of debate. The fire department’s request for $71,005 to pay for seven percent raises and changes in their work shifts was also approved without discussion.