School Board Elections in November = BAD IDEA

That headline covers just one aspect of the wrong-headed bill that passed the Senate Education Committee Monday and is headed to the full Senate. The reason this is back on the fast track has nothing to do with the Senate or anyone in Trenton actually caring about our school board elections. It is all about Trenton trying to find some way, any way to at least LOOK like they are working on property tax relief. AND Governor Corzine is simply stalling so he doesn't have to make his budget address in February...he would rather wait and see what kind of income tax revenues come in April.

Here are the main components of the Bill and why it's wrong:
1) Moving school board elections to November, combined with county, state and federal PARTISAN elections, will needlessly politicize school campaigns and clutter voters' mailboxes and attentions. School board elections should be based on educational issues -- that's it. Why do they think turnout will be better in November? Even when the governor's job and all state senators' and assemblypersons' seats have been up for election, turnout has remained consistent.

2) Eliminate the public elections on school budgets that are under state caps. This part is ok, in my opinion. Budget votes are basically meaningless because of the caps and adequacy amounts. Voters FEEL like they are actually influencing the budget, but the state is already controlling the potential for increase. And besides, with the economy, rising prices, flat state aid and threatened adequacy enforcement, there is little room for budgets to come in substantially below the 4% cap anyway.

3) Moving the vote on "second questions" for additional funding to November. This is just ridiculous. When the school district's budget year runs from summer to summer, how will we plan a budget when we won't find out about funding until November, half-way through the year? How will the village know how much property tax to collect? Will they have to go back and revise tax bills (which will cost the village money) if a second questions is passed in November? It's just silly.

This bill is about Governor Corzine and the legislature grasping at straws to help themselves look better and to help them deal with the tanking state economy. I don't appreciate it. I'm letting Senate President Richard Codey and Sen. Shirley Turner, chairwoman of the Senate Education Committee, know how I feel. Click on their names if you'd like to do that, too.

Tenure for Teacher's Aides?

Just a quick note to let you know about state bill A420 which "Establishes measures to provide employment stability for teaching paraprofessionals employed in school districts that receive federal funding under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act."

In other words, lifetime tenure for teacher's aides.

This is a bad thing. If you pay attention to some of the business at our Board of Ed meetings, we are constantly acquiring and un-acquiring aides. That's because the need for aides is driven by students' IEPs. When a particular student classified as special ed requires an aide, we are are required to provide it. And when that student no longer requires an aide, or if the student leaves the district, then we reassign the aide or the aide leaves the district. It's a fluid and changing environment and the district needs to be able to make decisions based on educational needs.

This bill passed the state Assembly (yesterday, I think) by a vote of 70-7-1. It now goes to the Senate Education Committee.

You can contact members of the Education Committee by clicking here. Tell them this is a bad idea.

(I'm still waiting for someone to propose a bill guaranteeing tenure for copywriters. Or accountants. Or fill-in-the-blank-with-whatever-job-you-have.)