WHITINGHAM- Twin Valley School Board members made short work of a short agenda at their regular meeting Tuesday evening.

The board got a glimpse of next year’s budget which, according to preliminary estimates, is slated for a modest 1.64% increase, a rise of about $85,834 in spending.

Windham Southwest Supervisory Union Business Manager Ronda Lackey said health insurance benefits, which have increased at astronomical rates over the past decade, are expected to rise by less than seven percent this year, according to her sources. Last year, the rate increase was negligible.

Salaries, which are slated to increase by a contractual four percent, and benefits are expected to rise by about $100,000.

Lackey warned the board not to get “overly optimistic” about the preliminary numbers, since a number of budget factors aren’t available yet, including revenue. She said special education costs are also down, for instance, but there would also be a proportionate drop in revenue from the state.

The budget draft doesn’t include any money for renovations at Twin Valley High School, and board member Tom Manton questioned whether it was wise not to continue improvements at the school. “If we don’t get a positive bond vote, are we doing the right thing by not doing any renovation work here?” he asked.

TVHS Principal Frank Spencer said he has a figure in mind for improvement projects at the school, but it wasn’t included in the preliminary draft budget. He said the projects and the amount could be discussed at a budget meeting, and board members could decide how much to include in this year’s budget.

In related matters, the board also received a communication from Twin Valley Facilities Committee Chair Phil Taylor. Taylor said he has met with representatives from a design/build firm regarding the renovation option at TVHS, and other firms that will be looking at the feasibility of the so-called “consolidation option.”

Taylor said the board should decide how to present the two options to the community, and a timeline for bringing the information to a straw vote. “What straw vote?” asked Spencer. “I don’t remember that the board agreed to a straw vote.”

Spencer suggested the board have a discussion about the implications of a straw vote and a binding vote. “The straw vote leaves open the option of the board ignoring the vote and doing something else,” he noted.

“Well, I don’t know what we do if we have a binding vote that goes two different ways,” said Manton.

Board members said they planned to present the information and have a straw vote sometime in January.