As we approach the annual town financial meeting, it is paramount to critically consider the allocation of our resources. The Little Compton Taxpayers Association  and their allies have often taken issue with the cost of education, citing high per-pupil costs. This year, the budget committee has proposed “level-funding,” under the pretext that "school spending has gone unchecked for too long." Unfortunately, the committee seems to lack data literacy, misinterpreting the cost of education in Little Compton. Their proposal, based on a cherry-picked number found online, is fundamentally flawed. This proposal leaves administrators with the choice to decide whether to cut positions, reduce vital programs, or extracurricular activities.

 The question we need to ask is: Are the Taxpayers Association and budget committee genuinely concerned about overall town spending, or do they have a different agenda? An analysis of town spending reveals a worrying trend: Little Compton has been allocating a smaller percentage of its budget to education, currently about 50 percent and decreasing, compared to other towns in Rhode Island. On the other hand, spending on the police and fire departments has increased (now constituting about 22 percent of the budget), along with other town services. The budget committee has proposed continuing to increase the cost of public safety services to residents and giving raises to some town officials. The drive to increase the budget in some service areas and decrease it in others should come with a well-reasoned, rational argument. We can all recognize the need to support various services that contribute to our community's well-being, such as public safety and town employees being paid a livable wage. This drive to reduce the school’s budget based on ideological grounds requires us to ponder whether their ultimate goal is to eliminate our town’s school and outsource our kids' education. Running a school involves fixed costs that must be met, irrespective of student enrollment. Your tax rate is not based on per pupil cost. It is based on total operational costs. Comparing a small school's per-pupil costs is akin to benchmarking the police budget to the crime rate or funding the fire department based on the number of fires, which, of course, is absurd.

 The taxpayers Association has long complained about the small class sizes in our school, suggesting we have too many teachers. However, they remain silent on the low crime rate and the increasing size of our police force. There are no complaints about the transition from a volunteer fire department to a professionally staffed fire department. Their selectiveness in their criticism is a clear indication that their concern is not proportional to the need; the budget committee and the taxpayers association seem to have a bias against investing in the education of our children.

We must not lose sight of the long-term impact of our investment in education. This has been a decades-long battle, with the taxpayers association viewing a small student-to-teacher ratio as an error in budgeting when, in fact, it is an investment in our children's future. We need budget committee members who understand the complexities of the town's budgets and are not illogically driven, which is why I’m running for a seat on the budget committee.

Andrew L. Rhyne, Ph.D.

Little Compton