Ridgewood BOE to discuss what to do with $$ returned by state.

Sorry for the lack of activity on my blog recently. Work has alternated between super-busy and very slow, and in the latter times, I try to catch up on family stuff, my son’s college search, baking, sleep…things like that.

The Ridgewood Board of Ed meets tonight at 7:30, and I’ll be watching on FiOS Channel 33. One of the primary topics of interest is the Board’s decision about what to do with the aid that will be coming back to the District from the state. Governor Christie’s people are making a big deal about how this aid represents the governor’s “commitment to education,” but I can’t help but wonder why, if he was so committed, he took it away in the first place. But that’s neither here nor there anymore. Now districts like Ridgewood need to figure out what to do with the money – within all the budgetary restrictions and rules imposed by the state. The biggest issue, that most people don’t understand, is that the money really should not be used for anything that will be an ongoing cost. For example, teachers or staff. Why? Because if you add staff now (like, to reduce class sizes in a grade or two replace a program that was cut), then when next year’s budget rolls around, we won’t be able to fund those salaries. The budget cap (which is really a tax levy cap) will prevent those positions from being funded, because they were not funded by this year’s tax levy. The state’s tax levy cap makes it impossible for districts to most effectively incorporate a windfall-type infusion of funding. Just another unforeseen drawback that taxpayers don’t always see.

(I hope Governor Christie and his minions don't think this return of part of our funding makes up for the delay in reimbursing us for the referendum construction grant monies. Boy, the shell games they play...maybe we'll have to use the state aid money to pay for the construction, while we wait again for the state to fulfill its legal obligation...again.)

I’m not sure what the other options and restrictions are for these funds coming back from the state. Presumably, the funds could be placed in the district’s surplus account for now, and then applied according to the rules that guide that line item’s use. I presume that Dr. Fishbein will make a recommendation, or a couple of recommendations, to the Board as to how he thinks the funds should best be used. I’ll be interested in that conversation tonight.

I see from the agenda that there’s opportunity for public comment regarding the district’s alternatives, so if you have an opinion, please go to the Ed Center and share it.

Also on the agenda: a proposal by Dr. Fishbein to have the District reimburse BOE members for the cost of their state-mandated criminal history checks. I don’t know what these background checks are going to cost, yet, but I think it’s reasonable for the District to pick up the tab. (Frankly, I think Trenton should pick-up the tab.)

I also see that the Board will have the second reading of new and revised policies, one of which is the Extracurricular Code of Conduct policy which I think is confusing and problematic with regard to enforcement. Will be interested to see if there is any discussion.

I’m going to try and start posting more regularly again…I have been reading all the education news and info blogs I’ve always followed, just haven’t felt the need to talk much these days. I’ll be visiting colleges the rest of this week with my son, but feel free to send your comments, especially after tonight’s discussion/decision re: additional funding. Let me know what you think!

P.S. Sorry there are no links to the agenda, etc. For some reason Blogger is no allowing me to post links. Just one more reason I'm considering moving to another blog platform...

BOE wants to hear from "no" voters.

The Finance Committee of the Board of Ed is inviting any interested voters to the Ed Center (3rd floor) tonight at 7:30 p.m. for an informal discussion about the recent budget vote. They especially want to hear from people who voted "no." Let's try to not be too cynical (you know who you are) and instead I hope you'll take them up on it. I argued for three years that the budget process needed to get input from the public much earlier in the process. The problem has always been that by the time the Board is discussing the budget and parents or taxpayers come to the microphone during public comment, it's basically too late to change anything. There's a tight schedule, dictated by the state, for when the initial budget is presented, when it must be finalized, delivered to the county, etc. It's been a constant source of friction...people come give their opinion about what they feel should be different in the budget, the Board listens, but since the budget has to go the county, and since the administration and Board has already spent weeks or months exploring alternatives, nothing really changes.

In addition, in spite of the District holding additional public meetings on the budget, and inviting questions at those meetings and via special budget emails, there are still many voters who have misconceptions or misinformation about certain facts about the budget and the process. Hopefully this informal conversation tonight will allow some of those questions to be answered.

So here's your chance to start the process for the April 2012 budget earlier...barely two weeks since the last election. Whether you feel this is a watershed moment in BOE history or just a blip in an imperfect process, I hope you'll agree that it's a step in the right direction.

Click here for the story about this meeting in Sunday's Bergen Record.

Ridgewood mentioned in NY Times story about school budgets.

The Times yesterday featured a story about school budgets and the election in New Jersey this year, as compared to last year.

An excerpt from the story...

Little drama. Limited tax increases. Fewer draconian cuts.

Despite the imposition of a cap this year that limits the increase in property tax collections to 2 percent, school districts in New Jersey are heading into budget elections on Wednesday largely free of the anger and turmoil of last year’s budget season.

and...

Even a well-to-do district like Ridgewood is sticking to a modest 2 percent increase in tax revenue, which will maintain existing programs but not pay for additional teachers to meet growing enrollment.

Statewide, nearly 87 percent of the 538 districts with budgets on the ballot will propose raising their taxes by no more than 2 percent, adhering to the annual limit set by the tax cap pushed through by Governor Christie. About 71 districts will go over 2 percent to cover large increases for health insurance, pensions and higher enrollment — spending that is allowed under the cap.

Eleven districts are also seeking voter approval on separate ballot questions to raise additional tax revenue for specific proposals, which include restoring sports programs and having full-day kindergarten.

Click here to read the full story.

More NJ districts are charging activity fees.

A recent survey by the New Jersey School Boards Association showed that approximately 40% of districts charge activity fees for students involved in extracurricular activities. Of those districts that charge activity fees, half charge a flat fee, and 34.6 percent charge a per-activity fee. (Ridgewood charges a flat fee for students in the middle schools and high school.)

Click here to see more detailed results on the survey.

A few selected comments from the survey results:

Our district has charged for activities for the past 10 years or so. We instituted them after several budget defeats and thought it would have a positive effect on parent/voter turnout … but so far, it hasn't seemed to work out. We have had surprisingly little reaction to the fees.

We discussed this for last year but decided that, although we could have used the money, we had to make sure that we had a policy in place and we were not going down the path of poor implementation like so many districts have.

I don't understand why everyone thinks when they get to high school, sports and other activities should be free. If they want the extras and the district does not have the money, they must be willing to pay. It's better than cutting the program!

I am not in favor of charging for activities/sports that are run through the schools. It is important that we encourage participation in activities/sports for many reasons. It's proven that kids who participate are better students.

It is an unfortunate necessity. Co-curriculars are a critical part of a student's education, but the state's failure to make good on its constitutional obligation to fund schools according to its own formula leads us down the slippery slope of having parents pay for "extras" that aren't really extra at all. Sad times for education in New Jersey

With 2 percent cap, activity fees may be the only way to protect extra curricular & co-curricular programs.

It is an unfortunate requirement in today's economic climate.

We have looked at this in the past, and will probably look at it in the future. At the moment we prefer not to impose this type of fee.

Extracurricular activities should be considered part of the essential educational experience and should be fully funded through the existing revenue streams.

We have raised the required number of participating students for clubs and activities, which has reduced the number of clubs and activities, and hence reduced some of our costs. Also, we have secured grants from the freeholder board to fund our after-school tutoring/homework club and our girls' and boys' running clubs.

We are introducing activity fees starting in the 2011-2012 school year. We felt it was time to take a small step into this area, especially when presenting a balanced budget is increasingly difficult.

Rainy day pre-election thoughts.

Election day is coming -- Wednesday April 27 -- and the rhetoric and all the stuff I hate about the process is in full swing. Signs on lawns. PR pieces in the newspaper. Blog posts with their anonymous comments and unique "spin" on facts. I've always been up front about my lack of political savvy. I don't play the games and I just try to call it like it is. There's really not a lot I can do to change some people's minds, once they've got certain ideas stuck there.

It's frustrating (and sort of funny, if it weren't so serious) to see myself portrayed as "the establishment." I have spent the past three years feeling like the outsider on the BOE. Many of the things that frustrated me before I was elected still cause me to bang my head on my desk -- even more -- today. The answers or solutions were not as easy as they looked from the outside. And they're not always easy to explain to others.

I am still the first to agree that the Board needs more openness and transparency. I've been working on it for three years. Not everyone on the BOE or in the administration agrees with me. We have improved, but not enough. It is like turning an aircraft carrier, the culture is so ingrained and the bureaucracy is so entrenched, that one board member can only impact so much. I will keep working on it -- I know it can get better. In the meantime, I've tried to fill some of the gaps with my own personal communication via this blog, even though it's a bit of a minefield to navigate the boundaries of free speech, confidentiality and "appropriate" Board member behavior.

As for the budget (tax levy) you're being asked to approve on Wednesday -- we have kept spending flat in all areas except health care, and that is contractual so there is nothing we can do about it with this budget. (In fact, if it weren't for the health premium increase, the budget would be going down $75,000.) We are working on the next contract now and the entire Board is well aware that salaries/benefits -- especially health insurance -- cannot remain as is. We simply cannot afford it. The system cannot support it.

I'm still hoping my serious commitment to these issues -- and others, as I've described before -- will convince enough voters to return me for three more years on the Board. I'm still the "new" member. I'm still the one on the Board who has not been part of the establishment for years and years. There is a lot more I can do and I'm willing to keep working.

I chose not to raise a bunch of money and pay for expensive signs (the ones you see now are all those that I saved from three years ago), postcard mailings, etc., because I felt I couldn't ask people to spend money on that stuff in this economy. I'm still silly enough to believe that elections should not be about who has more signs, who had more coffees or whose name is in what ballot position. I know what I've done, I know what can be done, and I know I can make a positive difference...if you'll re-elect me on Wednesday.

The myth of the “budget vote.”

Yes, it’s an intentionally provocative title, but I wanted to share a perspective that I’ve commented on before, especially when I hear Ridgewood residents arguing about the upcoming election and whether they plan to vote for or against "the budget."

In addition to electing members of the Board of Education*, on April 27 the ballot question will read:

Resolved, that there should be raised for the General Fund $81,323,178 for the ensuing school year (2011-2012).

Voters (whether they are taxpayers or not, by the way) are asked to approve the total amount of taxes, for the schools, to be levied via property taxes. That’s it. We are not voting for or against the budget – not voting on how that tax levy is spent, and not voting on how much is allocated to the various lines and cost centers.

Based on that understanding of the fact of the vote process, and with New Jersey’s government-mandated 2% cap on how much the tax levy is allowed to grow, I can understand the occasional argument from Trenton that the annual “budget vote” is unnecessary if a district’s budget is under the legal cap. Sure, the vote is a rare democratic access point between residents and the delivery of their money to the “public good,” and people do like to feel like they have a say in what happens with their hard-earned taxes. (Imagine if we could vote on the Federal budget…or the state budget…the mind reels at the prospect of TV ads bought by PACs and political parties.) But how much of a say is that vote in April?

If you think the school district should spend more money on this program or that program, your vote really doesn’t affect that. If you want the school district to hire this teacher or fire that administrator, your vote doesn’t affect that. If you think your vote will send a message to the teacher’s union, I’m not so sure how your vote would affect that. The only thing our vote does is decide how much money will be collected from all the taxpayers in Ridgewood and delivered to the school district. How the money is divvied up is proposed by the administrators and approved by the BOE…whom you elect to do so.

I understand how some can feel powerless…that the vote is sort of futile, because it’s already a done deal by the time it’s on the ballot. I happen to think that we can do a better job of ascertaining what residents think about the budget – before the annual school election. I’ve talked about creating opportunities for more citizen involvement, earlier in the process. Practically speaking, I’m not entirely sure how. Fact is, the budget is big and complicated and not really something that can be reduced to “sound bites” – despite the public’s penchant for framing issues that way. Typical political polarization doesn’t really work on something this complex, with direct results on 5800+ individual students with individual needs, individual preferences and individual issues.

So, I just wanted to add a little education as to what you’re truly voting for or against on April 27. It's not "the budget." It's the proposed tax levy as indicated above. This tax levy reflects the lowest tax increase since the mid-1980s. It represents 0% total growth in the total budget, except health insurance, which we are estimating to rise 12%. (In fact, if it weren’t for the increase in health benefits, the budget would be going down $75,000.) And it keeps the education our children are currently receiving intact. A “yes” vote sets the tax rate. A “no” vote charges the Village Council with setting the tax rate. They don’t get to recommend cuts. They don’t order changes in spending on this vs. that. They just set the tax rate, presumably lower than what the Board asked for on the ballot.

However you feel about the tax levy, I hope you will get out and vote.

*Should probably mention again that I hope you will re-elect me to the Board. Our schools are facing the toughest time in their history. Rising costs, dwindling resources and increased regulations from the state have contributed to an environment where providing the quality education Ridgewood expects and deserves is more difficult than ever. I have worked hard for the past three years, and I believe I have so much more to give to our schools and our community.

How a school budget is built.

Here's a video of the Bernards Township Superintendent of Schools (from the VoteApril27.com website) explaining what goes into their school budget -- which is remarkably similar to Ridgewood's. It's all stuff that our Dr. Fishbein or BOE members have stated at various times, but it's interesting to hear it from another perspective. I did notice her emphasis on a couple of points that I don't know if our community is always aware of. For example, when looking at Special Education costs, it's important to remember that the state law requires that our District (all districts) must provide special education to all youth from age 3 through 21. That's five years longer (or almost 40% longer) than we provide services to our regular education students, and it helps explain the size of the Special Education share of our budget. I wonder how many Ridgewood residents are aware of that.

Resident Gerry Clark has withdrawn from BOE race.

It has been reported by Patch.com that Gerry Clark, one of the challenges in the Board of Education election to be held on April 27, has withdrawn from the race. Click here for the full story.

In the meantime, the remaining candidates will be at the RHS Home & School meeting tonight to introduce ourselves and answer questions. Dr. Fishbein will also be there to present the 2011-12 budget which is up for vote.

The meeting starts at 7:30 p.m. and takes place in the RHS Library (Media Center) on the 2nd floor.

Referendum projects under budget...what does it mean?

At tonight's Board of Ed meeting, Dr. Fishbein updated us on the status of the referendum projects. As of last week, the final bids have been opened. We are currently still running at approx. $2 million under budget. (So-called "soft costs" still need to be calculated.) This leads me to share some info that I sent to a resident earlier today, in response to a question: what will the Board do with the leftover funds?

Once all the referendum projects are complete and closed out (ETA April 2013), the Board will basically have two options:

1. Spending unused referendum monies on projects "not specified in the referendum." If the projects are "within the scope" of the referendum, the BOE can decide to go ahead and do them. If they are not "within the scope," then the BOE would need voter approval first. For example, the BOE could repair an additional roof at BF, because the referendum included roofs at BF. But the BOE could not use the money to upgrade the library at RHS (without asking the voters), because the scope of the referendum did not include renovating the library at RHS.

2. Return the unused referendum monies to the taxpayer. This would most likely be done by applying the funds to the annual debt service portion of the taxes we collect, and would only provide tax relief in that given year. For example: every year, the tax revenue we receive includes a portion that is used to pay our debt service for all the outstanding bonds -- not just the most recent referendum -- on which we make payments. In the 2011-12 budget, that amount of debt service taxes is $3,173,000. In 2013 when any unused referendum money becomes available, the BOE will not be allowed to apply the funds to the outstanding principal, nor can the bonds be called (not until at least 2020).

Another bit of (helpful) information -- I believe the decision as to what do with unused referendum funds must be "all or nothing." For example, the Board would not be allowed to apply some to projects and some to debt service.

All this info was in response to a resident's question, which was as a candidate for re-election, which of the two options will I favor. My answer to that question was: I cannot in good conscience predict what I would favor in April 2013. It will depend on what is happening with the District's overall budget, education needs, and facilities needs at that time. A lot can happen in two years. There can also be different people on the BOE. I can say that if I'm there, I would be open to any option and I would want to have a robust public discussion, all of us in the community together. I'm sorry my answer wasn't one of the two choices, but it is my honest and sincere belief. I think it would be irresponsible for me to make a more pointed prediction now.

One last note: Dr. Fishbein noted that work on the GW Middle School addition will officially begin tomorrow, and work at Willard begins next week! The Ridge and Hawes additions are coming along great. Many other projects are completed or in-process. It has been so great to see these projects through, and to see the differences in our facilities. This work truly will benefit the children of Ridgewood and the community for generations.

Budget and ballot question approved by BOE.

At tonight's Board of Ed meeting, we approved the 2011-12 budget and ballot question for the upcoming vote by residents. The budget spreadsheet and powerpoint with notes & explanatory information will be on the District website shortly.

Following are the comments I made (or intended to make*) after the budget was reviewed:

What a difference a year makes.

This time last year, we were struggling to make millions of dollars in cuts (following a prior year of even more cuts). It was painful – and the District is still coping with the fallout. But we’re coping relatively well. Thankfully, a last-minute promise of some funding from the state, combined with good planning and efficiencies from school principals and Ed Center administration, headed off additional cuts for 2011-12.

I agree with Charlie – this is a bare minimum budget…

As a parent, I appreciate this budget that keeps our educational programs and staff intact – and includes a minimum amount for capital projects.

As a taxpayer, I thank the administrators for this budget that contains the smallest tax increase in decades.

And as a Board member, taxpayer and parent, I encourage anyone with questions as to what this budget means for their schools and classrooms, to speak to us tonight during public comment, email your questions to budget12@ridgewood.k12.nj.us, or please attend one of the three informational sessions that are scheduled. Everyone is invited to attend – not just parents – and the first one is this Thursday at 7:30 p.m. at GW Middle School.

Don’t just vote blindly on the budget…Get the information, the real information, from Dr. Fishbein, from the Board, or from your school’s principal.

It’s impossible to know what the future holds, but we can make a pretty good educated guess. Budgeting is going to get more difficult, not less. And the pressures to find creative ways to deliver education excellence will increase, not decrease. I believe this budget puts the District in a good position to face whatever comes at us next year and beyond.

I support this budget for 2011-12, and I hope Ridgewood residents will vote “yes” to approve it on April 27.

(*These are the notes I intended to read, but I think I paraphrased a bit during the meeting.)

Public hearing & community forums on 2011-12 budget.

Ridgewood residents are invited to learn more details about the 2011-12 school budget, which will be up for public vote on April 27. The following budget events are open to the community, and questions or comments are encouraged:

Official Public Hearing on Budget @ BOE Meeting
Tonight, 7:30 p.m. Ed Center, 3rd Floor
Watch on Cablevision Channel 77 or live webcast (click here to link live).

Community Presentation
Thursday, March 31, 7:30 p.m.
GW Middle School Auditorium

Coffee with the Superintendent
Tuesday, April 12, 9:00 AM
Ed Center, 3rd Floor

Community Presentation
Wednesday, April 20, 7:30 p.m.
BF Middle School Auditorium

Don't feel like attending a meeting, but have questions? Email budget12@ridgewood.k12.nj.us

Most recent budget activity:
At the Board meeting on March 21, the BOE had a Joint Meeting with the Ridgewood Village Council, to present an overview of the proposed 2011-2012 budget and to engage in a discussion. Assistant Superintendent for Business Angelo DeSimone presented to the Village Council an updated budget spreadsheet. Revenues are flat, with the exception of the proposed tax increase of 2%. Basically, the budget is a 0% increase from this year to next year, with no personnel cuts or cuts in programs. Utility costs are projected to increase 5%. The largest increase on the line items is the 12% projected increase for Employee Benefits, which includes medical insurance. The proposed 2011-2012 General Fund Tax increase of $1,594,572 is at the 2% cap. The total projected General Fund budget is $86,775,809, representing an increase from this year of $363,441.33. The tax impact of this budget would be $23.94 per $100,000 valuation, or $190.90 on the average assessed Ridgewood home of $797,422.

Budget 2011: What a difference a year makes.

The administrators reviewed the proposed 2011-12 budget for Ridgewood Public Schools at our Board of Ed meeting last Monday, and what a different experience that was, compared to this time last year. You can click here to download the budget spreadsheet, but the bottom line is this: With no cuts to staff or programs, the proposed budget features the lowest tax increase in at least 17 years, and is likely the lowest increase since 1986 (when the Glen School was closed).*

According to the budget presented, the tax levy would increase 2%, the maximum allowed by law. This translates into $23.94 per $100,000 assessed value, or $191 for the average assessed Ridgewood home.**

This time last year, we were struggling to make cuts totaling $6 million (following a prior year of cuts). We did it. It wasn’t easy. It was painful. And the District is still coping with the fallout. But we’re coping relatively well. Thankfully, a last-minute promise of some funding from the state, combined with austerity budgets from school principals and Ed Center administration, headed off additional cuts this year.

Residents will go to the polls to vote on the budget on April 27. I encourage all voters to review the budget and watch for the official District Newsline which will arrive in mailboxes. You should also keep an eye out for a postcard announcing community open forum sessions, where everyone will be invited to find out where the budget numbers come from and what it all means in terms of programs and the day-to-day classroom experience.

Any questions, you can post here. Or you can email me directly lauriegood@mac.com. Or email budget12@ridgewood.k12.nj.us and Dr. Fishbein will answer.


*I have tax information going back to 1994 and can confirm that the lowest tax increase over the past 17 years was $206 in 1995. I’m waiting to compile tax data back to 1986. I’ll update this post when I get it.

**According to the Village of Ridgewood, the average assessed Ridgewood home value is $797,422.

Revised Fields Policy is online; will be presented/voted-on Monday night.

An updated proposed revision to the Fields Use Policy will be presented to the Board of Ed tomorrow night at our regular public meeting. The draft policy is available as part of our agenda -- click here to download and read. Members of the Fields Committee will attend the meeting to respond to questions and concerns raised by BOE members and residents. I'd say it's likely that the BOE will vote on the proposed revision tomorrow night.

Also at tomorrow's meeting, the Board will receive a budget update from Dr. Fishbein and Mr. DeSimone. Last Monday we were presented with a budget that contained no cuts to staff or programs -- and yet, many lines on the budget were lower than last year. My hope is that tomorrow, we'll receive the details that can explain how those lines have been reduced, without loss of staff or programs. Of course, the recent $850,000 "gift" from Trenton has allowed us to eliminate the deficit which was reflected in our original budget. It's allowed us to not raid our capital reserve this year, which is a good thing. But, of course, with a 12% increase in healthcare costs, and increases in some other areas, we're not out of the woods. Hence, the proposed 2% increase in the tax levy.

In addition to tomorrow's BOE meeting, Dr. Fishbein is scheduling a number of open community meetings to review the budget and answer any questions from residents. I'll post those dates here as soon as they are confirmed.

Those are the main events on tomorrow's agenda. Please come to the meeting if you'd like to share your opinions during public comment, or if you'd just like to watch. You can also watch on CableVision Channel 77 or watch live on the web (click here).

Taxes and education quality.

Following is an email response I just sent, to a community member who wrote about concern for both taxes and maintaining quality education:

I appreciate your taking the time to contact me and share your thoughts...I can assure you I am well acquainted with the challenges faced by families struggling with severely diminished incomes.

You are absolutely correct that throwing money at schools does not make them better. Fortunately, Ridgewood continues to have excellent schools, while spending far below the state average on a per pupil basis. In fact, last year our total budget actually went down, somewhat paradoxically, even though taxes went up. (This is due to the loss of aid from the state of New Jersey -- we cut close to $3 million from our budget, but still required a 4% increase in taxes to make up for that lost aid.)

The recently-released New Jersey Schools Report Card showed how Ridgewood schools are much more efficient, by many measures, than most other similar-sized districts in the state.

I agree with the intangibles you name for maintaining quality schools, and I am happy to report that we are fortunate to have them here in Ridgewood: involved parents, motivated teachers and administrators that foster quality continue to be important elements of Ridgewood's schools.

We also have administrators and a BOE that have made tough decisions for the past few years, by:
-- cutting 20% of our administration
-- cutting over $4 million from the budget over past two years
-- reducing programs strategically, with minimal impact on students

For the upcoming 2011-12 school year, our proposed budget would require a tax increase of 2% -- in spite of rising costs, such as a projected 12% increase in health care. The reason we are able to balance our budget with a 2% tax increase is because our administrators and the Board continue to make the tough decisions necessary to remain fiscally responsible.

As a taxpayer, I understand your frustration with property tax rates and our need to rely heavily on those taxes to fund our schools, even as the state reneges on its long-term commitments to funding education, including special education. I promise you I will continue to look for ways to be fiscally responsible while I keep the quality of our education as my primary focus.

Understanding the school budget process. Tune in Friday.

This looks like a great program...from the New Jersey School Board's Association:

Local school officials often receive many questions from citizens, such as: How are priorities set? What are a school district’s fixed costs? How does state aid affect property taxes?

Tomorrow (Friday) morning, NJSBA’s online radio program, Conversations on New Jersey Education, will feature the topic: “Education Issues for the Non-Educator – Understanding School Budgets and School Funding in 2011.”

Host Ray Pinney will be joined by a panel of experts who will address these questions and other submitted by parents. The panel includes Michael Kaelber, director of NJSBA’s Legal & Policy Services Department; Dr. Valerie Goger, superintendent of the Bernards Township School District; and James Edwards, business administrator of the Brick Township School District.

The program will air at 11 a.m. Friday, March 4. Listeners who would like to ask a question during the show should use the call-in number, (347) 989-8904.

About the Program Conversations on New Jersey Education, on BlogTalkRadio.com, is similar to a live radio talk show, except it is broadcast through the Internet. The 45-minute shows air live, but will also be available to download to iPods or MP3 devices, or to listen to online “on demand.” Listeners only need a computer with high speed Internet access. To hear the live show or past recorded broadcasts, visit www.blogtalkradio.com/njsba.

BOE meeting Monday night.

There’s a lot going on at tomorrow’s Board of Ed meeting. We haven’t met for three weeks, so the agenda’s a little more full than typical. Full agenda here. A few highlights:

The Ridgewood Education Foundation will be presenting its Spring 2011 grant awards. The grants total $12,905 and the recipients are programs at RHS, Willard, Travell, Hawes, Ridge and Somerville.

Dr. Fishbein will update the Board on the 2009-10 Audit Report and Corrective Action Plan. Presumably we’ll hear how the software corrections are coming to correct the reporting glitches.

We’ll get a report on the Community Planning event that was held last month. That was such an interesting experience, I’m looking forward to seeing the ideas and suggestions put together into a report, and using the findings to inform our priorities for the coming few years.

The 2011-12 budget will be updated. Hopefully you saw Dr. Fishbein’s column in last Friday’s Ridgewood News, where he outlined the upcoming budget process, including opportunities for public input. (The online story (see link) includes a chart showing Ridgewood's financial efficiency compared to other districts.) Tomorrow night, the Board will be asked to approve the Preliminary Budget, which we must do in order to make the deadline for submitting to the Executive County Superintendent. The Preliminary budget is just that – not set in stone. I’m sure you heard about the approx. $850,000 in state aid coming to Ridgewood for next year. Before you start dreaming about where to spend this “windfall,” keep in mind that our initial budget showed a $650,000 deficit, so we’ll have to fill that hole first. Not sure what the administration is going to recommend with the rest. We’ll see tomorrow night.

We’ll have some more discussion on the updated Fields Use Policy, talking about questions and feedback we have and which we’ve received from the public.

Those are the meeting highlights. (You can watch live online by clicking here.) In terms of my personal BOE activity this week, I’ll be at Monday’s meeting, an Executive Session to discuss negotiations, Fields Committee meeting Wednesday morning, a webinar on social media in schools, and Federated HSA meeting on Thursday.

Ridgewood referendum projects are well under budget.

The Ridgewood News has a story today about Ridgewood schools' construction projects running under budget so far. I'm pasting the full text of the story here because I think it's helpful to see the projects and their status listed:

Despite rough weather this winter, construction projects at Ridgewood schools are moving ahead more or less on schedule and far under budget.

"Bids for the remaining projects continue to come in favorably," reported Superintendent Daniel Fishbein at a Jan. 24 meeting of the Ridgewood Board of Education (BOE).

The BOE approved a purchase bid for window and door replacements at Benjamin Franklin Middle School (BF) at a cost of $528,800, far below the roughly $900,000 budgeted for the project in the original bond referendum.

The referendum, narrowly approved by voters in December 2009, will ultimately encompass $48 million worth of construction projects at district schools. The projected tax increase on the average village home is about $300 per year over the course of the next 25 years to pay off the $38 million bond referendum. The state is contributing another $9.8 million in grants.

Bids from contractors are now being sought for other school projects. Seventeen contractors recently attended a walk-through tour of Willard for its expansion project slated for next year, Fishbein said. More bid dates are coming up in February.

Substantial construction projects are currently under way at Ridge and Hawes elementary schools. At Ridge, construction of a new roof and a new wing has been slowed due to inclement weather, but the roof of Hawes' new wing was installed before the snow and ice storms, so construction has continued without a hitch.

Ridge is still scheduled to fully open for fall 2011, Fishbein said during a tour of the premises. Ridge is receiving five new classrooms; two small group instruction rooms; an art studio; occupational and physical therapy space; mechanical room; storage; and a computer lab.

Travell, Willard and Somerville elementary schools and BF all underwent roofing replacements or improvements. Still to come are full renovations at Willard, though substantial asbestos abatement in a basement crawl space was successfully completed this summer. Willard will also undergo an expansion to add seven classrooms; one small group instruction room; a media center/ library; computer lab; resource room; a nurse's office; and storage.

BF has also received upgrades to its electrical, heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems; repairs of concrete and masonry, stairs and sidewalks; and its athletics fields have undergone significant renovations, including the installation of a new track and field facility for the district.

Ridgewood High School has received site updates to its sidewalks, stairs, external doors and brick and mortar, as well as new lockers and extensive work on its two athletics fields, including the installation of artificial turf. Other renovations include drinking fountains, plumbing, windows and doors, and fire detection systems and alerts.

George Washington Middle School (GW) has completed a new driveway on Washington Street. Plans for GW include an improved electrical system and windows, and expansion that will construct and/or renovate six classrooms, five small group instruction rooms, a media center/library, computer lab and gymnasium, which will take over part of the footprint of the existing field.

Many schools are also receiving occupancy sensor and light controls.

###

Great way to put $$ in perspective

I just love this video explaining the size of the US budget -- and the meaning of $100 million in cuts. (My husband wants to try and come up with a similar visual for the school budget...stay tuned!)

Shedding a little light on the facts about fields.

Forgive the pun, but I thought it was time to clarify and correct some of the “news” you may have been hearing about the fields and lights at RHS Stadium and Stevens Fields.

Friday’s Ridgewood News hosted several concerns about the funding for the lights. There was an allegation that one sports group may pull-out of the commitment to donate a minimum of 40% of the lease payments for years 2-5, if that group doesn’t get its way in terms of light shut-off times (as in, later light shut-off times). As BOE president Michele Lenhard said in that same newspaper article, the Board has a good-faith agreement with a group of sports organizations, and as of now, we are confident that the group will meet its commitment. There was never a promise of time for money, but rather an assurance from the District that rec sports groups need not worry about losing time on Stevens Field and RHS Stadium. Everyone involved in the arrangement pledged to use reason when working out schedules for use. The Fields Use Policy that will determine what days and times the lights can be used is currently being developed by the Joint Village of Ridgewood & Board of Education Fields Committee, and it will not be determined according to donation levels. The policy is scheduled to be presented to the BOE on Monday night, for discussion, public comment and possible approval. The policy will also need to be presented to the Village Council (date unknown) for their own discussion, public comment and approval.

Friday’s paper also contained some sensational claims about funding for the lights causing teachers to be fired or other staff to be cut. That is simply not correct. Here’s the explanation for the funding:

The lights were purchased with a five-year lease/purchase. That means we make five annual payments of $105,000. The first payment was made with funds donated by the sports groups. For year two, the BOE budget for 2011-12 includes 100% of the lease payment ($105,000) in the General Purchases line, the funds from which are not allowed to be used for paying staff. The General Purchases line is for one-time costs such as facilities repairs and summer maintenance projects, not for on-going personnel costs.

When the BOE receives the donation from the sports groups for year 2, the funds which had been earmarked for the lights will become available for other one-time building and maintenance costs.

In years three through five, the Board will have the ability to use unspent money from the referendum to complete our portion of the lease payments. (Currently we are running about $2 million dollars under budget on referendum costs.)

I hope this clears up any concern you might have had based on Friday’s newspaper. As you can see, asking parents if they are willing to give up their child’s teacher to pay for the lights is misleading at best.

Bonus post!

If you’re wondering what’s the real story about baseball diamonds in Ridgewood (and I hope you do want to hear the real story), here it is in a nutshell:

We all know Ridgewood doesn’t have enough field space for the children who currently play sports (this was discussed at length when the Village commissioned the Recreation Master Plan) and volunteers work hard to balance field access. It's more complicated than it may seem because different age groups require different field sizes. The BOE and the Village knew when the District undertook the field improvements at BF and RHS that while access for some sports would be increased, a “domino effect” would impact the 2,000 children who play in the RBSA, as well as the RHS baseball and softball teams. Unfortunately, the necessary changes that would make more diamonds available on Village fields – whether at Pleasant Park (Lower Hawes), Habernickel or Schedler – have not yet happened. The expansion project at GW middle school will eventually add another small diamond to the mix, but that won’t help this coming Spring season. The lights at Stevens Field can potentially help, but we've got to balance their use with the concerns of our neighbors. We’re all going to need to work together, and that's the process we're in right now.

So, yes, Ridgewood has too few baseball diamonds for the number of kids who play baseball. But the BOE didn’t create this situation in a vacuum, and it appears that the ball (pun intended?) is in the Village’s field (as it were)…

Budget and contract "news" is premature...and incorrect.

The other blog in town is erroneously reporting “BOE announces no raises for teachers and secretaries…” following the misleading report in Friday’s Ridgewood News that stated, “District administration has slated no raises for staff…” Let me just clarify something right now – the Board’s negotiations with the REA (teachers’ union) have not even started yet! The budget has not been created yet! This is an example of bad reporting that spreads through electronic media and takes on a life of its own.

Here are some facts:

The BOE’s negotiations with the Ridgewood Education Association will begin this month. The Board has been meeting in closed session to prepare, as has been announced in our public meeting notifications. There will be a process, obviously, and there will be proposals. But that negotiation, and the content of those proposals, will be confidential. They must be. Those are ground rules that the Board and the REA agree to. I know it can be hard for Ridgewood residents to not know, and to wonder what’s happening behind those closed doors, especially since the outcome of the negotiations will have such a direct impact on our community. But the negotiation process has to be confidential so that the parties can have direct and frank conversation with each other. “Negotiating in public” is not productive.

Believe me, when there is something to announce about the contract, we will announce it. But as of now, we haven’t even had our first meeting! Don’t you think it’s a little premature to “announce” contract terms? Please resist the urge to get riled up…my best advice would be to attend BOE meetings in-person or watch online so you can hear exactly what is said yourself. Any questions, feel free to email me or post them here.

A little bit later today I will clarify the budget discussion from last Monday night, which is where the phantom “freeze” reports originated.