Last night the Village Council voted to reduce the schools' tax levy by $100,000. This was based on the Board of Education's suggestion. (Well, after we suggested that they cut nothing, and it didn't sound like that idea was going anywhere.) Board President Michele Lenhard said last night that $100,000 could be trimmed from the transportation line on the budget. This means no further staff cuts...no cuts of librarians...no cut of 5th grade music...no cut of Learning Disabled Teachers...and those other things that were on the potential cut list.
Where did this $100,000 come from? When the District created the budget, they included an estimate for transportation, based on an educated "guess" (and historical trends) as to how much bus rates are going to go up. Bus rate increases must be approved by the state, and the state doesn't give the rate increase until after our budget vote. (Just another state practice that makes no sense.) So our budget included an increase of 5% in bus charges. Then, late last week, the state finally approved the new bus rate increase, and it's 0%. Revising our transportation line in the budget resulted in about $100,000 savings. This is what was offered to the VC as a way they could (symbolically, some would argue) cut the budget without affecting jobs.
Finally the District can get to work finalizing staff changes and reorganizing departments to cope with all the changes brought about by our staff cuts. It's going to take a lot of work to combine some supervisor jobs, fill holes from retirements, and figure out how remaining staff are going to pick up the tasks and responsibilities left when positions were eliminated.
Also at last night's meeting, the Board agreed to conditionally give our support to New Jersey's Race to The Top grant application. There is so much that is vague in the state's plan, and we are being rushed to sign on without answers to a lot of questions and with many things that will require legislative changes which may or may not occur. We decided that we want Ridgewood to be part of the conversation...to be part of the solutions in improving education in New Jersey...so we will yes with many conditions -- primarily 1) we will not participate if the costs to implement exceed the grant money Ridgewood would receive; and 2) we reserve the right to withdraw if the program is not making sense for Ridgewood.
Other business last night: The Board approved several staff changes, including the retirements of several long-time staff members, including: Elizabeth Bennett (3rd grade Travell, 16 years), Diane Callaghan (secretary, 22 years), Karen Fisher (2nd grade Travell, 37 years), Carol Savitscus (3rd grade Travell, 16 years) and Garland Allen (Director of Wellness, 11 years).
And, finally, the Board approved the Parent Survey, scheduled to take place by around June 1. (More info on that to come soon!)
Showing posts with label 2010-2011. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2010-2011. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Monday, May 17, 2010
How can I "ignore" the voters?
I’ve been listening to and reading comments about the Village’s handling of the school district budget. (The Council will vote tonight.) I understand that those who voted “no” on the budget will be frustrated if the Village Council leaves the budget as-is or if they cut only a "token" amount. I've heard comments like “listen to the voters,” “respect the vote,” or, charmingly, “you lost, get over it.” They can’t seem to understand why the Board of Ed or administration are fighting to prevent more budget cuts. I’d like to explain my thinking (and only mine, FYI – as always I’m not speaking for anyone but myself).
I’m sorry that it’s so hard for some to understand. But here it is: I have been sworn to keep what is best for the schools — and for the children in those schools — as my primary focus. In fact, by legislation, I have sworn an oath that says, “I will make decisions in terms of the educational welfare of children and will seek to develop and maintain public schools that meet the individual needs of all children..."
Nowhere in the Code of Ethics for School Board Members or the Oath of Office does it state that I should place complaints about taxes above the educational welfare of the children of Ridgewood. I am obligated to do everything I can – as a member of the Board – to ensure that our schools deliver the best education possible. As I’ve said before, I truly do understand the frustration of taxpayers. Of course I do...I’m a taxpayer! I’m someone who was out of work. My husband was out of work. We are not cavalier about our family budget. But putting aside my personal financial situation, I believe the $6.3 million we’ve cut from the 2010-11 budget is enough. I believe that further cuts at this time will destabilize the District even more and will negatively impact our schools. And therefore I am content to follow what the law dictates is supposed to be happening right now. That is, the Village Council is supposed to decide what is best for the schools. And I'm supposed to advocate for what I think is best for the schools. Of course, the Village Council members have not sworn an oath to the schools, so their position is a little more complicated. Their references to the “sanctity” of the vote, while contradictory to what they are in fact charged with doing, are understandable.
Please don’t get me wrong: I don’t operate with a knee jerk reaction that says all budget cuts are bad. I am not out to "inflate" the school budget. I only want to maintain or improve the quality of our schools, in spite of necessary budget cuts. Every single cut we made for 2010-11 was discussed, analyzed and debated. I personally supported many of the cuts. Once the Board came to consensus, I support all of them.
I know our staff will rise to the occasion and do their best to adjust to the changes we’ve made, and then we’ll probably have to make more changes next spring. It doesn’t take a crystal ball to predict that our budget will face more pressures next year. No matter what, though, all I can do is continue to work with the rest of the Board to do what is best for Ridgewood’s children, and balance that with what is best for individual tax bills.
I’m sorry that it’s so hard for some to understand. But here it is: I have been sworn to keep what is best for the schools — and for the children in those schools — as my primary focus. In fact, by legislation, I have sworn an oath that says, “I will make decisions in terms of the educational welfare of children and will seek to develop and maintain public schools that meet the individual needs of all children..."
Nowhere in the Code of Ethics for School Board Members or the Oath of Office does it state that I should place complaints about taxes above the educational welfare of the children of Ridgewood. I am obligated to do everything I can – as a member of the Board – to ensure that our schools deliver the best education possible. As I’ve said before, I truly do understand the frustration of taxpayers. Of course I do...I’m a taxpayer! I’m someone who was out of work. My husband was out of work. We are not cavalier about our family budget. But putting aside my personal financial situation, I believe the $6.3 million we’ve cut from the 2010-11 budget is enough. I believe that further cuts at this time will destabilize the District even more and will negatively impact our schools. And therefore I am content to follow what the law dictates is supposed to be happening right now. That is, the Village Council is supposed to decide what is best for the schools. And I'm supposed to advocate for what I think is best for the schools. Of course, the Village Council members have not sworn an oath to the schools, so their position is a little more complicated. Their references to the “sanctity” of the vote, while contradictory to what they are in fact charged with doing, are understandable.
Please don’t get me wrong: I don’t operate with a knee jerk reaction that says all budget cuts are bad. I am not out to "inflate" the school budget. I only want to maintain or improve the quality of our schools, in spite of necessary budget cuts. Every single cut we made for 2010-11 was discussed, analyzed and debated. I personally supported many of the cuts. Once the Board came to consensus, I support all of them.
I know our staff will rise to the occasion and do their best to adjust to the changes we’ve made, and then we’ll probably have to make more changes next spring. It doesn’t take a crystal ball to predict that our budget will face more pressures next year. No matter what, though, all I can do is continue to work with the rest of the Board to do what is best for Ridgewood’s children, and balance that with what is best for individual tax bills.
Monday, May 10, 2010
BOE meets with Village Council tonight
The Board of Education will be meeting again with the Village Council tonight, regarding the 2010-11 school budget. The Board delivered our recommendation to the Village last week: our recommendation is that, for the good of our schools and our children, the current budget, a reduction from this year's budget, cannot be cut further without harm. (The full letter to the Council will be available after the meeting.)
Anyone who has an opinion about what the Village Council should do with the budget is encouraged to attend tonight's meeting and make your comments in public.
Tonight's meeting is a "work session" meeting, so no action will be taken by the Council.
The meeting will take place at 5:30 p.m. at Village Hall. (No, I do not know why the meeting was set for 5:30. My guess is that they scheduled it before our customary Board meeting at 7:30, however tonight the BOE does not have a Regular Public Meeting scheduled.)
Anyone who has an opinion about what the Village Council should do with the budget is encouraged to attend tonight's meeting and make your comments in public.
Tonight's meeting is a "work session" meeting, so no action will be taken by the Council.
The meeting will take place at 5:30 p.m. at Village Hall. (No, I do not know why the meeting was set for 5:30. My guess is that they scheduled it before our customary Board meeting at 7:30, however tonight the BOE does not have a Regular Public Meeting scheduled.)
Sunday, April 25, 2010
BOE meets Monday with Village Council.
Tomorrow (Monday) the BOE will meet at 5:00 p.m. at the Ed Center, 3rd floor, for a very quick meeting to approve a staffing change and to pay some bills. Then we will adjourn and reconvene over at Village Hall with the Council. That second meeting is supposed to begin at 6:00, and the purpose will be to discuss the school district budget for 2010-11, the failure of the budget to be approved by the community, and what other information the Council needs before they can set the new tax rate.
According to the law, the Council is directed to set the tax levy. There is no presumption or direction that they must cut the levy, although the last time the budget failed, they did make a cut.
I do not know to what extent the Council will want to discuss line items of the budget or where savings might be found or why certain things cost what they do. This is my first time going through this process.
I do not know if there is opportunity for public comment in the meeting at Village Hall. I do know, however, that our abbreviated meeting at the Ed Center will include the customary two opportunities for public comment. Just in case there's anything anybody wants to say to the Board.
I also cannot tell you if the Village Council meeting is televised on Channel 77. I'm sorry, I just don't know about these things. If I find out anything more, I'll post it here.
According to the law, the Council is directed to set the tax levy. There is no presumption or direction that they must cut the levy, although the last time the budget failed, they did make a cut.
I do not know to what extent the Council will want to discuss line items of the budget or where savings might be found or why certain things cost what they do. This is my first time going through this process.
I do not know if there is opportunity for public comment in the meeting at Village Hall. I do know, however, that our abbreviated meeting at the Ed Center will include the customary two opportunities for public comment. Just in case there's anything anybody wants to say to the Board.
I also cannot tell you if the Village Council meeting is televised on Channel 77. I'm sorry, I just don't know about these things. If I find out anything more, I'll post it here.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
What does it mean?
You know I try to stick to local issues rather than county, state or national politics and "message sending," but I think this excerpt about New Jersey fits for Ridgewood.
Patrick Murray, Director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute, said the following based on Tuesday's votes statewide (comments in parentheses are my translations):
He said, "So, here's what we know about the New Jersey public:
1. They think the size of the cuts in state aid to local schools is unfair. (Translation: the state should give more $$ to school districts)
2. They think the teachers' unions should be willing to come to the table and agree to a wage freeze and benefit contributions. (Translation: They are angry at what is perceived as the teachers' lack of shared sacrifice.)
3. They don't want educational programs cut. (Ummm...no translation necessary)
4. They don't want their property taxes raised. (No translation necessary)
That about sums it up in Ridgewood, don't you think?
How you reconcile those things -- especially when some of them are out of our local hands -- is the challenge. We couldn't do anything about the state aid...we tried to do something with the teachers but they said no (some said yes but not enough) and the contract is legally binding...we cut $6 million in ways that we felt maintained our educational programs as much as possible districtwide, for the most students...and we kept the property tax increase at 4% instead of going higher like some people urged.
And what did that get us? A visit with the Village Council. If these four points were the key, then it would follow that we needed to cut more, period. Of course, you all watched as we made the cuts. You saw what else is on the list...do you see how #3 and #4 cancel each other out, when #1 and #2 are in force?
We'll meet with the Council soon, and take it from there. We'll get there.
Patrick Murray, Director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute, said the following based on Tuesday's votes statewide (comments in parentheses are my translations):
He said, "So, here's what we know about the New Jersey public:
1. They think the size of the cuts in state aid to local schools is unfair. (Translation: the state should give more $$ to school districts)
2. They think the teachers' unions should be willing to come to the table and agree to a wage freeze and benefit contributions. (Translation: They are angry at what is perceived as the teachers' lack of shared sacrifice.)
3. They don't want educational programs cut. (Ummm...no translation necessary)
4. They don't want their property taxes raised. (No translation necessary)
That about sums it up in Ridgewood, don't you think?
How you reconcile those things -- especially when some of them are out of our local hands -- is the challenge. We couldn't do anything about the state aid...we tried to do something with the teachers but they said no (some said yes but not enough) and the contract is legally binding...we cut $6 million in ways that we felt maintained our educational programs as much as possible districtwide, for the most students...and we kept the property tax increase at 4% instead of going higher like some people urged.
And what did that get us? A visit with the Village Council. If these four points were the key, then it would follow that we needed to cut more, period. Of course, you all watched as we made the cuts. You saw what else is on the list...do you see how #3 and #4 cancel each other out, when #1 and #2 are in force?
We'll meet with the Council soon, and take it from there. We'll get there.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Random thoughts the day after the vote…
I have been sitting in a meeting on the 46th floor of a building today, far away (figuratively) from Ridgewood, trying to switch out of BOE mode and into work mode. Every time someone posts a comment on my blog, however, I get an email to my phone…so obviously I’m not doing so well with putting the vote out of my mind for a few hours. (Sorry to my client for another day when you only get my partial attention!)
First, I thought it was clear but let me clarify my comment last night about the guy running down the stairs (who really did exist, by the way). My description of him being “uninformed” was in response only to his comment “I admit I don’t know anything about the issues.” (Well, that and the fact that he thought we were replacing guidance counselors with flat screen TVs.) I thought it was a funny thing to say…don’t you think that’s a tad remarkable…that he admittedly didn’t know the facts, but just wanted to vote? I did…
This budget process, and the election process, was difficult (to say the least). I don’t think a similar perfect storm has existed before. It was hard to communicate the facts of the operating budget in the face of anger about property taxes, the economy in general, state mandates, budget caps, union refusals…I mean, the fact that the total budget is going DOWN next year, and yet our taxes are going UP…that’s a mind-bender that’s hard to explain. (And yet it can be explained, as I did last week – click here.) The vote wasn’t a “landslide” or a “mandate.” It was pretty close. That almost makes it harder.
The day after an election like this, the natural thing is to figure out whom to blame. There are plenty of nuances and perspectives and we can slice the blame up many ways. Some of the biggest “servings” would have to go to the REA (clearly their action – inaction? -- upset voters enough to say no), Governor Christie (telling people to vote no to send a message, mis-speaking when he said if teachers took a freeze then no programs would be cut -- not true), the Bond Referendum in December (two school tax increases in 4-1/2 months), the BOE (maybe we should have cut more after all? $6 million wasn’t enough? In spite of our vast improvement in communications, we must still do better).
Beyond that, I’m going to resist too much quick Monday-morning quarterbacking. This takes some thoughtful, careful consideration and analysis, and we will be undertaking that as a Board very soon. We will be asking for your thoughts and listening to your input.
For now, we’ve got to work with the Village to get the tax levy set, so we can get to work moving the district forward. I’ll post when I know more about the timing, steps, etc.
First, I thought it was clear but let me clarify my comment last night about the guy running down the stairs (who really did exist, by the way). My description of him being “uninformed” was in response only to his comment “I admit I don’t know anything about the issues.” (Well, that and the fact that he thought we were replacing guidance counselors with flat screen TVs.) I thought it was a funny thing to say…don’t you think that’s a tad remarkable…that he admittedly didn’t know the facts, but just wanted to vote? I did…
This budget process, and the election process, was difficult (to say the least). I don’t think a similar perfect storm has existed before. It was hard to communicate the facts of the operating budget in the face of anger about property taxes, the economy in general, state mandates, budget caps, union refusals…I mean, the fact that the total budget is going DOWN next year, and yet our taxes are going UP…that’s a mind-bender that’s hard to explain. (And yet it can be explained, as I did last week – click here.) The vote wasn’t a “landslide” or a “mandate.” It was pretty close. That almost makes it harder.
The day after an election like this, the natural thing is to figure out whom to blame. There are plenty of nuances and perspectives and we can slice the blame up many ways. Some of the biggest “servings” would have to go to the REA (clearly their action – inaction? -- upset voters enough to say no), Governor Christie (telling people to vote no to send a message, mis-speaking when he said if teachers took a freeze then no programs would be cut -- not true), the Bond Referendum in December (two school tax increases in 4-1/2 months), the BOE (maybe we should have cut more after all? $6 million wasn’t enough? In spite of our vast improvement in communications, we must still do better).
Beyond that, I’m going to resist too much quick Monday-morning quarterbacking. This takes some thoughtful, careful consideration and analysis, and we will be undertaking that as a Board very soon. We will be asking for your thoughts and listening to your input.
For now, we’ve got to work with the Village to get the tax levy set, so we can get to work moving the district forward. I’ll post when I know more about the timing, steps, etc.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
School budget is defeated 2601-2508
updated 4/21/10 @ 8:10 AM
The unofficial budget results show a defeat in a close vote. The absentee ballots still need to be counted, which will happen tonight, so updated numbers should be available in the newspapers in the morning.
Updated results 4/21: Yes = 2537; No = 2639
We'll have plenty of opportunity to deconstruct what happened. For now we need to act quickly to get the Village Council the information they need so they can set the new tax rate. Will keep you posted on the process, timeline, etc.
But first, a quick humorous (sort of) story:
Tonight at 5 minutes before 9:00 I left the Planning Board meeting at Village Hall in order to head to the Ed Center for the election results. As I was going down the stairs, a man ran past me, saying, "I need to hurry up and go vote the budget down!" I sort of gasped, and he said, "They're firing guidance counselors and buying flat screen TVs for the classrooms!" I told him, in the interest of full disclosure, that I'm on the School Board. He said, "I don't care. I admit, I don't know anything about the issues...I just know the union is killing us and the crazy taxes have got to stop!" I tried to say something, but he didn't want to listen and ran off.
So there you have what is may be a classic "no" voter: semi-informed, angry about high taxes and not interested in having a conversation because he's in a hurry to send a message. Sorry if I sound bitter -- can you indulge me for one evening? Tomorrow I'll get back to proactively engaging with the public (I hope I meet that guy again someday, so I can better explain the issues -- and the facts) and working to move our schools and school finances forward. Good night.
The unofficial budget results show a defeat in a close vote. The absentee ballots still need to be counted, which will happen tonight, so updated numbers should be available in the newspapers in the morning.
Updated results 4/21: Yes = 2537; No = 2639
We'll have plenty of opportunity to deconstruct what happened. For now we need to act quickly to get the Village Council the information they need so they can set the new tax rate. Will keep you posted on the process, timeline, etc.
But first, a quick humorous (sort of) story:
Tonight at 5 minutes before 9:00 I left the Planning Board meeting at Village Hall in order to head to the Ed Center for the election results. As I was going down the stairs, a man ran past me, saying, "I need to hurry up and go vote the budget down!" I sort of gasped, and he said, "They're firing guidance counselors and buying flat screen TVs for the classrooms!" I told him, in the interest of full disclosure, that I'm on the School Board. He said, "I don't care. I admit, I don't know anything about the issues...I just know the union is killing us and the crazy taxes have got to stop!" I tried to say something, but he didn't want to listen and ran off.
So there you have what is may be a classic "no" voter: semi-informed, angry about high taxes and not interested in having a conversation because he's in a hurry to send a message. Sorry if I sound bitter -- can you indulge me for one evening? Tomorrow I'll get back to proactively engaging with the public (I hope I meet that guy again someday, so I can better explain the issues -- and the facts) and working to move our schools and school finances forward. Good night.
Monday, April 19, 2010
10 Reasons to Vote YES Tomorrow.
Ladies and gentlemen, our Top 10 List for tomorrow, April 20:
Top 10 Reasons to Vote YES on the school budget for 2010-2011.
(click on each for a full explanation)
#10 A Ridgewood education is a good value, with a relatively low Cost Per Pupil.
# 9 Our district is leaner than most districts.
# 8 Want cuts to administration? We've done it.
# 7 We held the tax increase to the 4% cap.
# 6 Our budget is DECREASING from 09/10 to 10/11.
# 5 We kept the budget cuts out of the classroom as much as possible.
# 4 We already enacted, long ago, the typical cost-saving measures.
# 3 There's no such thing as 'back to the drawing board.'
# 2 It's not all doom & gloom.
# 1 It's up to us.
Top 10 Reasons to Vote YES on the school budget for 2010-2011.
(click on each for a full explanation)
#10 A Ridgewood education is a good value, with a relatively low Cost Per Pupil.
# 9 Our district is leaner than most districts.
# 8 Want cuts to administration? We've done it.
# 7 We held the tax increase to the 4% cap.
# 6 Our budget is DECREASING from 09/10 to 10/11.
# 5 We kept the budget cuts out of the classroom as much as possible.
# 4 We already enacted, long ago, the typical cost-saving measures.
# 3 There's no such thing as 'back to the drawing board.'
# 2 It's not all doom & gloom.
# 1 It's up to us.
Sunday, April 18, 2010
$89 million school budget:
a "NO" vote does not "send a message" to anyone.
The following is reprinted from an anonymous post on The Ridgewood Blog 4/18/10:
...Unfortunately, some people don't seem to understand the implications of this vote.
First, a "NO" vote does not "send a message" to anyone. It does not have an impact on teachers benefits or their raises for next year. It simply means that the budget will get turned over to the Village Council (who know NOTHING about the school's needs or situations) to determine the amount of the tax for next year. They can assign ANY tax rate they want. They can increase the budget and raise taxes more, or they can cut the budget and limit the taxes. They are accountable to NO ONE on this issue. The most likely outcome is that they cut the budget more and reduce taxes, which will result in further teacher cuts...unfortunately, they will be the newer and more enthusiastic teachers, who most of us would prefer to have teaching our children. I, for one, do not want Annie Z or Keith K making any decisions about my children's education.
A "YES" vote simply preserves the budget that the BOE has presented with its existing cuts for next year. This does not send a message to anyone either. However, it ensures that the people, who are most knowledgeable about our school system, are making the decisions about how much and what to cut. This vote ensures guarantees that we do not cut any more teachers, that have already been proposed. While some of us would like to see some tenured teachers, who are in "coasting" mode lose their jobs, that will not happen, regardless of the voting results.
Note from Laurie:
This is basically the exact post I intended to write today, so thank you to "anonymous" for saving me some time. I have been so frustrated all weekend, whenever I heard someone say they want to vote "no" in order to teach the REA "a lesson." I just don't see the logic in that. And I've listened to enough comments from teachers to feel that for many of them, no matter how bad it gets, they're dug in for the long haul (or at least until the next contract negotiation).
Please vote YES on Tuesday. Polls are open from 7:00 AM to 9:00 PM. Results will be posted as soon as they are known.
...Unfortunately, some people don't seem to understand the implications of this vote.
First, a "NO" vote does not "send a message" to anyone. It does not have an impact on teachers benefits or their raises for next year. It simply means that the budget will get turned over to the Village Council (who know NOTHING about the school's needs or situations) to determine the amount of the tax for next year. They can assign ANY tax rate they want. They can increase the budget and raise taxes more, or they can cut the budget and limit the taxes. They are accountable to NO ONE on this issue. The most likely outcome is that they cut the budget more and reduce taxes, which will result in further teacher cuts...unfortunately, they will be the newer and more enthusiastic teachers, who most of us would prefer to have teaching our children. I, for one, do not want Annie Z or Keith K making any decisions about my children's education.
A "YES" vote simply preserves the budget that the BOE has presented with its existing cuts for next year. This does not send a message to anyone either. However, it ensures that the people, who are most knowledgeable about our school system, are making the decisions about how much and what to cut. This vote ensures guarantees that we do not cut any more teachers, that have already been proposed. While some of us would like to see some tenured teachers, who are in "coasting" mode lose their jobs, that will not happen, regardless of the voting results.
Note from Laurie:
This is basically the exact post I intended to write today, so thank you to "anonymous" for saving me some time. I have been so frustrated all weekend, whenever I heard someone say they want to vote "no" in order to teach the REA "a lesson." I just don't see the logic in that. And I've listened to enough comments from teachers to feel that for many of them, no matter how bad it gets, they're dug in for the long haul (or at least until the next contract negotiation).
Please vote YES on Tuesday. Polls are open from 7:00 AM to 9:00 PM. Results will be posted as soon as they are known.
Reason #1 to Vote YES on April 20:
It’s up to us.
No one else is going to help us. The state has made it clear that we are on our own. No union will be riding in on its white horse to save the day with last-minute concessions. It’s up to us. The taxpayers. The community. We must take care of business for the good of Ridgewood. We owe it to our children and we owe it to the property owners of this town. Keeping our schools strong is the best way we can prepare our children for the future. Keeping our schools strong is our best chance for getting our property values back up. Approving this budget is the first step to keeping our schools strong.
This business of creating the budget, making the cuts and getting out the vote...this has all been just the prelude to the actual work that needs to begin to evolve the district...and it needs to begin soon.
Let’s stop blaming Christie. Let’s stop blaming the NJEA. Or the REA. Let’s stop blaming Trenton. Or whoever else “out there” you feel is undermining our schools. Forget about "sending a message." If you want to send a message, get involved and voice your opinion. When you’re in the election booth, none of that matters. In the booth, it’s time to stop the talk, and walk the walk (couldn’t resist).
It's up to us. Let’s come together, move past the budget and get busy improving the district and making the adjustments necessary to work within the economic reality of 2010-11.
This business of creating the budget, making the cuts and getting out the vote...this has all been just the prelude to the actual work that needs to begin to evolve the district...and it needs to begin soon.
Let’s stop blaming Christie. Let’s stop blaming the NJEA. Or the REA. Let’s stop blaming Trenton. Or whoever else “out there” you feel is undermining our schools. Forget about "sending a message." If you want to send a message, get involved and voice your opinion. When you’re in the election booth, none of that matters. In the booth, it’s time to stop the talk, and walk the walk (couldn’t resist).
It's up to us. Let’s come together, move past the budget and get busy improving the district and making the adjustments necessary to work within the economic reality of 2010-11.
Reason #2 to Vote YES on April 20:
It’s not all doom & gloom.
So much of the conversation surrounding the budget has focused on the unprecedented number of cuts we had to make, first to keep the budget under the state cap and then to make up for the loss of our state aid. But it’s important to remember the positives:
Student achievement is high. U.S. News & World Report ranks RHS in the top 2.5% of high schools nationwide. SAT scores are high. Our Class of 2010 has four National Merit Finalists, 36 Garden State Scholarship recipients and 102 College Board AP Scholars. And more...
Our staff is accomplished. RHS Social Studies teacher John Dombille was named 2009 VFW New Jersey Teacher of the Year. GW Teachers Dee Kuiken and Jen Make published a children’s book. Janelle Rose Jacoby, GWMS Orchestra Director, was selected to conduct the 2010 Jr. Regions Orchestra. And more...
Our class sizes are low. One of the things parents have communicated over and over is their commitment to keeping class sizes as low as possible. We've been able to continue to honor that commitment with this budget.
Our extra-curriculars are strong. A Ridge student was a winner of the National Geography Bee. Two BF violinists won seats in the 2010 New Jersey All-State Intermedia Orchestra. The RHS Ice Hockey team won the NJTCC Bergen/Hudson Division championship. And more...
Our program is growing and improving. The 2010-11 budget contains programs and services that exceed the State Board of Education’s Core Curriculum Content Standards, including: New math textbooks for grades 3-5 (funded by ARRA grant). New middle school courses in Shakespeare, Speech & Debate, Realistic Fiction & Short Stories, Foundations of Algebra, Dramatic Expressions, Conversational Spanish and Social Skills (Special Ed). New high school courses include Advanced Math Applications, Integrated Physics & Art, Entrepreneurship, Music Mentors, Journalism Production, and more. And new high school textbooks for AP Calculus, Physics, Chemistry, Psychology, Sociology, AP Macro/Mico Economics...And more...
I’ve said this before: The cuts we had to make are painful. We’re all going to have to work hard to adjust. (Or as Jack Lorenz says, “ a lot of people will have to do a lot more work”). We will do it. When you vote on April 20, you’re not voting for all the cuts we made…you’re not voting for the things we’re leaving behind. You’re voting for the future. In spite of the economic forces working against the district, the budget we approve will move us forward. Because on April 21, the day after the budget vote, we’ll still have the things that make Ridgewood great. We’ll still have amazing students, we’ll still have involved parents and we’ll still have excellent staff.
Please vote YES on April 20!
Student achievement is high. U.S. News & World Report ranks RHS in the top 2.5% of high schools nationwide. SAT scores are high. Our Class of 2010 has four National Merit Finalists, 36 Garden State Scholarship recipients and 102 College Board AP Scholars. And more...
Our staff is accomplished. RHS Social Studies teacher John Dombille was named 2009 VFW New Jersey Teacher of the Year. GW Teachers Dee Kuiken and Jen Make published a children’s book. Janelle Rose Jacoby, GWMS Orchestra Director, was selected to conduct the 2010 Jr. Regions Orchestra. And more...
Our class sizes are low. One of the things parents have communicated over and over is their commitment to keeping class sizes as low as possible. We've been able to continue to honor that commitment with this budget.
Our extra-curriculars are strong. A Ridge student was a winner of the National Geography Bee. Two BF violinists won seats in the 2010 New Jersey All-State Intermedia Orchestra. The RHS Ice Hockey team won the NJTCC Bergen/Hudson Division championship. And more...
Our program is growing and improving. The 2010-11 budget contains programs and services that exceed the State Board of Education’s Core Curriculum Content Standards, including: New math textbooks for grades 3-5 (funded by ARRA grant). New middle school courses in Shakespeare, Speech & Debate, Realistic Fiction & Short Stories, Foundations of Algebra, Dramatic Expressions, Conversational Spanish and Social Skills (Special Ed). New high school courses include Advanced Math Applications, Integrated Physics & Art, Entrepreneurship, Music Mentors, Journalism Production, and more. And new high school textbooks for AP Calculus, Physics, Chemistry, Psychology, Sociology, AP Macro/Mico Economics...And more...
I’ve said this before: The cuts we had to make are painful. We’re all going to have to work hard to adjust. (Or as Jack Lorenz says, “ a lot of people will have to do a lot more work”). We will do it. When you vote on April 20, you’re not voting for all the cuts we made…you’re not voting for the things we’re leaving behind. You’re voting for the future. In spite of the economic forces working against the district, the budget we approve will move us forward. Because on April 21, the day after the budget vote, we’ll still have the things that make Ridgewood great. We’ll still have amazing students, we’ll still have involved parents and we’ll still have excellent staff.
Please vote YES on April 20!
Friday, April 16, 2010
Reason #3 to Vote YES on April 20:
There is no such thing as “back to the drawing board.”
I’ve heard a couple of people say they want to vote “no” on the budget in order to “send a message.” Some want to send a message to the teachers’ union, whose members voted against offering concessions to help the budget. (I think I’ve already stated how I think this strategy is wrong-headed and dangerous.) Others want to send a message to the District, saying things like “voting no will force them to go back to the drawing board” and come up with different cuts.
Unfortunately, there is no such thing as “back to the drawing board.” We already exhausted the drawing board. Our budget process over the past few months explored so many options for cuts and savings. We listened to administrators and teachers, we listened to the public, we listened to each other and we came up with the best combination of cuts for 2010-2011. There aren’t a bunch of other cuts sitting out in the margin somewhere. $6.4 million contains pretty much every cut we feel we could manage.
And even if there were alternatives, going back to the drawing board is not how the process works. If the budget fails, then by law it goes directly and quickly to the Village Council. That body will then set the new tax rate. Whatever number they set, is the number we have to live with. Obviously, our elected Village Council members will want to do what they think the public wants…they are feeling their own pressures as they make their own plans to raise taxes for the municipal budget. So it’s virtually certain that the Council will mandate further cuts. So our school budget would basically contain all the cuts currently proposed plus more cuts to meet the Council’s tax rate.
Let’s not put the budget in the hands of the Village Council…They’re perfectly nice people, but they are not operating with the functioning of our schools as their top priority. They are not well-versed in the ins and outs of the school budget or day-to-day school operations. With their own election looming, they can’t help buy let political concerns influence, even just a tiny bit, their decisions.
Please Vote YES on April 20!
Unfortunately, there is no such thing as “back to the drawing board.” We already exhausted the drawing board. Our budget process over the past few months explored so many options for cuts and savings. We listened to administrators and teachers, we listened to the public, we listened to each other and we came up with the best combination of cuts for 2010-2011. There aren’t a bunch of other cuts sitting out in the margin somewhere. $6.4 million contains pretty much every cut we feel we could manage.
And even if there were alternatives, going back to the drawing board is not how the process works. If the budget fails, then by law it goes directly and quickly to the Village Council. That body will then set the new tax rate. Whatever number they set, is the number we have to live with. Obviously, our elected Village Council members will want to do what they think the public wants…they are feeling their own pressures as they make their own plans to raise taxes for the municipal budget. So it’s virtually certain that the Council will mandate further cuts. So our school budget would basically contain all the cuts currently proposed plus more cuts to meet the Council’s tax rate.
Let’s not put the budget in the hands of the Village Council…They’re perfectly nice people, but they are not operating with the functioning of our schools as their top priority. They are not well-versed in the ins and outs of the school budget or day-to-day school operations. With their own election looming, they can’t help buy let political concerns influence, even just a tiny bit, their decisions.
Please Vote YES on April 20!
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Reason #4 to Vote YES on April 20:
We already enacted, long ago, the “typical” cost-saving measures.
In some ways, Ridgewood Public Schools are a victim of our own success when it comes to finances. When state regulations imposed the infamous “cap” that allows us to increase our tax levy no more than 4%, school district budgets were essentially frozen in time. From that day on, the potential increase of any budget was limited. Districts that were wasteful and bloated or, shall we say, robustly or luxuriously funded (depending on how you look at it) at that time, began their tiny increases at the higher level. When cuts were needed to stay under cap, those districts had plenty of “fat” to cut. Districts that had already taken cost-saving measures and were already lean, found it harder and harder to identify “extras” to eliminate.
That’s where we are today in Ridgewood. We already have one of the lowest Cost Per Pupil spending rates around. We already have one of the highest ratios of students to administrators. Our class sizes are already on the higher side (not “high,” per se, but compared to some neighboring towns). And over the past 20 years, Ridgewood Public Schools has already undertaken many of the cost-saving efforts that some districts are just now contemplating:
-- We already outsourced our custodial & maintenance services 14 (or was it 17?) years ago
-- We already outsource our cafeteria services
-- We participate in a bid consortium for purchasing all instructional, office and co-curricular supplies
-- We belong to a consortium that buys energy in bulk to save $$
-- We contract with an energy monitoring company that has saved us hundreds of thousands of dollars over the years
-- We belong to a telephone service consortium for buying telephone services at discount
-- We upgraded our phone service to VoIP last year, reducing our phone service fees from $100,000/year to $700/month
-- We participate in an insurance consortium for purchasing our property, liability, etc., insurance
Every day I seem to see another story in the newspaper about a district “looking into” outsourcing its custodial service or food service. How nice for them that they have that option! Because we already did these things – and we have saved thousands of dollars since – we unfortunately don’t have those relatively “easy” options available to us today.
As you can see, Ridgewood Schools work hard to save money and be as efficient as possible in our spending. This is another good reason to Vote YES on April 20.
That’s where we are today in Ridgewood. We already have one of the lowest Cost Per Pupil spending rates around. We already have one of the highest ratios of students to administrators. Our class sizes are already on the higher side (not “high,” per se, but compared to some neighboring towns). And over the past 20 years, Ridgewood Public Schools has already undertaken many of the cost-saving efforts that some districts are just now contemplating:
-- We already outsourced our custodial & maintenance services 14 (or was it 17?) years ago
-- We already outsource our cafeteria services
-- We participate in a bid consortium for purchasing all instructional, office and co-curricular supplies
-- We belong to a consortium that buys energy in bulk to save $$
-- We contract with an energy monitoring company that has saved us hundreds of thousands of dollars over the years
-- We belong to a telephone service consortium for buying telephone services at discount
-- We upgraded our phone service to VoIP last year, reducing our phone service fees from $100,000/year to $700/month
-- We participate in an insurance consortium for purchasing our property, liability, etc., insurance
Every day I seem to see another story in the newspaper about a district “looking into” outsourcing its custodial service or food service. How nice for them that they have that option! Because we already did these things – and we have saved thousands of dollars since – we unfortunately don’t have those relatively “easy” options available to us today.
As you can see, Ridgewood Schools work hard to save money and be as efficient as possible in our spending. This is another good reason to Vote YES on April 20.
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Glen Rock teachers agree to pay freeze.
Reprinted from Bergen Record, www.northjersey.com, 4/12/10
In a bold move going against the grain of the state’s teacher’s union, the Glen Rock Education Association (GREA) agreed Monday to take a pay freeze for the 2010/2011 school year.
In exchange, the BOE agreed not to outsource any custodial positions for at least one year.
"I cannot tell you how grateful we are, and the entire town of Glen Rock should be, that our teachers have proven once again that they do put the welfare of our children and this district paramount in their thinking," said BOE Vice President Barbara Steuert, a member of the negotiation committee.
Meanwhile, the Glen Rock Administrators Association will also agree to a wage freeze – meaning that all employees in the district will be working at the current salaries in the next school year.
On March 31, the BOE voted 5-3-1 against ratifying a tentative agreement it reached with the GREA in February after more than two years of negotiations. The agreement was reached before school officials learned the district would receive no state financial aid for 2010-11. At the March 31 meeting, Superintendent of Schools Dr. David Verducci and Business Administrator Michael Rinderknecht agreed to take pay freezes, and some BOE members asked the district’s teachers to make similar concessions.
On Monday night, the BOE voted 8-0-1 in favor of the revised agreement. Trustee Carlo Cella III, whose wife is a teacher in the district, abstained. The mood at the meeting was jovial, with rounds of applause coming from the audience of mostly parents and teachers after the announcement.
GREA President Sue McBride said the teachers voted "in a significant majority" to support the revised contract at its meeting on Monday afternoon, and called her membership’s decision "magnanimous."
"They acted with grace under pressure, keeping in mind the students, programs and schools of Glen Rock, and also with hopes of saving the jobs of colleagues," she said.
McBride said that although the state teacher’s union, the New Jersey Education Association (NJEA), had advised the GREA to "stand up to the bullying of the governor," Glen Rock had been in a unique position.
"There were a lot of things in play here: protracted bargaining, significant cuts in the budget and an upcoming [public] vote," McBride said. "At the end of the day, it’s the [local] membership’s vote. The NJEA respects that."
A spokesperson for NJEA could not be reached for comment at press time.
Rinderknecht said the pay freezes from the GREA will save the district about $800,000, and the freeze from the administrators association should save approximately $35,000. Further, in exchange for pay freezes, Governor Chris Christie offered last month to give districts the money the state would save on Medicare and Social Security tax contributions — an amount that would provide 7.65 percent in extra aid for every dollar gained in savings.
Steuert emphasized that the BOE will "do our best to focus the reinstatement on classrooms."
Verducci underlined that even with the concessions, there was still an $857,000 budget shortfall in Glen Rock, and the district’s list of cuts will still be applied.
"But based on the concessions of all employees, that list would get dramatically shrunk," Verducci said.
Rinderknecht said such a jostling of the budget leading into a school election was unprecedented.
"I’ve been in the business 30 years and I’ve never seen this before," he said. "We’re freeing up money where we can bring back lost positions, but post-election, so the cart’s in front of the horse. We’re going to try to spare as many positions as possible with the monies that were freed up."
The district’s agreement with the GREA includes pay increases already negotiated for most employees for each school year from June 2008, when the union’s previous contract expired, to this year. The district anticipated those pay increases in its 2008-09 and 2009-10 budgets, and the raises will be applied retroactively.
Steuert added that the new agreement includes some pay adjustments for the top tier of teachers, so that no employee would be paid less after healthcare premium adjustments were made.
In a bold move going against the grain of the state’s teacher’s union, the Glen Rock Education Association (GREA) agreed Monday to take a pay freeze for the 2010/2011 school year.
In exchange, the BOE agreed not to outsource any custodial positions for at least one year.
"I cannot tell you how grateful we are, and the entire town of Glen Rock should be, that our teachers have proven once again that they do put the welfare of our children and this district paramount in their thinking," said BOE Vice President Barbara Steuert, a member of the negotiation committee.
Meanwhile, the Glen Rock Administrators Association will also agree to a wage freeze – meaning that all employees in the district will be working at the current salaries in the next school year.
On March 31, the BOE voted 5-3-1 against ratifying a tentative agreement it reached with the GREA in February after more than two years of negotiations. The agreement was reached before school officials learned the district would receive no state financial aid for 2010-11. At the March 31 meeting, Superintendent of Schools Dr. David Verducci and Business Administrator Michael Rinderknecht agreed to take pay freezes, and some BOE members asked the district’s teachers to make similar concessions.
On Monday night, the BOE voted 8-0-1 in favor of the revised agreement. Trustee Carlo Cella III, whose wife is a teacher in the district, abstained. The mood at the meeting was jovial, with rounds of applause coming from the audience of mostly parents and teachers after the announcement.
GREA President Sue McBride said the teachers voted "in a significant majority" to support the revised contract at its meeting on Monday afternoon, and called her membership’s decision "magnanimous."
"They acted with grace under pressure, keeping in mind the students, programs and schools of Glen Rock, and also with hopes of saving the jobs of colleagues," she said.
McBride said that although the state teacher’s union, the New Jersey Education Association (NJEA), had advised the GREA to "stand up to the bullying of the governor," Glen Rock had been in a unique position.
"There were a lot of things in play here: protracted bargaining, significant cuts in the budget and an upcoming [public] vote," McBride said. "At the end of the day, it’s the [local] membership’s vote. The NJEA respects that."
A spokesperson for NJEA could not be reached for comment at press time.
Rinderknecht said the pay freezes from the GREA will save the district about $800,000, and the freeze from the administrators association should save approximately $35,000. Further, in exchange for pay freezes, Governor Chris Christie offered last month to give districts the money the state would save on Medicare and Social Security tax contributions — an amount that would provide 7.65 percent in extra aid for every dollar gained in savings.
Steuert emphasized that the BOE will "do our best to focus the reinstatement on classrooms."
Verducci underlined that even with the concessions, there was still an $857,000 budget shortfall in Glen Rock, and the district’s list of cuts will still be applied.
"But based on the concessions of all employees, that list would get dramatically shrunk," Verducci said.
Rinderknecht said such a jostling of the budget leading into a school election was unprecedented.
"I’ve been in the business 30 years and I’ve never seen this before," he said. "We’re freeing up money where we can bring back lost positions, but post-election, so the cart’s in front of the horse. We’re going to try to spare as many positions as possible with the monies that were freed up."
The district’s agreement with the GREA includes pay increases already negotiated for most employees for each school year from June 2008, when the union’s previous contract expired, to this year. The district anticipated those pay increases in its 2008-09 and 2009-10 budgets, and the raises will be applied retroactively.
Steuert added that the new agreement includes some pay adjustments for the top tier of teachers, so that no employee would be paid less after healthcare premium adjustments were made.
Reason #5 to vote YES on April 20:
We kept the budget cuts out of the classroom as much as possible.
As we looked at places to cut from the school district budget, we avoided some “quick fixes” that could have taken big chunks out of our expenses. For example, we have maintained class sizes at the relatively small numbers we currently enjoy and which the community has supported over the years. Even though there is not “scientific” evidence or studies that "prove" class sizes directly affect student achievement, it has long been felt by parents, and by teachers and administrators, in Ridgewood that class size has an impact on learning, classroom management, etc. As someone who came from California, I personally survived in very large classes (average of about 30) growing up. My daughter was in a classroom with 40+ students in 2nd grade. This was the norm and we dreamed about the luxury of having 22 or 25 kids in a class. (A little perspective is good.) In talking with the community during the budget process this year, I heard over and over parents asking that we please keep class sizes where they are. Luckily we were able to maintain that priority.
Other cuts we made in an attempt to stay away from the students’ daily classroom experience included: supervisors, supplies, secretaries, professional development, co-curricular, athletics, staff development, Director of MIS, Director of Curriculum, freezing aide and non-affiliated salaries.
Obviously, we couldn’t keep all the cuts away from students. Unfortunately, our cuts to Guidance services at the high school, Reading Recovery in first grade, textbooks, and other cuts will be felt throughout the district. But overall, we were able to lessen the impact and retain as much of our programs as possible. Click here to see the complete list of cuts...If you spend a few minutes looking carefully, I think you will see that we have been mostly successful in minimizing the impact of the cuts.
Something to remember: as painful as the cuts are, and as hard as we’re all going to have to work to adjust, we will do it. On April 21, the day after the budget vote, we’ll still have the things that make Ridgewood great. We’ll still have amazing students, we’ll still have involved parents and we’ll still have excellent staff. Those are the things that truly make our education excellent.
Any questions about the budget, please get the facts: Visit the district website's budget page, email questions to budget11@ridgewood.k12.nj.us, or post comments here.
Please vote YES on April 20.
Other cuts we made in an attempt to stay away from the students’ daily classroom experience included: supervisors, supplies, secretaries, professional development, co-curricular, athletics, staff development, Director of MIS, Director of Curriculum, freezing aide and non-affiliated salaries.
Obviously, we couldn’t keep all the cuts away from students. Unfortunately, our cuts to Guidance services at the high school, Reading Recovery in first grade, textbooks, and other cuts will be felt throughout the district. But overall, we were able to lessen the impact and retain as much of our programs as possible. Click here to see the complete list of cuts...If you spend a few minutes looking carefully, I think you will see that we have been mostly successful in minimizing the impact of the cuts.
Something to remember: as painful as the cuts are, and as hard as we’re all going to have to work to adjust, we will do it. On April 21, the day after the budget vote, we’ll still have the things that make Ridgewood great. We’ll still have amazing students, we’ll still have involved parents and we’ll still have excellent staff. Those are the things that truly make our education excellent.
Any questions about the budget, please get the facts: Visit the district website's budget page, email questions to budget11@ridgewood.k12.nj.us, or post comments here.
Please vote YES on April 20.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Reason #6 to vote YES on April 20:
Our budget is DECREASING from 09/10 to 10/11.
While it’s correct that our tax levy is increasing at the cap-induced maximum of 4%, in reality, the Ridgewood Public Schools’ overall budget is going down next year.
Huh? How does that work?
If you look at the budget for the district (click here), you will see that revenues are decreasing from $90,494,444 in 09/10 to $89,441,565 in 10/11. This is due primarily to the cuts in state aid.
Because we have a balanced budget, you will also see that our expenses are likewise decreasing from $90,494,444 in 09/10 to $89,441,565.
Once we factored in the increases in our expenses (contractual increases, tuition increases, health insurance premiums going up, transportation costs going up, etc.) and then factored in the decrease in our revenue (thank you, Governor Christie), we were left with a big gap. A tax increase of 4% closed part of the gap. And the $6.4 million of programming/staff cuts closed the rest.
The important point I wanted to make today is: we have trimmed a lot from our budget. We are not increasing our overall budget. We still have the same number of students. And we’ll still educate every one of them. Voting YES on the budget will allow us to provide the education that we’ve worked so hard to maintain, through the budget cut process. Voting NO on the budget means we’ll have to cut even more (assuming the Village Council would recommend additional cuts).
Please VOTE YES on April 20.
Huh? How does that work?
If you look at the budget for the district (click here), you will see that revenues are decreasing from $90,494,444 in 09/10 to $89,441,565 in 10/11. This is due primarily to the cuts in state aid.
Because we have a balanced budget, you will also see that our expenses are likewise decreasing from $90,494,444 in 09/10 to $89,441,565.
Once we factored in the increases in our expenses (contractual increases, tuition increases, health insurance premiums going up, transportation costs going up, etc.) and then factored in the decrease in our revenue (thank you, Governor Christie), we were left with a big gap. A tax increase of 4% closed part of the gap. And the $6.4 million of programming/staff cuts closed the rest.
The important point I wanted to make today is: we have trimmed a lot from our budget. We are not increasing our overall budget. We still have the same number of students. And we’ll still educate every one of them. Voting YES on the budget will allow us to provide the education that we’ve worked so hard to maintain, through the budget cut process. Voting NO on the budget means we’ll have to cut even more (assuming the Village Council would recommend additional cuts).
Please VOTE YES on April 20.
Monday, April 12, 2010
Christie has either lost his mind or he really doesn't care who gets hurt in his quest to break the NJEA.
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the rabbit hole, the other side of the looking glass, the place where nothing makes sense.
I just read this headline on NJ.com:
Gov. Chris Christie urges voters to reject school districts' budgets without wage freezes for teachers.
I am speechless.
Except for this:
Please, voters of Ridgewood, use your heads and don't be swayed by what Governor Christie wants.
Christie wants to break the NJEA? OK.
Christie is playing power and politics? Whatever.
At the end of the day (sorry, I do hate that phrase), the residents of Ridgewood only owe their allegiance to one entity -- and it's not a big guy in Trenton, whether that big guy is the governor or the chairman of the NJEA. The citizens of Ridgewood answer to ourselves. And our children.
The REA should have voted to accept the concession presented by their leadership -- not because Christie told them to, but because it was the right thing to do for Ridgewood.
We need to pass the budget on April 20 because it's the right thing to do. Failure of the budget will result in further cuts to our educational programs. Failure of the budget will not teach the NJEA or REA a lesson. It will only hurt our schools.
More to come...
I just read this headline on NJ.com:
Gov. Chris Christie urges voters to reject school districts' budgets without wage freezes for teachers.
I am speechless.
Except for this:
Please, voters of Ridgewood, use your heads and don't be swayed by what Governor Christie wants.
Christie wants to break the NJEA? OK.
Christie is playing power and politics? Whatever.
At the end of the day (sorry, I do hate that phrase), the residents of Ridgewood only owe their allegiance to one entity -- and it's not a big guy in Trenton, whether that big guy is the governor or the chairman of the NJEA. The citizens of Ridgewood answer to ourselves. And our children.
The REA should have voted to accept the concession presented by their leadership -- not because Christie told them to, but because it was the right thing to do for Ridgewood.
We need to pass the budget on April 20 because it's the right thing to do. Failure of the budget will result in further cuts to our educational programs. Failure of the budget will not teach the NJEA or REA a lesson. It will only hurt our schools.
More to come...
Reason #7 to Vote YES on April 20:
We held the tax increase to the 4% cap.
Before anyone starts in with complaints that the Board views the 4% cap as a “target,” consciously choosing to budget to that level of growth no matter what…let me just say this about that (as my Dad used to say):
Six months or so ago, we started talking at Board meetings about the upcoming budget. We discussed looking at several options, including versions with tax increases of 0%, 1%, 2%, 3% and 4%. For myself, I can say that I was hoping there would be some way to create a budget with a less-than-cap tax increase. I knew it would probably mean some cuts, but I wanted to at least see what it would look like.
Of course, this was long before we knew about our health insurance premiums going up almost 30%...before we knew exactly how much our transportation costs or out-of-district tuition costs would be rising…and before we ever could have imagined losing 100% of our categorical aid from the state.
The fact is, the District had to cut over $6 million just to create a budget that was based on a 4% tax increase. These cuts are painful and deep. The idea that we could somehow cut even more, to increase taxes, say, 3%, is basically unfathomable. To me.
So, I guess in one sense, this year the 4% increase did become something of a target. It was a target that would let us establish a limit to the cuts to our programs and our Ridgewood education.
Now we could have, legally, created a budget that incorporated a 5% tax increase. Or 6%. Or more. Our loss of state aid qualified us to get a waiver to raise taxes over the cap. Board members heard from many community members who actually asked us to do this. The common theme of these emails and calls and conversations was: please don’t cut so deeply. We’re willing to pay more for our schools.
The Board discussed the idea of going above the cap, and determined that our community, overall, would not support such a budget. There were two primary themes in the communications I personally received: 1) some people said they simply could not afford to pay more. 2) Others said they might be willing to pay more, if the teachers’ union had been willing to give some concession on their contract.
In the end, the Board’s goal was to approve a budget that we felt the community could support. We need the budget to pass (or else more cuts will be made...more on that in a future post).
Any questions on the budget, feel free to comment here, or send an email to budget11@ridgewood.k12.nj.us. You can also review the budget, the cuts and other budget information by clicking here.
Please vote YES on April 20.
Six months or so ago, we started talking at Board meetings about the upcoming budget. We discussed looking at several options, including versions with tax increases of 0%, 1%, 2%, 3% and 4%. For myself, I can say that I was hoping there would be some way to create a budget with a less-than-cap tax increase. I knew it would probably mean some cuts, but I wanted to at least see what it would look like.
Of course, this was long before we knew about our health insurance premiums going up almost 30%...before we knew exactly how much our transportation costs or out-of-district tuition costs would be rising…and before we ever could have imagined losing 100% of our categorical aid from the state.
The fact is, the District had to cut over $6 million just to create a budget that was based on a 4% tax increase. These cuts are painful and deep. The idea that we could somehow cut even more, to increase taxes, say, 3%, is basically unfathomable. To me.
So, I guess in one sense, this year the 4% increase did become something of a target. It was a target that would let us establish a limit to the cuts to our programs and our Ridgewood education.
Now we could have, legally, created a budget that incorporated a 5% tax increase. Or 6%. Or more. Our loss of state aid qualified us to get a waiver to raise taxes over the cap. Board members heard from many community members who actually asked us to do this. The common theme of these emails and calls and conversations was: please don’t cut so deeply. We’re willing to pay more for our schools.
The Board discussed the idea of going above the cap, and determined that our community, overall, would not support such a budget. There were two primary themes in the communications I personally received: 1) some people said they simply could not afford to pay more. 2) Others said they might be willing to pay more, if the teachers’ union had been willing to give some concession on their contract.
In the end, the Board’s goal was to approve a budget that we felt the community could support. We need the budget to pass (or else more cuts will be made...more on that in a future post).
Any questions on the budget, feel free to comment here, or send an email to budget11@ridgewood.k12.nj.us. You can also review the budget, the cuts and other budget information by clicking here.
Please vote YES on April 20.
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Reason #8 to Vote YES on April 20:
Want cuts to administration? We’ve done it.
Throughout the process of talking about the budget over the past few months, some in the community urged us to try for equity in spreading the impact around and keeping the fallout as far away from students as possible. If you look at the entire list of cuts, we are actually making fairly major cuts in administration & Ed Center staff.
As part of a restructuring of supervisors, there will be a reduction of three supervisors: there will be a new, combined position of Director of Wellness & Athletics. Similarly, the positions of Math Supervisor and Science Supervisor will be combined. The Director of World Languages position will be eliminated and those responsibilities moved to another supervisor (at the moment, I can’t remember where).
At the Ed Center, the cuts include:
-- Elimination of the Director of MIS
-- Elimination of the Director of Curriculum
-- Elimination of a Staff Developer
-- Elimination of the Public Information Officer*
-- Elimination of a secretary in the Curriculum Dept
-- Elimination of a secretary in HR
-- Cutting a Community School secretary to half-time
There may be a couple more secretarial positions, but the administrative cuts listed here total approximately $850,000
I know there is a perception among some people that we are "administrator-heavy." But the facts do not bear this out. We are a large district, the largest in the county. We have very few administrators, and these cuts will help to streamline even further. (See Reason #9 for voting yes on April 20: high ratio of students-to-administrators.)
For those who advocate cutting in the Curriculum area: we do need someone to direct our curriculum. Aside from the regular updating that must take place to keep up with the state's core content standards and to keep our curriculum current, many of the changes we're implementing due to these cuts will require that new curriculum be written or existing curriculum be revised. In addition, the Office of Curriculum and Instruction is responsible for all staff development, instructional improvement, state testing & analysis, observations & evaluations of first-year teachers, supervising K-12 librarians and supervising K-5 Language Arts, Math, Social Studies and Science.
Don’t forget – one of the issues that was discussed during the recent math "situation" was the community's desire for less "site-based management" of elementary curriculum and instruction, and more consistency across the district. The Asst. Superintendent of Curriculum is responsible for that consistency.
That being said, the administration has proposed cutting the Director of Curriculum, which removes a "layer" from that department.
All in all, the 2010/11 budget represents a pretty significant reduction in administration and supervision.
Please vote YES on April 20.
As part of a restructuring of supervisors, there will be a reduction of three supervisors: there will be a new, combined position of Director of Wellness & Athletics. Similarly, the positions of Math Supervisor and Science Supervisor will be combined. The Director of World Languages position will be eliminated and those responsibilities moved to another supervisor (at the moment, I can’t remember where).
At the Ed Center, the cuts include:
-- Elimination of the Director of MIS
-- Elimination of the Director of Curriculum
-- Elimination of a Staff Developer
-- Elimination of the Public Information Officer*
-- Elimination of a secretary in the Curriculum Dept
-- Elimination of a secretary in HR
-- Cutting a Community School secretary to half-time
There may be a couple more secretarial positions, but the administrative cuts listed here total approximately $850,000
I know there is a perception among some people that we are "administrator-heavy." But the facts do not bear this out. We are a large district, the largest in the county. We have very few administrators, and these cuts will help to streamline even further. (See Reason #9 for voting yes on April 20: high ratio of students-to-administrators.)
For those who advocate cutting in the Curriculum area: we do need someone to direct our curriculum. Aside from the regular updating that must take place to keep up with the state's core content standards and to keep our curriculum current, many of the changes we're implementing due to these cuts will require that new curriculum be written or existing curriculum be revised. In addition, the Office of Curriculum and Instruction is responsible for all staff development, instructional improvement, state testing & analysis, observations & evaluations of first-year teachers, supervising K-12 librarians and supervising K-5 Language Arts, Math, Social Studies and Science.
Don’t forget – one of the issues that was discussed during the recent math "situation" was the community's desire for less "site-based management" of elementary curriculum and instruction, and more consistency across the district. The Asst. Superintendent of Curriculum is responsible for that consistency.
That being said, the administration has proposed cutting the Director of Curriculum, which removes a "layer" from that department.
All in all, the 2010/11 budget represents a pretty significant reduction in administration and supervision.
Please vote YES on April 20.
Reason #9 to Vote YES on April 20:
Our ratio of students to administrators is high. We are leaner than most districts.
One of the ways to evaluate how “top heavy” a district is, is to look at its ratio of students to administrators. The more students there are per administrator, the better. Right? So how do we stack up?
According to the recently released Comparative Spending Report from the New Jersey Department of Education, Ridgewood’s ratio of students to administrators for 2009/10 is 207.2. This ranks us at #25 out of the 105 districts, grades K-12, with enrollment of 3501 or more. This is relatively efficient: many districts have far more administrators than Ridgewood.
Even though our current ratio of students to administrators is already fairly high, it will be even higher in next year’s DOE report, since we’re cutting administrators and supervisors inthe 2010/11 budget. Tomorrow, in Reason #8 to Vote YES, I’ll outline the administrative cuts that are planned.
Please vote YES on April 20.
According to the recently released Comparative Spending Report from the New Jersey Department of Education, Ridgewood’s ratio of students to administrators for 2009/10 is 207.2. This ranks us at #25 out of the 105 districts, grades K-12, with enrollment of 3501 or more. This is relatively efficient: many districts have far more administrators than Ridgewood.
Even though our current ratio of students to administrators is already fairly high, it will be even higher in next year’s DOE report, since we’re cutting administrators and supervisors inthe 2010/11 budget. Tomorrow, in Reason #8 to Vote YES, I’ll outline the administrative cuts that are planned.
Please vote YES on April 20.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
