Tim White Listens: BOE to discuss budget on Thursday, April 8

Saturday, April 03, 2010

BOE to discuss budget on Thursday, April 8

On April 8, the Superintendent and BOE will be sharing their thoughts on the impact of the Council-led budget discussions.Tim White

48 comments:

Anonymous said...: I'm a parent. I have kids in the school system. I want the budget fully funded. However, I am realistic and I know that times are tough. I would just like to know why the parents organizing to "save Cheshire schools" aren't talking about the "elephant in the room?" Yes, that would be the teachers contract and their 4.4% raises. I'm willing to do my part and pay slightly higher taxes. Shouldn't the teachers show us what they are willing to do???

And the hysterical anonymous letter that is being left on residents' mailboxes today about what could happen if the school budget is cut is incendiary, reactionary and just plan ridiculous. It's all speculation and some of it contradicts what Dr. Florio said at meetings last week.

Get a grip people!! And try to be calm and rational. If you look at enrollment stats for the last few years, you will see that enrollment is dropping off at the elementary level.

We aren't going to get anywhere and we aren't going to help the schools and our kids if we continue to let our emotions get the best of us.; April 03, 2010 11:13 AM
Anonymous said...: Tim, thank you for posting this for me but I need to clarify something. Besides discussing the implications that the TC-led budget discussions may have on the education budget we will be going in detail about where the $950K+ reduction will come from.

Dr. Florio and his staff, as well as the BOE members, will share their recommendations on where reductions should be made and who/what will be impacted.

Thanks,
Tony Perugini; April 03, 2010 11:29 AM
Anonymous said...: Tony - Glad to hear that the BOE is being preemptive this time about letting the people know where the cuts will likely come from. What happens if the TC needs to use Thursday night too?; April 03, 2010 4:16 PM
Tony Perugini said...: "What happens if the TC needs to use Thursday night too?

To the best of my knowledge, the BOE is the only group scheduled to use town council chambers at 7:30pm Thurs night.

I expect that some members from the Town Council will be in attendance at the BOE meeting on Thursday night.

"Tony - Glad to hear that the BOE is being preemptive this time about letting the people know where the cuts will likely come from."

Preemptive? Preemptive, to me, means that these details would be made public much earlier in the budget process. However, despite my attempts to have an open dialogue on these details at three different BOE meetings it never materialized.

Each time I suggested we go into budget reduction scenarios I was accused by BOE members and staff of trying to 'incite' the town and that by releasing these details panic would ensue in town. Silly.

However, it seems that the same BOE members/administration that advised against 'inciting' the town felt it was OK to drop the news about Chapman School. While I don't have an issue with releasing the idea I don't agree with the "do as I say not as I do" mentality.

As for Chapman...YES...some BOE members have had discussions about the idea. However, no study has been done that shows what the potential savings could be, if any. But it certainly needs to be studied and facts be known before such a proposal can be taken seriously. And not just Chapman...all of our education facilities should be studied. It's not out of the question but I think it's a symptom of a larger issue at hand such as long-term planning (beyond the next school year).

However, I do agree with the BOE that we don't want to list the positions that would be impacted too early in the budget process as many variables can change before the budget is passed. Although I think it's a reasonable expectation to have a discussion about possibly eliminating teaching positions in Grades 1 - 12 (for example) without having to talk about specific names.

We're all adults (most of us anyway) and I know we can have reasonable dialog on these issues. As such, I will be at Main Street Cafe Saturday April 10th from 9am to 11am. If anyone wants to chat with me about the budget, education issues/ideas I'll share as much information as I can to help answer your questions.

Additionally, if you have questions you want to the ask the BOE Thursday night but don't want to get in front of the microphone then you can send them to me and I'll ask them. I'll keep your name confidential as always.

Thanks,
Tony Perugini
BOE; April 03, 2010 5:07 PM
Anonymous said...: I would love to read a copy of the letter that is being referred to by the first poster on this string. Tim if one was dropped in your mailbox will you scan and post it on your blog?

The writer is correct...this advocacy for teachers is getting off the point bigtime. Teachers are vital to the education process...we know this. Uncontrolled spending on salary increases is simply unsustainable. Most of "us" get this. Why do the teachers, educated as they are, fail to realize the system needs their help. How can they continue to prey on the emotions of parents to garner sympathy for their wage hikes. Its a broken record that tugs at fewer and fewer heart strings these days.; April 03, 2010 5:42 PM
Anonymous said...: In response to 11:13 I guess you didn't attend the March 22nd town meeting held at Dodd Middle School so I will try to recap it for you. One of the items discussed in the well balanced presentation explained that the 4.4% "raise" is somewhat misleading insofar as this figure includes the built-in "increment" increase for teachers not at the maximum 14th step. Since the majority of teachers in the system are at the top step they only received an average 1.8% increase. However, what is never included in the press about the teacher's raise is that the contract that was negotiated between the teacher's union and the BOE also included a substantial increase in teacher's medical premiums (one of thehighest in the state), co-pays, deductibles and prescription costs. As a consequence, when you take into consideration these costs the overall net increse for the majority of teachers is under 0.5% or even zero. The actual Powerpoint presentaton is posted on the Save Cheshire Public Schools site. Furthermore, it was discussed that while the teachers have discussed helping out they have been instrucuted by their legal advisors not to re-open the contract, which could jeopardize the entire contract settlement. So the real question that emerged from the evening, that neither the Chairman of the BOE himself could not answer is WHY THE CUTS IN THE FIRST PLACE? It appears it was an arbitrary decision and one that will impact residents who either have children in the system or who might stand to lose property value if schools continue to be underfunded. Check out the Powerpoint it was very informative.; April 03, 2010 5:58 PM
Anonymous said...: 5:58
Powerpoint or no...the salary line increase for this years BOE budget is 4.4%.

Because of the very convoluted step system some teachers...those in the system for many years receive less in percentage terms than newer teachers but the taxpayers are paying for the budget not picking and choosing what they want to pay for. So nuance aside the bottomline is the bottom line...the salary line is 4.4%...right out of Dr. Florio's budget under the salary cost section.

Why you folks keep railing away over property values is beyond me. Are you selling this year? Your home value sank anyway because of the recession and Cheshire's values have held better than surrounding towns. If the schools get some of the credit so be it but only the blind cannot see that every surrounding town is dealing with the same issue with town and school budgets so stop the whining and deal with it.

Wake up and ask the teachers why you have to go out and beg on their behalf for their wage increase? They're willing to sacrifice hteir own, the untenured, and scare you into thinking they can't do their job now that there maybe one extra kid in a classroom. They should be ashamed and you should too for being duped.; April 03, 2010 6:59 PM
Anonymous said...: "Furthermore, it was discussed that while the teachers have discussed helping out they have been instrucuted by their legal advisors not to re-open the contract, which could jeopardize the entire contract settlement."

This is nothing more than politics and granstanding and it's a diversion tactic. Here's why I say this (and someone figured this out in another thread here):

The EAC offered (their idea) three promissory days (loan) to Cheshire. They also asked for job security and an early retirement incentive. Any one of these 'concessions' requires the teacher's contract to be opened up for modifications/amendments. In doing so, a Memorandum of Understanding would be needed in order to keep the modifications to the topic at hand. It's been done before and is standard practice.

As such, my question is this: Why didn't the union's legal representation shout 'Risk!' when they themselves offered to open up the contract for their 'concessions'? Why wasn't it a risk then?

It's only because we (Dr. Florio, Gerry Brittingham and Tim Slocum) asked for true concessions...three actual furlough days that suddenly there's risk.

There's is no risk and the BOE has no intentions of gutting the teacher's contract. We asked for 3 furlough days which would greatly help our budget for the coming school year. Unfortunately, that's not going to help in 2011-2012 and 2012-2013.

Our goal was simple: keep the teaching staff we currently have in place and work together to get through the next 2-3 years of economic uncertainty. If both sides of the bargaining table can put aside the politics and legaleeze then I think that goal can be achieved.

Thanks,
Tony Perugini
BOE; April 03, 2010 7:19 PM
Tony Perugini said...: Here's an email I received that's being sent around to parents with children in the school system. I applaud Justin Adinolfi and Mike Ecke for trying to come up with alternative methods of financing education. However, this email, in addition to other ridiculous rumors being circulated, is another example of how the stakeholders in education are being pitted against once another.

Particularly, the following line:
"Again, I'd ask that you forward this email to parents only."

It's not only parents such as myself that have a stake in the education but also non-parents, taxpayers that contribute significantly to our education budget. It's arguable whether this proposal by Adinolfi and Ecke is a good idea or not but it should be made available to everyone.

From: Justin Adinolfi
Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 8:42 PM
To: ************************
Cc: ************************
Subject: Town Budget News

****,

Since your email spawned a massive outburst of emails between parents and the Town Councilors, I thought I would send you the plan that Michael Ecke and I put together over the last few days regarding the Town budget. I'd ask that you forward this to parents at this time.

Specifically I want to point out our efforts in the education area. Michael and I have decided to recommend that $500,000 be restored to the BOE budget from what the BOE cut from Dr. Florio's recommended budget and sent to the Town Manager. While this may be less than you had hoped, let me state that the Republican majority is likely to cut an additional $400,000 from education beyond what the BOE already cut. That means the Democrat's proposal, if adopted, would contribute $900,000 more to education than it appears the Republican majority will contribute. I hate to sound political, but that is the reality of the situation.

Our recommendation is not likely to pass as proposed, but I wanted you to be aware of our efforts in hopes that there will be an outpouring of parents at both the Monday 4/5 7 PM Public Hearing at Town Hall and the 4/13 7:30 PM Council meeting at Town Hall where the budget will be adopted. Everyone's presence and comments at those two meetings hopefully will put us in a better position than where I think we will end up if we don't proactively support restoring BOE funding beyond what the BOE adopted.

Again, I'd ask that you forward this email to parents only. Michael Ecke has already sent our proposed budget to the Mr. Schrumm and Mr. Ruocco with whom he serves on the Town Council Budget Committee. While our budget will raise taxes more than the Republicans, our total budget, total tax increase would be an increase for each average household of $134 annually or 36 cents/day. Not an outrageous amount in my mind.

The tax increase could be even further reduced if the BOE would accept the teacher offer to work three promissory days in the next school year, thus minimizing teacher layoffs and saving taxpayers an additional $461,000 next year. Yes the teachers want to get paid back within 5 years so we would have to budget for that, but most businesses that I know would take an interest free loan of $461,000. I haven't heard any good reasons why some of our elected officials will not even discuss it.

Please let me know if you have any questions or comments.

Thanks for your support and enthusiasm. Lets do it for our children!!!

Justin Adinolfi
----------------

This shouldn't be about parents vs. non-parents and Democrats vs. Republicans.

Tony Perugini
BOE; April 03, 2010 7:37 PM
Anonymous said...: In response to Tony Perugini's blog: " In doing so, a Memorandum of Understanding would be needed in order to keep the modifications to the topic at hand. It's been done before and is standard practice".This may be standard practice in some circles but in education contracts the only time this has been done has ended up in the courts. The "memorandum" is not a legal and binding choice free from jeoparidizing the rest of the contract. This is why the teacher's legal advisors instructed them NOT to open the contract undr any circumstances. So to clarify what you said, they NEVER offered to open the contract. Unfortunately,one member in particular on the TC has stated publicly for years his disdain for not being able to totally control the education budget due to binding arbitration laws. They were instituted to prevent BOE's and TC's from gutting education budgets that led to strikes in the 70's. As a consequene there is a NO STRIKE clause that now makes it illegal to strike in CT. In any case, he has sought to do an end run on the contract settlements by signing it in the fall and then renegging on it come budget time by simply cutting a large portion of the BOE proposal. Were it not for this unfortunate situation the union's legal advisors might acquiesce to opening the contract. It is my understnading that when the teacher's union surveyed the teachers the majority were willing to help out with the budget cut. Perhaps if the TC builds some trust this year by restoring a portion of the budget cut and using a very small portion of the Rainy Day Fund, rather than further reducing it, the union and their legal council will be more willing to do something more considerable next year when we will need to deal with REAL revenue losses. As a taxpayer while I am sympathetic with the teachers I also realize that enrollment in the elementary schools is dropping off and state and federal revenue will be decreasing in the years to come. I would hope that we can start mending fences this year with the hope of being more demanding of all of the unions come next year when we ALL will need to tighten our belts.; April 03, 2010 8:11 PM
Anonymous said...: Cheshire, along with all of CT is at an economic cross road. We are suffering from declining jobs, declining population, and declining wealth. The one area where jobs are increasing and wages are increasing is government. This is not sustainable. Public school systems in particular continue to demand and receive annual budget increases which are simply unsustainable too.

It's going on everywhere in CT, Cheshire included. Here in town the student population is declining but the education budget can only increase. Many people whose houses are on the market have found that there are few if any buyers at the rosy inflated prices we have come to believe we deserve based on the optimistic, inflated projections of the local real estate trade.

It seems pretty clear that something has to give. There is no way that the next 5 or 10 years can be like the last 10 years in terms of local property tax hikes. Since the school budget, and in reality the teacher pay budget is the largest single part of the town budget it stands to reason that it needs to take a hit now and probably annually for the next 4 or 5 years if there is any hope of reigning in the terrible property tax monster brought to us all by one sided stupid binding arbitration legislation the state operates under.

Since the teachers as a group through their out of town union won't budge from their greedy 15 % contract pay hike layoffs are really the only tool town government has left in its tool box to deal with this issue. It is time to do less with less.; April 03, 2010 8:12 PM
Anonymous said...: In response to 8:12 perhaps asking taxpayers to consider voting on a referendum item to spend $5-6 million to fix the pool problem should be off the table, as well as purchasing any more open space. Don't we have enough parks, playgrounds and open space as it is? Let's cut back in all areas, especially those that are really not pressing.; April 03, 2010 8:47 PM
Tony Perugini said...: 8:11

"So to clarify what you said, they NEVER offered to open the contract. "

You are correct they never offered to open up the contract. I should have stated that they offered concessions and, in the beginning (Jan), it seemed as though the discussions would lead to the opening up of the contract for some form of modification. But it's not the BOE or the administration's intention of gutting the contract or trying to screw over the teachers. Thank you for catching that.

"I would hope that we can start mending fences this year with the hope of being more demanding of all of the unions come next year when we ALL will need to tighten our belts."

Other unions are open to helping out but I'm not at liberty to discuss those details at this time. The last time Dr. Florio updated us on these discussions was about 6 weeks ago. Hopefully, Dr. Florio can elaborate on this Thursday night. I will certainly ask.

Thanks,
Tony Perugini; April 03, 2010 8:55 PM
Anonymous said...: I was one of only a handful of people who attended the TC/Boe budget meeting at town hall and I heard Florio say that the contract does not have to be opened and that a letter of understanding could be written up to cover the 3 furlough days that they hoped would be offered up w/o a payback.; April 03, 2010 9:06 PM
Anonymous said...: 9:06:
I wish that were the case. However, at the March 22nd Dodd meeting the teacher's legal counsel specifically stated that the memorandum was not legally binding. When challenged by someone in the audience regarding another attorney's interpretation, the union's legal counsel stated that Mr. Mooney (the attorney in question) represents BOE's and is therefore biased in his perspective. I wish both the town attorney and the union attorney could sit down at the same table and hash this out rather than have the rst of us, who are not experts in education tax law make assumptions about what is and is not legal. If anyone out there on the TC/BOE and teachers union is reading this please get the lawyers to the table and work this out once an for all. This is a community made up of very caring people who have rolled up their sleeves time and time again for good causes. Lets not leave a bad taste in our mouths because the legal counsel for both sides won't sit down and work this out. Don't use our children as pawns in the battle to do what's right by them.; April 03, 2010 9:43 PM
Anonymous said...: 9:43
The unions offer for deferring 3 days pay (scheduled teacher workshop days)for 5 years is off the table...no need to have the lawyers sit down and work this out. Elected officials have made that determination.

If the Cheshire teacher union considers a furlough, its members approve and the town agrees who would take that to court?... state teacher union officials?

The stae union leadership says no concessions so the local districts must conform. Tenure saves the greatest number and the newbies are sacrificed with no regard by the union for your kids despite what they say.

There were 15 positions lost last year of the 25 projected. One was a layoff and the rest were retirements. Have your kids suffered harm? Not if your doing your job at home and the teachers are doing their job in the classroom.

This is all about the teacher union and has little to do with your kids. Consider this. What if the public works guys showed up to save their jobs and said if you lay one of us off school buses may slip off the roads during winter storms, possibly injuring school children, so you better not dare try.

Get some perspective.; April 03, 2010 10:14 PM
Anonymous said...: 10:14. Even if the teachers can get their legal counsel to agree to opening the contract and the rank and file agrees to a 3 day furlough, that still makes up only half of the $950K reduction. Where do you suggest the rest coming from? The Rainy Day Fund-I doubt Mr. Schrumm would let that happen; increase in taxes (about $4 more a month) I doubt Mr. Schrumm would go for that. There has to be movement on both sides to show good faith in resolving a town issue. What about also putting off some of the town side spending (replacing windows in the Town Council room etc. )as suggested by Mr. Ecke? Then everybody wins. How's that for a perspective?; April 04, 2010 12:00 AM
Anonymous said...: Anything that saves energy is a long term savings. Where is the thinking here? If we could save money over the next 20 years there will be more money to spend on important items. The D's just don't get it. NO TAX INCREASE THIS YEAR.; April 04, 2010 12:20 AM
Anonymous said...: Dear 12:20 You are so out of touch with reality. First off, the democratic proposal is less than your republican one. This shouldn't be about dems versus republicans but rather to do what is needed to make this community a better place to live in. Second of all, living in a community means agreeing to paying for services that serve the entire community not just your own. What if next year your road needs to be paved and other residents say "hey it's not my road" andvote not to spend money to pave it? Living in a community means being a citizen who embraces a civic responsibility to do what is in the best interests of the entire community. Perhpas you shuld consider living in some rural area without public services where you can only pay for what you choose to pay for.; April 04, 2010 9:39 AM
Anonymous said...: Dave Schrumm wrote the 10;19 post
Dave say all that at a public meeting please
Are you working yet?; April 04, 2010 10:15 AM
Anonymous said...: Dear 10:15 don't you mean to refer to the 8:12 post as being that from Mr. Schrumm. If it's not it is clearly someone very close to him. Schrumm wants to blame all the town's woes on the teachers because he can't personally control their salaries. Why isn't he fighting the rising health care or insurance costs (which by the way he benefited from until he was let go from Aetna). While he is ranting about the teacher's he needs to own up to the gross mistake in fiscal management he and his cronies made in not recommending the town pool be built with a permanent enclosure to begin with. Now he has nerve to ask the public to approve a $5-6+ million bond issue to correct his initial mistake. Wake up Dave stop being part of the problem and become part of the solution. Serving as the financial chairman on the TC means making fiscal recommendations to provide the majority of residents with the services they need while at the same time being fiscally responsible. Granted the education budget needs to be trimmed especially over the next few years,but it shouldn't be because you don't like unions. The BOE made their cuts on the hope that the teachers' unoin would make concessions. How can anyone make a budget decision based on blind assumptions? Maybe there eere items in Florio's budget that could be reduced, but that was NOT the rationale the BOE members used in suggesting the budget reduction. That is clearly unethical. As Mr. Ecke has pinted out, there are also other town-side itmes that should be significantly reduced as well. It's all about the values one has in dong the right thing as a public official. So stop your vitriolic attack on the unions and try to strike a compromise with them in keeping spending down.Why not work out a compromise whereby you can assure their legal counsel that you will only use three furlough days ($461K) if they open the contract and the town will use a small portion of the Rainy Day Fund to make up the difference. That would show real leadership, particularly in mending some of the broken fences between the unions and the town. Without taking measures (being more open to alternaive viewpoints rather than your own)to provide a more conducive environment to discuss how we ALL can tighten our belts in the next few years the entire town will suffer. Take the moral and ethical high road and consider the logic in some of what Mr. Ecke has proposed, which by the way will result ina smaller tax increase than your proposal.the time has come for us all to work together to resolve our commumnity's fiscal issues.; April 04, 2010 11:44 AM
Tony Perugini said...: "The BOE made their cuts on the hope that the teachers' unoin would make concessions."

This is simply not true. I should know, I'm on the BOE and voted for the $1.2M increase in the education budget. Throughout the BOE budget meetings which started in January, throughout the account review meetings, throughout the meetings discussing the adoption of the BOE budget...we've talked about our reasons for supporting this increase. It has nothing to do with what the union will or will not do, what the TC will or will not do. Looking at what we're facing now with funding, what's coming and the hurdles awaiting us we made our decision. You may disagree, and that's perfectly OK, but don't try to overshadow the BOE's positive intentions with this budget.

The students of school system will still receive a quality education while we make small, shared sacrifices and help one another get through a tough economic downturn.

The BOE made a fiscally responsible decision to maintain high quality education in awful economic times not only for the coming school year but looking forward to the next 2-3 years when we're facing a $6M education funding shortfall ($3M in 2011) according to Dr. Florio. And no, I don't believe our quality of education is going to suffer with our budget proposal. We're not gutting the school system nor putting students in harm's way. If we believed that to be the case we wouldn't have supported the increase.

If the EAC decides to help, that's great and it would ease some of the reductions for the coming school year but three furlough days won't do much for the 2011 and 2012 school years. Where's our 2-3 year plan to get through this? Unfortunately, the real issue at hand which I believe to be the lack of a clear, long-term education funding plan is being overshadowed by the propaganda being spread about and rising out of the Democrats vs. Republicans, BOE vs. TC, EAC vs. BOE/TC and other stakeholders being pitted against one another for nothing more than political capital.

If children are truly going to suffer it's going to be because of the above political nonsense. There's no place for it in education.

As for where I believe we can make reductions, here are some of the areas I expect will be discussed Thursday night:

- Teaching positions in Grades 1 - 12
- Electives at CHS
- Support staff positions
- Athletics
- Extra-curricular activities
- Music
- Band
- Stipends
- CHS Department Head Positions
- Custodial personnel/services

Some parents asked why not start with reductions in non-teaching positions first such support staff/athletics/extra-curricular activities? The argument being that we should protect the classroom as much as possible as it's core to education.

Some have asked if it's possible to put Instructional Assistants in the classroom, even on an ad-hoc basis, to help with increased class sizes for those teachers that may need assistance with students that require extra attention (not Special Ed). This is something I'm looking into.

It's unfortunate that the only area being discussed is teaching positions but I suspect it's to fuel the politics around concessions and to spur emotion throughout town. However, I believe that shared reductions in the areas I listed above will not reduce the quality of education. And for the record, the topic areas I listed were discussed some time ago amongst the BOE members and at our caucus preceding the adoption of the BOE budget.

Dr. Florio stated that he could make the BOE budget work during the TC Budget committee meeting. However, I cannot support any further reductions to the proposed education budget. During our caucus, I argued against a further reduction in education. Most folks don't know this but the original reduction was more than $900K and closer to a $1.3M reduction.

- Tony Perugini; April 04, 2010 1:11 PM
Anonymous said...: Thank you Tony for a very cogent response. With respect to what you said:
"Unfortunately, the real issue at hand which I believe to be the lack of a clear, long-term education funding plan is being overshadowed by the propaganda being spread about and rising out of the Democrats vs. Republicans, BOE vs. TC, EAC vs. BOE/TC and other stakeholders being pitted against one another for nothing more than political capital".
What can we do as a community to encourage all vested parties coming together and beginning to discuss the future budget crisis NOW and now let it wait until next spring when emotions and political posturing take hold of the issues? As it currently stands there is a lot of distrust between the various factions in towns insofar as being able to wrok with each other in a constructive and productive way. I guess what I am asking is how do we begin mending fences to foster discussing the real issues lying ahead in a civil manner?; April 04, 2010 5:27 PM
Anonymous said...: Stop with the pool. It has nothing to do with the budget. Mr. Ecke's plan just pushes out our liability two more years. Look at it.; April 04, 2010 6:39 PM
Anonymous said...: 6:39 You're right that the pool has nothing to do with the budget. However, I think what peopoe are referring to is that slated for referendum this fall is deciding whether to spend $5-6 million to fully enclose the pool, which is what should have been the case from the get go. I beleive the reason people on this blog keep bringing up the pool is not that it has anything to do with this budget, but that the pool issue was an example where there was little long term planning and the powers in charge at the time didn't want to spend the money to do it right-enclose it permanantly. So we can't just keep chopping away at the education budget year after year without having at least a 5-year plan in mind. Maybe that means having fewer elementary schools or eliminating certain programs. However, it is the town leadership's job to do some long-term planning with the BOE and the unions and setting budget priorities. All vested parties need o begin to work together not at odds with one another and certainly not wait until budget time each spring to begin talking to each other. While I don't usually agree with Mr. Schrumm's austerity plans, to his credit he is suggesting to the BOE and the unions that we need to begin planning now for the next 2-3 years when there will be a REAL budget crisis.; April 04, 2010 8:02 PM
Anonymous said...: Simple solution...lay off the # of teachers that will keep the teacher Salary Account the same as last year.
The town is tired of the teacher union calling the BOE's bluff. A year or two of a stable salary account may be what is needed to have the union accept affordable contracts.
Oh dear, the people that "came to this town because of the school system" will move out! Who are they kidding? Where are they going to go?...Hamden, Wallingford..? Let 'em! We don't need these selfish airheads in our town anyway.; April 04, 2010 8:36 PM
Anonymous said...: 8:36 In reality the people who will be let go first will be the noncertified staff members who are not teachers (aides, secretaries, hall monitors etc.)The next to go will be the nontenured and then the younger tenured teachers and so on. Without a real plan in mind for the next 5 years,if we use Mr. Schrumm's figures, we could stand to lose nearly all of the noncertified staff and a large percentage of the young teachers. Now when the older staff members retire (there are only a couple for this year) their positions will not be filled to save money.However, if the BOE decides to fill those positions what teacher in their right mind is going to choose to come to work in Cheshire knowing that they have only a year or two at best before they will be cut as well. How long will it take to begin to really make some serious inroads into devastating the K-12 programs? Without a long term downsizing plan that takes into consideration what programs, schools and staff to deliver those programs we need to maintain effective as a premier school system we WILL begin to falter as a system and see it in decreasing property values. I'm sure you would want your firm or company to do the same long term planning. All I'm saying is take a more proactive approach to budgeting as most successful institutions do.; April 04, 2010 9:01 PM
Anonymous said...: 11:44 a.m. you are incorrect, "...Dear 10:15 don't you mean to refer to the 8:12 post as being that from Mr. Schrumm. If it's not it is clearly someone very close to him. Schrumm wants to blame all the town's woes on the teachers because he can't personally control their salaries. ..."

I am not Schrumm and in fact you need to recognize that many residents would agree with what I wrote. Saying it publicly in this town would cause one ridicule or worse by some less than savory sorts who are always babbling about presenting the Greedy Teachers Union of Cheshire with gifts of money just because the teachers always really need it. Many of us are tired of what goes on and in fact we all spoke in unison back in November. Remember the previous council kind of got what the teachers union should be getting. They were turned out to unemployment pasture.

This is not Schrumm speaking but since you seem fixated on attacking someone who was fairly elected to office by a majority of the town I'm certain you won't believe me when I proclaim I AM NOT SCHRUMM! I am also not a Republican either - - -; April 04, 2010 9:38 PM
Anonymous said...: 9:38. It is always interesting to see people's true nature come out when they start publicly demeaning others out of envy for what they earn. Have you ever considered that maybe what teachers do is more important in the scheme of things than what you do? Do you also envy the salaries of other professionals who are also required to earn Master degrees or better? Or are you just envious of teachers because their salaries are based on your tax dollars? Let me play devil's advocate her for a moment. Realizing the important role teachers play in our society, what would you suggest they be paid IF it was not dependent on tax dollars? Well, on second thought, this is really an unreasonable question to ask someone unless you have experienced what they actually do rather than rely on what you think they do. However, what if someone told YOU that they don't think you deserve the salary you are earning. Wouldn't you say the same? So don't talk to me about teachers salaries until you "walk a mile in their shoes".; April 04, 2010 10:03 PM
Anonymous said...: 10:03 p.m. - - you sound very much like many of the members of the local teachers union. Maybe the one in this town or many of the other financially broken towns in CT.

Not only am I not SCHRUMM but during a part of my career I was also a teacher. I'm sure it wouldn't mean much though because it wasn't teaching a bunch of 6 year olds. It was however teaching serious upper level physical science stuff to people earning accredited professional degrees. And in fact I was also a member of a labor union once too.

What goes on in towns like Cheshire over public education is financially killing state towns. What passes as education is all too often killing the chances of our young people to excel in the work places of the 21st century too. Assuming that a masters degree in education sets someone off as an academic doesn't really cut it when compared to what is required in other professions. Take a look at what lawyers, doctors, engineers and accountants need in order to legally practice their professions. They get paid more than public school teachers and they earn their pay through hard work, not politically connected labor unions.

Teacher tenure rules are stupid. State mandated binding arbitration is stupid. It offers a one way path to annual salary increases even if none are warranted.

It is time to cut the BOE budget and if it requires downsizing the staff to accomplish, welcome to the real American work world.; April 05, 2010 8:28 AM
Anonymous said...: 8:28. Thank God you never taught school age children. I was a public school teacher years ago and know what is entailed in teaching. You had the privilege of lecturing to highly motivated adults. You obviously have neither the experience nor clue how to motivate kids to learn resulting in transforming information to knowledge into understanding. Talk to me later when you have actually had to teach, (which is a skillful art) not lecture, (which anyone can do) people and therefore have some understanding of what the job of a public school teacher entails. Everyone thinks they can teach because they went to school. What's ridiculous and stupid is that people like you think you know what teaching entails. It would be unreasonable for me to criticize what you do, because I don't know what you do. So before you criticize what others do "walk a mile in their shoes". By the way I love how people like you are ignorant of the facts about arbitration settlements. If you took the time to investigate meta-analyses (which you can if you surf the net) you would see that arbitrated settlements have sided with BOE's as much as they have for teachers. It's not one-sided for teachers. And contracts being settled now are coming in a lot lower than before in responding to the economic climate. The reason arbitration laws were instituted in the first place was to ensure that teacher's would receive fair settlements rather than what occurred in the 70's that ultimately led to strikes and for some (like Bridgeport-arrests). There is a NO STRIKE clause in contracts as a consequence. Furthermore, I don't remember hearing taxpayers coming out in droves to support hikes in teacher's salaries when they were well below the average salary back when I taught in the 70's. I think the real reason people like you are up in arms about teacher's salaries is that they have little understanding of what teachers do that is compounded by a lack of respect for the profession. So now that teachers are earning comparable salaries to those in industry some envious taxpayers feel threatened that someone with an "inferior" career path is making what "I" am. Here's a question for you what do you do that is so much more important than what teachers do?; April 05, 2010 10:46 AM
Anonymous said...: 10:46am...I agree that teaching is not an easy job and it's not for everyone. I do respect what our teachers have to do in order to prepare to become an instructor let alone deliver results.

However, I will be honest with you. I don't appreciate the sympathy/victim card that the EAC and some of it's members (not all of them) are trying to play. Let's face some facts for a moment.

- Teachers in Cheshire work 186 days in the classroom. (or is it 187?)

- Union/Contracted mandated work hours and caps on hours worked per day.

- Tremendous benefits...The ability to see any doctor on the planet with no questions asked paid for by Cheshire taxpayers. Have you seen the medical benefits account?

- Guaranteed salary/benefits increases.

- Tenure...the holy grail of job security.

No its not an easy job teaching students but I think you'll agree that the benefits far outweigh the negatives here especially in a town like Cheshire.

I don't sympathize with the EAC membership because I am also making sacrifices helping pay for their salaries during these tough economic times. I expect some help in return and it's disheartening that the EAC won't help in any meaningful way.

If we all truly want to do the best thing for our children then the EAC should make sacrifices in the short-term just like everyone else in town is doing. They should take the high road by putting politics and personal agendas aside and help. I am and will pay more in taxes.; April 05, 2010 11:23 AM
Anonymous said...: 11:23. I TOTALLY agree with you as do many teachers. Friends of mine who are still teaching in Cheshire tell me that it is NOT the teachers unwillingness to help out but that their legal counsel all the way up to the State level have advised them not to open the contract for fear of what has already happened in some towns like Torrington. Apparently, there was a problem that emerged, no doubt due to both parties,leading to an inability to resolve the contract. While both parties went into re-opening the contract with good intentions problems arose that now have to be resolved in the courts. This is not to say that the contract COULD be re-opened in Cheshire with no problems. However, there are some union-busting members (one in particular)of the TC who very well would find a loophole to make deeper cuts into the contract and jeopardize other items. Therefore, the real problem lies in a lack of trust in only coming out with that which the teachers intend on going into in re-opening the contract.Therefore, as one blogger said last night, what is needed now more than ever is a way to begin mending fences between all the vested parties (TC. BOE and the Unions) so that they collectively can begin resolving future budget crises (and future ones WILL be formidable)without having to go through what we all have witnessed these past few weeks.; April 05, 2010 11:53 AM
Anonymous said...: 10:46 a.m. "thank God you never taught school age children. I was a public school teacher years ago and know what is entailed in teaching. You had the privilege of lecturing to highly motivated adults. ... Talk to me later when you have actually had to teach, (which is a skillful art) not lecture, (which anyone can do) people and therefore have some understanding of what the job of a public school teacher entails."

As for thinking that teaching 20 some-things is easier than teaching little children, that truly misses reality.

K-12 teachers can get away with stuff that never, ever flies in a university environment anymore. After all, the really smart kids are the ones who go on to those tough upper level technical courses. After 13 years in k-12 they have seen and experienced all of the good but also all of the bad that public education has to offer. They are empowered and they don't put up with much.

Your concept of lecturing is kind of out in the ether too. Just think about it a bit. When one is teaching serious science courses one needs to be able to explain everything associated with a particular course in great detail. IT really is teaching. It isn't lecturing.

Anyway, continued support for this state's teachers unions and their supporting band of overpaid support minions will not insure good education for our children in a public school setting.

Think about it. Look at the performance of private schools. New England has many. Even though private school teachers make less and have less protection under the law many private school graduates do much better then their public school counter parts.

It is past time to begin right sizing the town's BOE budget. It has been driven out of control by the greedy Cheshire Teachers Union for some time now. Cut the budget now.; April 05, 2010 1:21 PM
Anonymous said...: "Look at the performance of private schools. New England has many. Even though private school teachers make less and have less protection under the law many private school graduates do much better then their public school counter parts."

I am glad that you brought that up.

The cost of Cheshire Academy is 3 times the cost of public school in Cheshire $30000+ per year vs. $11,500. (please look it up on the academy website) That of course only counts course work (not boarding). They also get to hand select the students they want or don't want. On the performance side, the public schools here actually perform a little better.

Cheshire Public Schools: WHAT A GOOD DEAL!!; April 05, 2010 2:08 PM
Anonymous said...: 1:21. In response to your comment:
"Your concept of lecturing is kind of out in the ether too. Just think about it a bit. When one is teaching serious science courses one needs to be able to explain everything associated with a particular course in great detail. IT really is teaching. It isn't lecturing".

By "out in the ether" are you referring to using constructivist pedagogies that foster children to participate in the creation of their own understanding using cognitive and metacognitive learning strategies that have been proven to improve performance and motivation to learn? Or are you referring to having teachers identify a students' zone of proximal development and then scaffolding lessons and strategies to encourage the student to actually understand the concepts rather than merely memorizing it as what typically occurs in lecture-style "instructivist" presentations? Or are you referring to providing students with differentiated learning opportunities because not all students learn a concept at the same pace? what you know of "teaching" is merely transmitting information in a logical and sequential manne and is primarily, if not solely, teacher-oriented.It's like teaching someone to ride a bike without ever having them get on the bike but merely listening to your instructions. Most of waht we learn occurs in a very different manner. That is not to say that there is a place for lecturing and even memorization. But either of these lead to deep meaningful understanding that can be generalized to other situations. This is VERY important in science. Simply knowing the steps of a cellular process doesn't mean you either understand it or can relate it to other processes. so your type of "teaching" may work well with mature and motivated learners but that is typically not the case with most children and even high school students. Read a little about motivational learning theory and then get back to me.; April 05, 2010 2:53 PM
Tony Perugini said...: 11:53 said "Therefore, the real problem lies in a lack of trust in only coming out with that which the teachers intend on going into in re-opening the contract."

I was not involved in previous contract negotiations so I really can't comment on first-hand experience about what may or may not have occurred in past contract negotiations. But, I will add my .02 cents about your statement above.

Of the three elected officials negotiating on behalf of Cheshire (Dr. Florio, Tim Slocum and Gerry Brittingham) I know that Dr. Florio and Gerry were involved in the current contract in 2008. I think you'll agree that this contract was very fair and Dr. Florio and Gerry supported it, as did other members of the previous BOE. I'd say what they were able to accomplish with the EAC was not good faith but great faith.

Dr. Florio and Gerry have no intention of gutting the contract. Neither does Tim Slocum. If I were a member of the EAC, I'd count my blessings that we have these three gentlemen on the other side of the table. It could be worse :-).

I personally have no intention of gutting the contract. I don't think anything we presented even borders gutting the contract. For me specifically, I was looking for 3 unpaid furlough days this coming school year and greater adoption of the HSA plan.

My vote on the ~ $1.2M increase has nothing to with calling the union's bluff (as some have stated) nor is it retribution. It's the reality of our economic situation we're not the only school district facing these challenges by any means.

We need to take a step back, make this process better, more open/transparent and work together to come up with a long-term plan that looks beyond next year. I think stakeholders such as the union, taxpayers, etc. are feeling the pain from the lack of a long term vision on funding as well planning for various projects in and around town including education. I do believe this TC and this BOE will make this process better.

I want to make investments in education but the Super's budget proposal represents a polarization effect that increased costs (not just salaries) has had on investing in education. Dr. Florio's proposal contains no capital investments, only expense containment. 80% of his proposal consists of Salaries & Benefits expense. We've been polarized into containing costs and that's not a good plan for education. This is just wrong. Then again...I don't feel we have a clear plan on education that lays out what these investments will be and what they mean to the bottom line and, more importantly, how they would help our students.

I think we all knew in 2008 that our economy was not going to spring back to new heights in 12 months. IMO we failed to act accordingly. Well, here we are and I don't think we can simply borrow our way out of it.

With our without the EAC's help, we're going to make this budget work and move forward on planning our education's future. I'd prefer we do this together.

Thanks,
Tony Perugini
BOE; April 05, 2010 4:13 PM
Anonymous said...: Tony:

I think I can speak on behalf of the teachers in agreeing that the contract that was settled was very fair to both sides. It was for this reason that neither side to pursue arbitration. I wish ALL contracts could be resolved WITHOUT going to arbitration. So the problem is NOT with Dr. Florio or Mr. Brittingham but rather with what influence Mr. Schrumm may impose on them in getting back his "pound of flesh". Basically, remove Schrumm from the equation and the issue becomes a nonissue. However, even IF the union could be assured that only the 3 furlough days would be given up to help ease the budget deficit,where would the remaining money come from? Three three days only comprise about $460K. Assuming the TC further reduces the education budget by another $350K that leaves about $850K to make up? Schrumm has been emphatic about NOT using money from the Rainy Day Fund nor the anticipated $3-4 million in CRRA money that will be made available in June. So here is where the reticence issues from. The teachers could give back $460K and still have nearly the same budget deficit that was created with the BOE reduction. Perhaps IF the BOE and TC could agree to make up the rest (deficit minus the $460K) for this year by using the Rainy Day Fund and the EAC legal counsel could be given an ironclad agreement to only take the $460K and nothing else then MAYBE a deal could be struck. However, this is something only the BOE and TC and especially the legal counsel for both sides can answer.; April 05, 2010 4:32 PM
Tony Perugini said...: 4;32...in my 1:11 post I listed the areas where I think reductions should be made to support the BOE proposal.

However, as I stated in that post (or in some others, I'm losing track :-)) I DO NOT SUPPORT the additional $461K reduction at this time. I suspect that we'll have to eliminate some athletic programs and extra-curricular activities in addition to additional teaching positions being eliminated. OR, the discussion of closing school will be jump-started.

I'm quite certain this is going to come up at Thursday night's BOE meeting. It's certainly a scenario we'll be discussing.

Thanks,
Tony; April 05, 2010 4:49 PM
Anonymous said...: 4:32

Last year the four Republican TC members sought to reject the teachers contract and send it back to arbitration. In a 5-4 vote they lost. Those 4 sit on this council joined by Andy Falvey, Dave Schrumm and Anne Giddings. Michael Ecke is the only other alumni from the last council term and that is only because of the minority representation rule.

You may want to credit Schrumm with every vote you disagree with but to be fair you should credit the other Republicans too. They would want it to be that way.

And remember this...last years public hearing with all of Cheshire Union officials expressing shock at the cuts proposed to their budget set in motion that 2009 election landslide by the Republicans. What has really changed? Things are worse not better. A roundtable of attorney's can't straighten out problems. Elected leaders do that.; April 05, 2010 5:49 PM
Anonymous said...: 5:49. You are mistaken the present teacher contract NEVER went to arbitration probably because Schrumm was NOT in office at the time. It is the first contract in my memory that a teacher's contract has not gone on to arbitration.If it is a fair settlement for both sides, which as Mr. Perugini attests it was, then there is no reson to go to arbitration. In fact, the majority of settlements, Cheshire excluded, typically DO NOT go to arbitration.; April 05, 2010 6:12 PM
Anonymous said...: 4.4% was a bit greedy. I think most teachers would change their vote today. The big union bosses are dictating to them. This is a shame. The big bosses win. Sad for the teachers,students,parents and taxpayers.; April 05, 2010 6:53 PM
Anonymous said...: 2:53 p.m.- -"out in the ether" can be understood by most folks who have a really good command of the history of science. There was a time when the ether was the latest and greatest theory. It maybe was akin to some of today's most important theories of education though. But time goes by and certainly being relegated to the ether is not too positive - - -

"It's like teaching someone to ride a bike without ever having them get on the bike but merely listening to your instructions. Most of waht we learn occurs in a very different manner."

More fantastic insight from one of the crowd who just can't give away other people's money to the greedy Cheshire Teachers Union fast enough. Don't strain yourself worrying too much just how you learn. Put your energy into learning however you can make it happen. After 40 or 50 years you need to really know something in order to do things and be productive. Hot air is only marginally better then a cloud of old fashioned ether.; April 05, 2010 7:50 PM
Anonymous said...: 7:50. IN respnse to your comment:
"-"out in the ether" can be understood by most folks who have a really good command of the history of science. There was a time when the ether was the latest and greatest theory. It maybe was akin to some of today's most important theories of education though. But time goes by and certainly being relegated to the ether is not too positive - - -", the orginal Michaelson-Morley experiment was revisited in 1986 using much more sophisticated and sensitive equipment. Their findings demonstrated that the ether does exist. In fact, as modern physicists have concluded space is not empty but consists of a very energy dense zero point field that literally connects everything. So I guess some of old "ether" ideas aren't outdated but just need some polishing to "see" them better.By the way the educatoin theories I'm talking about are well-established not fads. Serious teachers don't get caught up with fads, they use what works,like I'm sure you do in your profession.; April 05, 2010 11:51 PM
Anonymous said...: 4:32
"I think I can speak on behalf of the teachers in agreeing that the contract that was settled was very fair to both sides."

It is not fair if the majority of our towns people are in the midst of one of the worst enconmies we have seen in our life time. While we are all getting our pays frozen or in some cases losing our jobs, you and your cohorts are getting an average of 4.4% raises.

In our mind, that may be fair. To most of us, it isn't.

You point the finger at Schrumm, but do you realize he is 1 vote? He cannot restructure your entire contract alone.
I think it is just the teachers copping out and looking for a scapegoat so they don't look so greedy.

Take a chance for once and try to help the students and this community.; April 06, 2010 12:28 AM
Anonymous said...: 11:51 "the orginal Michaelson-Morley experiment was revisited in 1986 using much more sophisticated and sensitive equipment."

M&M did not invent the ether theory. It predated them and their experiments from the 1880s until the 1920's. Ether as known to pre-1880 scientists does not exit. It was their wonderful invention of the human mind which didn't hold water. Alchemy doesn't hold water either, or does it?

The current state mandated binding arbitration for teachers unions and the greed of the local teachers union is an incredible affront to the citizens of this town as well as this state. It is past time to reign in local education budgets. Back office and teaching positions need to be eliminated to keep spending either constant or to reduce it a bit.; April 06, 2010 9:50 AM
Anonymous said...: 9:50. You are assuming that there isn't any validity to the results of the several experiments that have demonstrated the ether actually exists. One thing science has taught us is that the more we learn the more we realize how little we actually know. Science historian Thomas Kuhn wrote in his seminal book the Structure of Scientific Revolutions the reasons underlying the shift to different paradigms-mental inertia and ego to support the status quo. Shifting your paradigm means letting go of or transcending beliefs that have been central to your position. Belief in the status quo prevents intellectual growth. So keep your dogma if it makes you feel more comfortable and secure. I will choose to believe that some beliefs are outdated or merely invalid, but others offer us opportunities to get closer to seeing the light at the opening of "Plato's Cave". As for binding arbitration, do some research and see for yourself that it has benefited BOE's as often as they benefited unions. And, by the way, most contracts in the state do not go to arbitration as was this present one.; April 06, 2010 12:40 PM
Anonymous said...: 12:40, Binding arbitration has accelerated the financial ruin of this particular state. Binding arbitration is used all too often except when its more evil aspects are well understood by frightened local elected officials who almost always cave to the unrealistic greedy demands of local teachers unions.

They know all too well that if the initial annual, greedy union demands are not immediately agreed to those unaccountable arbitrators will 99 times out of 100 side with the unrealistic greedy teachers union. The members of those unions have become drunk with the power they can exercise over the tax paying electorate.

It must be remembered that our very liberal state legislature used teacher binding arbitration as one of its many tools for social re-engineering of this state. We are just now beginning to see how costly and poorly designed things like CT Binding Arbitration are.

Certainly if one is a strong supporter of the always increasing salaries resulting from binding arbitration one will become ecstatic when some new governor or the legislator decides to double our currently small annual state income tax rate. After all, it is a privilege to live here and be making enough to actually pay income taxes, isn't it? No doubt binding arbitration is a concept that will even help to attract new businesses to places like Cheshire. new businesses which will be able to pay employees many times more than minimum wage.

The pre-M&M concepts of the ether were disproved by M&M. Alchemy can't turn junk into gold either. However, Our state's teachers union can always turn every year into a year for inflated, unnecessary and budget breaking pay raises. Many times these pay raises are unwarranted and unearned.; April 06, 2010 3:21 PM

Tim White Listens

Me in Haiti

Interesting sites

2012 candidates

Followers

2009 Candidate websites

Send LTTEs!

Categories

Save $/Energy

Local websites

Council emails

Cheshire sports

Blog Archive

Saturday, April 03, 2010

BOE to discuss budget on Thursday, April 8

48 comments:

About Me