The township school board voted unanimously Wednesday night to close Southard Elementary School to help close the district's budget gap.
triggerAd(1,PaginationPage,14);
School Board President Mary Cerretani tearfully nodded her head shortly after 10 p.m. Wednesday, silently casting the final "yes" vote to close the school as about 200 residents and teachers looked on.
It was unclear how many staffers will be laid off as a result of the decision.
The school has been open since 1955. Closing it is expected to save some $2.3 million.
Cerretani warned that the district may decide to close another school depending upon state and federal aid figures. She also said it is possible a school could be closed in May if voters defeat the budget next month and cuts need to be enacted.
The crowd at the board meeting was roughly divided between parents who wanted the school to remain open and residents who wanted the budget to be cut to avoid a large tax hike.
School administrators had claimed the budget deficit could be as high as $4.5 million for the next school year. That depended on state aid figures and the application of rules on how to account for prior budget maneuvers.
The district built three schools five years ago, but because of declining enrollment, school officials decided closing one of the 13 schools was the best option.
"We are not in the position of predicting what the future of enrollment will be," school board member Robert Antonaccio said. "Jobs are being lost. This is an enrollment problem. There is now a need to make a correction."
Some parents had fought for the schools to remain open and offered substitute budget cuts.
Barbara Lashley, who has taught in the district for 39 years, said in an interview that she was shocked.
"It's a sweet school," she said. "It's the only home I've ever known."
Other teachers hugged in the hallways after the board's decision.
"We are faced with making a bold and decisive decision," Superintendent Enid Golden told the crowd. "This is a high-stakes decision. We are talking about people, parents, the community."
By MICHELLE GLADDEN • STAFF WRITER • March 5, 2009 from www.dailyrecord.com
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Youtube video link to Howell TRUTH's recording of 2/19 BOE meeting
PART 1:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-768873219868910432&ei=aJamSbX_CI_-qwKtmMCYBw&q=howell+township+boe&hl=en
PART 2:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7008336943565852313&hl=en
PART 3:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6341306344051676102&hl=en
PART 4:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3757934018489937882&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-768873219868910432&ei=aJamSbX_CI_-qwKtmMCYBw&q=howell+township+boe&hl=en
PART 2:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7008336943565852313&hl=en
PART 3:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6341306344051676102&hl=en
PART 4:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3757934018489937882&hl=en
NO referendum, decides BOE
District will not hold referendum on school closing , voting for BOE members and school budget will be held April 21. Read entire Tri-Town news article: http://tritown.gmnews.com/news/2009/0226/front_page/001.html
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Click here to see the BOE adgenda for Feb. 18th meeting
A Special Executive Session, Regular Board Meeting and Public Hearing on
Tax Levy Cap Proposal will be held on
Wednesday, February 18, 2009 at 7:30 p.m. in the Middle School North Cafetorium.
Public Session will begin at approximately 8:00 p.m.Middle School North Conference Room7:30PM
Tax Levy Cap Proposal will be held on
Wednesday, February 18, 2009 at 7:30 p.m. in the Middle School North Cafetorium.
Public Session will begin at approximately 8:00 p.m.Middle School North Conference Room7:30PM
Thursday, February 5, 2009
An Open Letter to the Howell Township Teachers' and Administrators' Union President
You may have heard of the group Howell TRUTH * Townspeople Rooting out Unnecessary Tax Hikes * and you may believe that TRUTH is “the opposition.” In fact, TRUTH is on the same side of the school closing issue as you.We are not fighting to keep the doors to any particular BUILDING open. We are working diligently to avoid layoffs throughout the district, from administrative staff to instructional staff right on through to custodial/maintenance staff. We presume this is your goal as well, as the Howell Township Teachers' and Administrators' Associations Presidents.We hope you would agree that the common cause that unites us, the desire to preserve jobs in this awful economic crisis, is far more significant than whatever issues might be seen as dividing us. Please do not allow any outside force, whether it is from the administration, the board of education, or the state or national union, to divert your attention from this singular purpose, if it is in fact your desire to preserve jobs as well. We need courageous leaders now more than ever and we encourage you to be such leaders.We invite you to read our Mission Statement, at www.howelltruth.blogspot.com, so that you will know that our intentions are not to attack the unions or your membership. Our goal is to preserve the great educational system we have put together over the years by preserving its staff. Please work with us to encourage the board of education to make cuts, not closings. Please agree to sit down with the board to discuss whether concessions can be made to help see your membership and our great staff through this economic emergency. Please do so quickly, as a closing decision could come as early as mid-February.We have supported you through the good times and now we are asking that you support us during these troubling times. Thank you.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Tri-Town News Article
Parents want all options examined
Howell TRUTH gets involved with school budget issues
BY TOYNETT HALL Staff Writer, January 22, 2009
For more than a year, members of the Howell Board of Education have been contemplating the possibility of closing one or more schools in order to close a projected $5 million deficit in the 2009-10 school year budget.
Some members of the community group Howell TRUTH (Townspeople Rooting out Unnecessary Tax Hikes) have claimed that the board has failed to seek out alternatives to closing a school. They have said the board's attempt to include the public in the decision-making process has been less than genuine.
Howell's public schools are operating with a $110.2 million budget in place for the 2008-09 school year. The budget for the 2009-10 school year is being developed now. The board has not yet decided whether to close one or more schools.
There are 10 elementary schools and three middle schools in Howell. Howell High School is not part of the Howell K-8 School District. The high school is owned and operated by the Freehold Regional High School District.
During a Jan. 14 board meeting, Al Miller of Howell TRUTH asked the board to consider other measures toward closing the projected budget gap, including reopening contract negotiations with the Howell Township Education Association (HTEA).
The HTEA represents Howell's teachers, and salaries make up a significant portion of the school district's budget.
The board "needs to look at other costsaving measures and needs to stop looking for ways to take things from the children," Miller said.
He suggested that the board members reach out to teachers and administrators and request a giveback or pay freeze to help buffer the blow of the difficult economic times.
Miller accused the board members of not listening to the ideas and suggestions that are being offered by concerned citizens.
Amy Fankhauser of Howell TRUTH called on the board to act in a transparent and accountable manner by providing the public with a cost-saving analysis of alternatives other than closing a school.
"At the Nov. 17 Finance Committee meeting, the administration stated that the majority of the savings on account of a school closing do not come from the operational costs of the facility, but rather on savings from a reduction in staff in salary and benefits. Our group has requested a costsavings analysis, one with specific numbers based on specific scenarios, to justify the proposed [school] closings," Fankhauser said.
"The time for speculation is over. The public needs to see the savings. I often feel like I am caught up playing that 'find the pea under the shell' game, and this causes me to question the board's true intentions. I have heard many members of the community speak on the budget crisis and school closing issue, and the one thing I hear repeatedly is that they believe the board has made up its mind on what it is going to do and has had its mind made up for some time now, but is waiting for some unknown reason before it takes action. Many of us have the perception that you are listening to our words, but not truly hearing them because your minds are already made up," she said.
Another parent, Laura Sandow, said the board needs to trim the fat.
"There are some areas of overspending. The district needs to look for ways to spread out the workload without increasing payroll. Are you all really listening and hearing what the community is saying? We are asking you to cut the budget. You all need to do the hard job and cut the luxury items. This is a budget problem, it's not just about closing schools. It's a failed spending formula," Sandow said.
Board President Mary Cerretani responded to the accusations, saying, "The administration has listened to the community. Your comments are taken seriously. We have looked at many options and suggestions offered, and we will continue to look at them. There will be cuts made. Board members are also community members. We are and have been trying to do what's right for the students of our township."
Contact Toynett Hall at howell@gmnews.com.
APP Article: School Board, parents consider ways to cut costs
School board, parents consider ways to cut costs
By Michelle Gladden • Staff Writer • January 22, 2009
HOWELL — Next year's school budget is on most everyone's mind these days.
Board officials are conducting an extensive cost-savings analysis to help them determine whether they will need to close one or more schools to meet a steep budget shortfall, while a group of parents conducting their own analysis say they want to see cost savings that don't include closing schools.
In December, parents suggested $3.5 million worth of cuts, which included eliminating some assistant and school nurse positions, capping professional development and travel expenses, reeling in the use of substitute teachers, reducing child study teams, and cutting courtesy busing, media specialists and an assistant superintendent position.
"I personally attend almost every Facilities, Finance, Community Relations and Board of Education meeting within our township, and it appears the Board of Education and administration have only discussed ways to close schools and not any alternatives," said Al Miller, president of the Southard Elementary School PTA and a member of the grass-roots Howell Truth group.
Miller said the group is comprised of "townspeople working to root out unnecessary tax hikes."
The realization that as many as two of the kindergarten-through-eighth-grade school district's 13 schools may need to close came to a head in early November. Since then, committee and board meetings have centered around how best to address an estimated $3 to $5 million deficit.
"I often feel like I am caught up playing that find-the-pea-under-the-shell game," said Amy Frankhauser, also a member of Howell Truth.
"It really comes down to how much the board is willing to cut from the budget, starting with items that affect the children the least before the board reaches down to those areas that affect the children the most, such as school closings," Frankhauser said.
Officials say that while the board's governance includes the right decide whether or not to close schools, a petition by parents to put the option to the voters is being considered.
The exact deficit amount rests on how much aid will come from Trenton, as well as whether the district will again receive a waiver for pension reimbursement used to offer immediate tax relief in the 2007-08 budget.
Last year the Executive County Superintendent Carole Knopp Morris granted the waiver, which allowed the district to ask taxpayers to approve a $2.1 million levy increase.
A series of reports were compiled to gauge how much savings could be rendered for each of the 13 schools, and officials now are vetting five possible scenarios that would include redistricting students.
A cost-savings analysis report is expected to given at the Finance Committee's next meeting, which as of press time, officials said would take place Jan. 27 or Feb. 2.
For more information, visit www.howell.k12.nj.us.
Michelle Gladden: (732) 308-7753 or mgladden@app.com
By Michelle Gladden • Staff Writer • January 22, 2009
HOWELL — Next year's school budget is on most everyone's mind these days.
Board officials are conducting an extensive cost-savings analysis to help them determine whether they will need to close one or more schools to meet a steep budget shortfall, while a group of parents conducting their own analysis say they want to see cost savings that don't include closing schools.
In December, parents suggested $3.5 million worth of cuts, which included eliminating some assistant and school nurse positions, capping professional development and travel expenses, reeling in the use of substitute teachers, reducing child study teams, and cutting courtesy busing, media specialists and an assistant superintendent position.
"I personally attend almost every Facilities, Finance, Community Relations and Board of Education meeting within our township, and it appears the Board of Education and administration have only discussed ways to close schools and not any alternatives," said Al Miller, president of the Southard Elementary School PTA and a member of the grass-roots Howell Truth group.
Miller said the group is comprised of "townspeople working to root out unnecessary tax hikes."
The realization that as many as two of the kindergarten-through-eighth-grade school district's 13 schools may need to close came to a head in early November. Since then, committee and board meetings have centered around how best to address an estimated $3 to $5 million deficit.
"I often feel like I am caught up playing that find-the-pea-under-the-shell game," said Amy Frankhauser, also a member of Howell Truth.
"It really comes down to how much the board is willing to cut from the budget, starting with items that affect the children the least before the board reaches down to those areas that affect the children the most, such as school closings," Frankhauser said.
Officials say that while the board's governance includes the right decide whether or not to close schools, a petition by parents to put the option to the voters is being considered.
The exact deficit amount rests on how much aid will come from Trenton, as well as whether the district will again receive a waiver for pension reimbursement used to offer immediate tax relief in the 2007-08 budget.
Last year the Executive County Superintendent Carole Knopp Morris granted the waiver, which allowed the district to ask taxpayers to approve a $2.1 million levy increase.
A series of reports were compiled to gauge how much savings could be rendered for each of the 13 schools, and officials now are vetting five possible scenarios that would include redistricting students.
A cost-savings analysis report is expected to given at the Finance Committee's next meeting, which as of press time, officials said would take place Jan. 27 or Feb. 2.
For more information, visit www.howell.k12.nj.us.
Michelle Gladden: (732) 308-7753 or mgladden@app.com
Howell TRUTH mission statement
TRUTH - Townspeople Rooting out Unnecessary Tax Hikes
WHO WE ARE - Like you who are visiting here today, we are taxpayers and we are parents who reside in Howell. We are proud of our town and our schools and we want to continue to reside in this community. We also want to see more families come to enjoy the quality of life we have found in Howell.
WHAT WE BELIEVE: TRUTH believes that the best interests of our children come first and that our children are best served by a quality educational system. In turn, this quality education serves the community well by drawing in families who value education and who, then, come to live, work, shop and volunteer in our community. We believe a well-run, fiscally responsible school district is the foundation upon which a thriving community is based.
WHY WE FORMED TRUTH: TRUTH was born out of our current global economic crisis. Howell has seen its fair share of foreclosures and families being forced to relocate because of escalating taxes and dwindling financial resources. We have come together to, first, educate ourselves on the school budget process so that we can share what we have learned with others.
OUR GOAL: The ultimate goal of TRUTH is to foster and promote fiscal responsibility and accountability within our school district. Our goal is to partner with the board, the community and other public service providers to cut costs where appropriate and necessary so that we all can continue to afford to reside within Howell and to attract new residents to our community. We are guided first by the best interests of the children and then by the interests of the taxpayers. Sometimes these interests coincide, sometimes they are at odds. Our ultimate goal is to strike a balance between the two.
TRUTH recognizes that many of the cost-saving or revenue creating suggestions we will advance will be unpopular. We hope that they will all generate discussion and debate as people become better equipped to meaningfully participate in the school budget process and, ultimately, the operation of our school district.
TRUTH attempts to take a holistic approach to the economic crisis as it impacts our school system and welcomes respectful discussions and input from all who visit this site. We thank you for your participation in this process.
WHO WE ARE - Like you who are visiting here today, we are taxpayers and we are parents who reside in Howell. We are proud of our town and our schools and we want to continue to reside in this community. We also want to see more families come to enjoy the quality of life we have found in Howell.
WHAT WE BELIEVE: TRUTH believes that the best interests of our children come first and that our children are best served by a quality educational system. In turn, this quality education serves the community well by drawing in families who value education and who, then, come to live, work, shop and volunteer in our community. We believe a well-run, fiscally responsible school district is the foundation upon which a thriving community is based.
WHY WE FORMED TRUTH: TRUTH was born out of our current global economic crisis. Howell has seen its fair share of foreclosures and families being forced to relocate because of escalating taxes and dwindling financial resources. We have come together to, first, educate ourselves on the school budget process so that we can share what we have learned with others.
OUR GOAL: The ultimate goal of TRUTH is to foster and promote fiscal responsibility and accountability within our school district. Our goal is to partner with the board, the community and other public service providers to cut costs where appropriate and necessary so that we all can continue to afford to reside within Howell and to attract new residents to our community. We are guided first by the best interests of the children and then by the interests of the taxpayers. Sometimes these interests coincide, sometimes they are at odds. Our ultimate goal is to strike a balance between the two.
TRUTH recognizes that many of the cost-saving or revenue creating suggestions we will advance will be unpopular. We hope that they will all generate discussion and debate as people become better equipped to meaningfully participate in the school budget process and, ultimately, the operation of our school district.
TRUTH attempts to take a holistic approach to the economic crisis as it impacts our school system and welcomes respectful discussions and input from all who visit this site. We thank you for your participation in this process.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Phone and Email contacts for the Howell Board of Education
Mrs. Mary Cerretani, President: (370-4302), Mcerretani@howell.k12.nj.us
Mrs. Sherry Roses, Vice President: (751-0521), Sroses@howell.k12.nj.us
Mr. Robert Antonaccio : (919-1007), Rantonaccio@howell.k12.nj.us
Mrs. Patricia Blood: (901-2944), Pblood@howel.k12.nj.us
Mr. David G. Flaherty: (458-5969), Dflaherty@howell.k12.nj.us
Dr. Stephen M. Levine: (206-0206), Slevine@howell.k12.nj.us
Mr. Joseph Moscato, Jr.: (462-9338), Jmoscato@howell.k12.nj.us
Mrs. Valerie A. Rosenberg: (840-0391), Vrosenberg@howell.k12.nj.us
Mr. Gene Tanala: (938-3899), gtanala@howell.k12.nj.us
Mrs. Sherry Roses, Vice President: (751-0521), Sroses@howell.k12.nj.us
Mr. Robert Antonaccio : (919-1007), Rantonaccio@howell.k12.nj.us
Mrs. Patricia Blood: (901-2944), Pblood@howel.k12.nj.us
Mr. David G. Flaherty: (458-5969), Dflaherty@howell.k12.nj.us
Dr. Stephen M. Levine: (206-0206), Slevine@howell.k12.nj.us
Mr. Joseph Moscato, Jr.: (462-9338), Jmoscato@howell.k12.nj.us
Mrs. Valerie A. Rosenberg: (840-0391), Vrosenberg@howell.k12.nj.us
Mr. Gene Tanala: (938-3899), gtanala@howell.k12.nj.us
Friday, January 16, 2009
Statements read by HOWELL TRUTH at 1/14/09 Board Meeting
STATEMENT 1:
Good evening.
Several months ago, our group asked the administration to provide us with some rough numbers regarding the potential tax impact of the upcoming budget, understanding that state aid was an unknown. We have been told that the best we can hope in terms of state aid is to receive the same amount we received last year or the “hold harmless” amount, but that we could get less because of our current economic crisis.
Here is what we do know, in round numbers. Last year's tax levy was approximately $68,000,000. In the upcoming budget year, we have certain fixed contractual costs, including salary increases and health benefits costs. We asked the administration, if given those fixed costs, we could support the district by the 4% cap over last year's levy and we were told “no.” All indications are that the upcoming budget will hit the 4% cap – our worst case scenario.
So, applying 4% to the $68,000,000 levy last year, we are looking at an additional levy of approximately $2.72 million this year for a total tax levy of roughly $70-72,000,000.
What we don't know and won't know until sometime in the late spring or early summer is the certified tax base or ratables – the value of the taxable properties among which the tax levy is spread. We do agree with the administration that the certified ratables will be down from last year due to some business closings and successful tax assessment appeals.
But, even assuming a best case scenario on ratables (or using last year's certified amount), the administration has projected that we can expect the following tax increases:
on a $300,000 home, an increase from between $110-204;
on a $350,000 home, an increase from between $129-238;
on a $400,000 home, an increase from between $147-273; and
on a $450,000 home, an increase from between $165-307.
And, remember, these increases are due to the school budget alone and do not reflect any increase due to municipal services. Yes, these are rough, ballpark figures and depend an certain assumptions about what the school tax rate will increase to from last year's .999. But, the administration's tax increase projections last year as part of our successful Get Out the Vote initiative were pretty dead on, at least according to my tax bill.
If a referendum is held on March 10 or a second question presented in April asking the taxpayers to shoulder an additional $5,000,000 levy, essentially the board would be asking us to accept a nearly 12% increase in taxes (the 4% cap plus about 8% more in additional tax levy).
At the special board meeting last week where the board adopted the referendum calendar, a member of this panel stated that “It really comes down to how much the community is willing to fund to run the schools” or words to that effect. For me and my fellow TRUTH members, it really comes down to how much the Board is willing to cut from the budget, starting with items that affect the children the least before the board reaches down to those areas that affect the children the most, such as school closings.
At the November 17th Finance Committee meeting, the administration stated that the majority of the savings on account of a school closing do not come from the operational costs of the facility but rather on savings from a reduction in staff in salary and benefits. Our group has repeatedly requested a cost savings analysis, one with specific numbers based on specific scenarios, to justify the proposed closings. We were provided with the operational costs of each facility but essentially told that a further break down would be premature because we did not have a Facilities Committee report or architect's report to base any closing scenarios on. Well, we have those reports now and we have the scenarios. I am formally requesting that a cost savings break down be prepared with all due haste and presented at the next Finance Committee meeting or Board of Education meeting, whichever occurs first. The time for speculation is over. The public needs to see the savings.
When these school closing discussions began, all the community heard was that we are over adequate, meaning we are spending more money per pupil than the state says is necessary because we have too many schools for too few pupils. That was the initial rationale for a school closing – so we would not jeopardize our state funding. I personally do not recall hearing the word “adequacy” in nearly a month, except when referenced by a member of the public. We caught on to your adequacy argument and offered ideas within the adequacy model and now adequacy seems to no longer be the critical component of our budget crisis it once was. I often feel like I am caught up playing that “find the pea under the shell” game and this causes me to question the board's true intentions.
I have heard many members of the community speak on the budget crisis and closing issue and the one thing I hear repeatedly is that they believe the board has made up its mind on what it is going to do and has had its mind made up for some time now but is waiting for some unknown reason before it takes action. Many of us have the perception that you are listening to our words, but not truly hearing them because your minds are already made up.
How you respond to this sentiment?
Thank you.
STATEMENT 2:
Good Evening, I am a proud member of the Howell Truth Committee. Truth is a committee of common townspeople rooting out unnecessary tax hikes.
At the Public Forum meeting on December 2nd, this Board and Administration were given ideas by The Howell Truth Committee showing ways to make cuts and save approximately 3.5 million dollars. The proposed cuts would keep us well within the State Model and the Adequacy Model. To date, there has been no response from either the Board of Education and/or the Administration that any of the proposed cuts were being considered. I, personally, attend almost every Facilities, Finance, Community Relations and Board of Education meeting within our township and it appears that Board of Education and Administration have only discussed ways to close schools and not any alternatives.
When questioned on the proposed savings of closing a school or schools, neither the Board of Education nor the Administration were able to give the residents the exact break- down as to savings. We were told in one meeting that the savings would not be through operational cost but through salaries. Then, at a different meeting, it was explained that we would lose very little staff because the students still need to be educated some where.
So once again where is the savings?
We know that even if some staff is let go, it will be from the staff members that are at the bottom of the salary guide. This, in turn, does not add up to the big saving that residents are being led to believe which would actually be achieved through the closure of schools.
Both the Board of Education and Administration have stated that by closing one or more schools, the township will still not be in a position to lower taxes and/or bring back any of the programs that have been taken away from the students.
Recently, the Howell Truth Committee contacted the Teacher’s Union to request that negotiations be re-opened regarding contracts. The request was made that either the members take a pay freeze or provide some type of give back to get our schools and our children through these hard economic times. The Truth Committee also asked the Board of Education to reach out to the union and try to make this attempt in order to avoid the loss of any of the excellent staff of this district.
I would like to renew our request and also ask the Board of Education not only to ask the Teachers Union but to also ask the Administrators Union to re-open negotiations regarding contracts. For this District to get through the current economic times, we need some type of pay freeze or give back. This Administration needs to lead by example. These give backs and or pay freezes need to start with Dr. Golden and go all the way down the line. Also if the Superintendents and Assistant Superintendents for one year gave back their Annual buy back option of cash for their unused sick & vacation days that would be a cost savings of $156,600.00 to the district. In the contract listed on the District Web Site we can see that Dr. Golden can receive $45,000 for her unused sick leave $13,340 for her unused vacation days in cash. Mr. Massa can receive $45,000 for his unused sick leave and $13,340 for his unused vacation days in cash. Dr. Jones can receive $8,880 for her unused sick leave and $11,840 for her unused vacation days in cash. Mrs. Collandar is not listed so we are estimating she can receive $11,240 for her unused vacation days in cash, and finally Mr. Sanasac can receive $8,360 for his unused vacation days in cash.
Again giving back of these items for one year can save the district $156,600.00 this is enough to fund at least three non-tenured teaching positions.
There are so many other ways to cut the school budget without closing schools. All of our schools are vital now and will remain so in the future. Closing schools is not a viable option.
The Howell Truth Committee is requesting that the Board of Education look for other cost saving possibilities and prevent the closing of schools in our district. Please stop looking for ways to take more from our children and look for ways to keep our schools open. Closing schools will not enable the reinstatement of any programs nor would the residents get tax decreases. The disadvantages will be larger class sizes, less individualized attention, longer bus rides and much, much more. All of these things directly affect students’ test performance.
In closing, we are requesting that action be taken now as to alternative cost saving for our district not after the budget clock has run out. Please do it for our children.
Thank you.
STATEMENT 3:
I would like to bring the BOE attention back to the 2008-09 budgets. In putting the budget together you gave it a priority list.
Read the list
I would like to know how closing two schools fit into this list?
If you make bigger class room sizes, you will not improve the instruction time you will increase staff to help manage the class room witch will cost us more money in salaries witch is where the problem of the budget spending lies. You would also be increasing transportation and longer bus rides.
Technology program: Why can’t we consolidate jobs? We are paying 3 men on an average one hundred thousand dollars plus benefits to run our tech programs.
In corporate America when they down size on a team of lets say 5, 2 lose their jobs because of down sizing the other 3 take on the reasonability’s of the other 2 and they don’t get compensated they are just grateful they have a job. You need to look for ways to spread the workload out without increasing the pay roll. You are spending money in the budget that this community can’t afford any more.
After going through the budget at length we have presented to you cuts that would be reasonable and would not effect the education of our children. These are areas of over spending and we are still waiting for your answers. You yourselves at a meeting have said you have given this community every thing they have asked for. Well we are asking and quit frankly we are telling you, you need to cut the budget. But the question here is, are you listening, are you hearing what the community is saying.
When you tell us you are going to present a budget for the people to vote on that will ask for the 4% increase plus the 5million gap. We say you are not listening, you are not hearing what this community wants. You need to cut the budget and present to the community a reasonable and responsible budget that lines up with the hard economic crisis that this country, state and community is going through. Do you not know that there are people in this community that have lost their jobs and that their unemployment check would not be able to cover the Cobra health insurance that they would need to care for their families? Do you not know there are people here that have not have raises in 5 years. Do you not know that there is people that have taken pay cuts just to keep their jobs?
You might say we are upset, I say we are very disappointed and angry that you are not hearing what this community is saying. We are angry because as we have gone through the budget we see the poor stewardship of this spending. The over spending of this administration has to got change. Why should the community pay for your travel expenses? In corporate America and private business that is one of the first things they cut. This community cannot afford to carry all of your expenses. Healthcare has to got change; we cannot afford to pay your entire healthcare. People have been giving back for years. Even our government is asking for the givebacks and changes. They have finally realized this spending formula does not work. With the salaries we are paying you, you can afford to pay for it, we cannot.
You might be thinking what has this got to do with Priority for Developing the Budget list, well the professional staff and administration salaries and benefit package are all part of that budget and you need to do the hard job and cut the luxury items that you have had and line up with a responsible spending formula at this time of financial crisis.
This budget problem is not just about cutting 2 schools this is about a failed spending formula.
What this community needs is conservative spending at a time of crisis. I will say it again everyone needs to give up something here, this administration as to lead by example.
Good evening.
Several months ago, our group asked the administration to provide us with some rough numbers regarding the potential tax impact of the upcoming budget, understanding that state aid was an unknown. We have been told that the best we can hope in terms of state aid is to receive the same amount we received last year or the “hold harmless” amount, but that we could get less because of our current economic crisis.
Here is what we do know, in round numbers. Last year's tax levy was approximately $68,000,000. In the upcoming budget year, we have certain fixed contractual costs, including salary increases and health benefits costs. We asked the administration, if given those fixed costs, we could support the district by the 4% cap over last year's levy and we were told “no.” All indications are that the upcoming budget will hit the 4% cap – our worst case scenario.
So, applying 4% to the $68,000,000 levy last year, we are looking at an additional levy of approximately $2.72 million this year for a total tax levy of roughly $70-72,000,000.
What we don't know and won't know until sometime in the late spring or early summer is the certified tax base or ratables – the value of the taxable properties among which the tax levy is spread. We do agree with the administration that the certified ratables will be down from last year due to some business closings and successful tax assessment appeals.
But, even assuming a best case scenario on ratables (or using last year's certified amount), the administration has projected that we can expect the following tax increases:
on a $300,000 home, an increase from between $110-204;
on a $350,000 home, an increase from between $129-238;
on a $400,000 home, an increase from between $147-273; and
on a $450,000 home, an increase from between $165-307.
And, remember, these increases are due to the school budget alone and do not reflect any increase due to municipal services. Yes, these are rough, ballpark figures and depend an certain assumptions about what the school tax rate will increase to from last year's .999. But, the administration's tax increase projections last year as part of our successful Get Out the Vote initiative were pretty dead on, at least according to my tax bill.
If a referendum is held on March 10 or a second question presented in April asking the taxpayers to shoulder an additional $5,000,000 levy, essentially the board would be asking us to accept a nearly 12% increase in taxes (the 4% cap plus about 8% more in additional tax levy).
At the special board meeting last week where the board adopted the referendum calendar, a member of this panel stated that “It really comes down to how much the community is willing to fund to run the schools” or words to that effect. For me and my fellow TRUTH members, it really comes down to how much the Board is willing to cut from the budget, starting with items that affect the children the least before the board reaches down to those areas that affect the children the most, such as school closings.
At the November 17th Finance Committee meeting, the administration stated that the majority of the savings on account of a school closing do not come from the operational costs of the facility but rather on savings from a reduction in staff in salary and benefits. Our group has repeatedly requested a cost savings analysis, one with specific numbers based on specific scenarios, to justify the proposed closings. We were provided with the operational costs of each facility but essentially told that a further break down would be premature because we did not have a Facilities Committee report or architect's report to base any closing scenarios on. Well, we have those reports now and we have the scenarios. I am formally requesting that a cost savings break down be prepared with all due haste and presented at the next Finance Committee meeting or Board of Education meeting, whichever occurs first. The time for speculation is over. The public needs to see the savings.
When these school closing discussions began, all the community heard was that we are over adequate, meaning we are spending more money per pupil than the state says is necessary because we have too many schools for too few pupils. That was the initial rationale for a school closing – so we would not jeopardize our state funding. I personally do not recall hearing the word “adequacy” in nearly a month, except when referenced by a member of the public. We caught on to your adequacy argument and offered ideas within the adequacy model and now adequacy seems to no longer be the critical component of our budget crisis it once was. I often feel like I am caught up playing that “find the pea under the shell” game and this causes me to question the board's true intentions.
I have heard many members of the community speak on the budget crisis and closing issue and the one thing I hear repeatedly is that they believe the board has made up its mind on what it is going to do and has had its mind made up for some time now but is waiting for some unknown reason before it takes action. Many of us have the perception that you are listening to our words, but not truly hearing them because your minds are already made up.
How you respond to this sentiment?
Thank you.
STATEMENT 2:
Good Evening, I am a proud member of the Howell Truth Committee. Truth is a committee of common townspeople rooting out unnecessary tax hikes.
At the Public Forum meeting on December 2nd, this Board and Administration were given ideas by The Howell Truth Committee showing ways to make cuts and save approximately 3.5 million dollars. The proposed cuts would keep us well within the State Model and the Adequacy Model. To date, there has been no response from either the Board of Education and/or the Administration that any of the proposed cuts were being considered. I, personally, attend almost every Facilities, Finance, Community Relations and Board of Education meeting within our township and it appears that Board of Education and Administration have only discussed ways to close schools and not any alternatives.
When questioned on the proposed savings of closing a school or schools, neither the Board of Education nor the Administration were able to give the residents the exact break- down as to savings. We were told in one meeting that the savings would not be through operational cost but through salaries. Then, at a different meeting, it was explained that we would lose very little staff because the students still need to be educated some where.
So once again where is the savings?
We know that even if some staff is let go, it will be from the staff members that are at the bottom of the salary guide. This, in turn, does not add up to the big saving that residents are being led to believe which would actually be achieved through the closure of schools.
Both the Board of Education and Administration have stated that by closing one or more schools, the township will still not be in a position to lower taxes and/or bring back any of the programs that have been taken away from the students.
Recently, the Howell Truth Committee contacted the Teacher’s Union to request that negotiations be re-opened regarding contracts. The request was made that either the members take a pay freeze or provide some type of give back to get our schools and our children through these hard economic times. The Truth Committee also asked the Board of Education to reach out to the union and try to make this attempt in order to avoid the loss of any of the excellent staff of this district.
I would like to renew our request and also ask the Board of Education not only to ask the Teachers Union but to also ask the Administrators Union to re-open negotiations regarding contracts. For this District to get through the current economic times, we need some type of pay freeze or give back. This Administration needs to lead by example. These give backs and or pay freezes need to start with Dr. Golden and go all the way down the line. Also if the Superintendents and Assistant Superintendents for one year gave back their Annual buy back option of cash for their unused sick & vacation days that would be a cost savings of $156,600.00 to the district. In the contract listed on the District Web Site we can see that Dr. Golden can receive $45,000 for her unused sick leave $13,340 for her unused vacation days in cash. Mr. Massa can receive $45,000 for his unused sick leave and $13,340 for his unused vacation days in cash. Dr. Jones can receive $8,880 for her unused sick leave and $11,840 for her unused vacation days in cash. Mrs. Collandar is not listed so we are estimating she can receive $11,240 for her unused vacation days in cash, and finally Mr. Sanasac can receive $8,360 for his unused vacation days in cash.
Again giving back of these items for one year can save the district $156,600.00 this is enough to fund at least three non-tenured teaching positions.
There are so many other ways to cut the school budget without closing schools. All of our schools are vital now and will remain so in the future. Closing schools is not a viable option.
The Howell Truth Committee is requesting that the Board of Education look for other cost saving possibilities and prevent the closing of schools in our district. Please stop looking for ways to take more from our children and look for ways to keep our schools open. Closing schools will not enable the reinstatement of any programs nor would the residents get tax decreases. The disadvantages will be larger class sizes, less individualized attention, longer bus rides and much, much more. All of these things directly affect students’ test performance.
In closing, we are requesting that action be taken now as to alternative cost saving for our district not after the budget clock has run out. Please do it for our children.
Thank you.
STATEMENT 3:
I would like to bring the BOE attention back to the 2008-09 budgets. In putting the budget together you gave it a priority list.
Read the list
I would like to know how closing two schools fit into this list?
If you make bigger class room sizes, you will not improve the instruction time you will increase staff to help manage the class room witch will cost us more money in salaries witch is where the problem of the budget spending lies. You would also be increasing transportation and longer bus rides.
Technology program: Why can’t we consolidate jobs? We are paying 3 men on an average one hundred thousand dollars plus benefits to run our tech programs.
In corporate America when they down size on a team of lets say 5, 2 lose their jobs because of down sizing the other 3 take on the reasonability’s of the other 2 and they don’t get compensated they are just grateful they have a job. You need to look for ways to spread the workload out without increasing the pay roll. You are spending money in the budget that this community can’t afford any more.
After going through the budget at length we have presented to you cuts that would be reasonable and would not effect the education of our children. These are areas of over spending and we are still waiting for your answers. You yourselves at a meeting have said you have given this community every thing they have asked for. Well we are asking and quit frankly we are telling you, you need to cut the budget. But the question here is, are you listening, are you hearing what the community is saying.
When you tell us you are going to present a budget for the people to vote on that will ask for the 4% increase plus the 5million gap. We say you are not listening, you are not hearing what this community wants. You need to cut the budget and present to the community a reasonable and responsible budget that lines up with the hard economic crisis that this country, state and community is going through. Do you not know that there are people in this community that have lost their jobs and that their unemployment check would not be able to cover the Cobra health insurance that they would need to care for their families? Do you not know there are people here that have not have raises in 5 years. Do you not know that there is people that have taken pay cuts just to keep their jobs?
You might say we are upset, I say we are very disappointed and angry that you are not hearing what this community is saying. We are angry because as we have gone through the budget we see the poor stewardship of this spending. The over spending of this administration has to got change. Why should the community pay for your travel expenses? In corporate America and private business that is one of the first things they cut. This community cannot afford to carry all of your expenses. Healthcare has to got change; we cannot afford to pay your entire healthcare. People have been giving back for years. Even our government is asking for the givebacks and changes. They have finally realized this spending formula does not work. With the salaries we are paying you, you can afford to pay for it, we cannot.
You might be thinking what has this got to do with Priority for Developing the Budget list, well the professional staff and administration salaries and benefit package are all part of that budget and you need to do the hard job and cut the luxury items that you have had and line up with a responsible spending formula at this time of financial crisis.
This budget problem is not just about cutting 2 schools this is about a failed spending formula.
What this community needs is conservative spending at a time of crisis. I will say it again everyone needs to give up something here, this administration as to lead by example.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Scenerios the board is currently looking at regarding school closings
They are as follows:
1. Close Ardena OR Southard and redistrict entire elementary student population among the remaining elementary schools;
2. Close Ardena AND Greibling, moving these students to the Memorial Middle School and redistricting the Memorial Middle School students to Middle School North and Middle School South; also, assign some Griebling students to Land O'Pines.
3. Close Ardena and move students to Memorial Middle School along with Newbury Elementary School special education and preschool disabled students; Close Southard and redistrict among remaining elementary schools; redistrcit middle school students between Middle School North and Middle School South.
4. Divide the middle school students more evenly as follows: Middle School North and Middle School South to house 950 students, Memorial Middle School to house 500 students. In addition, could close one elementary school and redistrict among remaining elementary schools.
5. Move the central administration staff and Information Technology department into the schools instead of maintaing distict board offices (on Squankum Yellowbrook Road) and Information Technology trailer at Ardena.
6. Establish grade level schools; that is, K-2, 3-5 and 6-8.
1. Close Ardena OR Southard and redistrict entire elementary student population among the remaining elementary schools;
2. Close Ardena AND Greibling, moving these students to the Memorial Middle School and redistricting the Memorial Middle School students to Middle School North and Middle School South; also, assign some Griebling students to Land O'Pines.
3. Close Ardena and move students to Memorial Middle School along with Newbury Elementary School special education and preschool disabled students; Close Southard and redistrict among remaining elementary schools; redistrcit middle school students between Middle School North and Middle School South.
4. Divide the middle school students more evenly as follows: Middle School North and Middle School South to house 950 students, Memorial Middle School to house 500 students. In addition, could close one elementary school and redistrict among remaining elementary schools.
5. Move the central administration staff and Information Technology department into the schools instead of maintaing distict board offices (on Squankum Yellowbrook Road) and Information Technology trailer at Ardena.
6. Establish grade level schools; that is, K-2, 3-5 and 6-8.
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Howell schools face $5M deficit (APP article)
By Michelle Gladden
HOWELL — The township school board on Wednesday left open the possibility of asking voters to approve spending $5 million to fill a budget deficit.
The board voted 4 to 2 to approve the scheduling of a referendum in which school officials would ask the public to approve a budget beyond the state's budget cap.
Board members said they were not committing to the referendum or the proposed budget increase. "We're only establishing the time frame for this election," Board Vice President Sherry Roses said.
The decision came as officials have discussed closing two of the district's 13 schools. The district will run as much as a $5 million deficit if those schools are not closed, officials have said.
School officials said the action was necessary because of legislation awaiting Senate approval that would move school board elections to November and also do away with voter approval of any budget within the state-mandated 4 percent cap. A referendum would then be needed to approve the extra spending.
"The purpose of this is really as a protective measure more than anything else," Board Attorney Jan L. Wouters said. "A timetable must be provided to the county. If we don't act now, we would not be able to hold a special election."
With a $25,000 price tag for the special election, some board members thought it too high of a cost.
"I find it reprehensible that the state of New Jersey and the Department of Education are holding our hands to the fire when they haven't even voted on this yet," board member Patricia Blood said. "Given the fiscal issues with regard to the decline in our enrollment, state funding and state mandates, I find it difficult to consider spending this money when we are in such fiscally difficult times. I understand the rationale, but we are being caught in a Catch 22."
The special election would mean district officials could also ask voters to approve a second ballot question. That question would be applicable directly to the spending of funds, officials said.
Some 50 parents attended the meeting Wednesday and questioned everything from how the ballot questions would be worded to whether such a tax hike would bring the district back into fiscal balance in the future.
Board officials said earlier in the school year that as many as two of its 13 schools could close in order to balance its budget, but parents have voiced concerns on the effects closing schools would have on the students since it would mean a redistricting of the near 64-square-mile community.
School officials continue to explore which of the 13 schools could close, whether to cut programs and staff. Officials have said a deficit resulted because a one-time pension refund was used to provide tax relief in the 2007-08 school year. Rising costs and contract obligations have contributed as well.
State aid allotments based on a new formula also translated to less help for the district, officials have said.
In order to help weigh options, the district asked parents to voice their opinions at a special meeting in November. Parents proposed some $3 million in cuts, which did not include the closing of a school.
School officials have also said they will seek another $2 million waiver, as granted by the county's Executive Superintendent last year. The waiver allowed the district to ask voters to approve a levy increase, which they did.
Michelle Gladden: (732) 308-7753 or mgladden@app.com
HOWELL — The township school board on Wednesday left open the possibility of asking voters to approve spending $5 million to fill a budget deficit.
The board voted 4 to 2 to approve the scheduling of a referendum in which school officials would ask the public to approve a budget beyond the state's budget cap.
Board members said they were not committing to the referendum or the proposed budget increase. "We're only establishing the time frame for this election," Board Vice President Sherry Roses said.
The decision came as officials have discussed closing two of the district's 13 schools. The district will run as much as a $5 million deficit if those schools are not closed, officials have said.
School officials said the action was necessary because of legislation awaiting Senate approval that would move school board elections to November and also do away with voter approval of any budget within the state-mandated 4 percent cap. A referendum would then be needed to approve the extra spending.
"The purpose of this is really as a protective measure more than anything else," Board Attorney Jan L. Wouters said. "A timetable must be provided to the county. If we don't act now, we would not be able to hold a special election."
With a $25,000 price tag for the special election, some board members thought it too high of a cost.
"I find it reprehensible that the state of New Jersey and the Department of Education are holding our hands to the fire when they haven't even voted on this yet," board member Patricia Blood said. "Given the fiscal issues with regard to the decline in our enrollment, state funding and state mandates, I find it difficult to consider spending this money when we are in such fiscally difficult times. I understand the rationale, but we are being caught in a Catch 22."
The special election would mean district officials could also ask voters to approve a second ballot question. That question would be applicable directly to the spending of funds, officials said.
Some 50 parents attended the meeting Wednesday and questioned everything from how the ballot questions would be worded to whether such a tax hike would bring the district back into fiscal balance in the future.
Board officials said earlier in the school year that as many as two of its 13 schools could close in order to balance its budget, but parents have voiced concerns on the effects closing schools would have on the students since it would mean a redistricting of the near 64-square-mile community.
School officials continue to explore which of the 13 schools could close, whether to cut programs and staff. Officials have said a deficit resulted because a one-time pension refund was used to provide tax relief in the 2007-08 school year. Rising costs and contract obligations have contributed as well.
State aid allotments based on a new formula also translated to less help for the district, officials have said.
In order to help weigh options, the district asked parents to voice their opinions at a special meeting in November. Parents proposed some $3 million in cuts, which did not include the closing of a school.
School officials have also said they will seek another $2 million waiver, as granted by the county's Executive Superintendent last year. The waiver allowed the district to ask voters to approve a levy increase, which they did.
Michelle Gladden: (732) 308-7753 or mgladden@app.com
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
IMPORTANT Howell Board of Education Meeting Jan. 7
The BOE is holding a Special Meeting on Wednesday, Jan 7th at 8pm at Middle School North. On the agenda for that night is a discussion on putting the closing of school(s) on a referendum. If they do put it out as a referendum that would then be voted on by the Howell Residents on March 10th. If this does happen then the Board will have to keep all of Howell Schools open if the referendum is passed. We need every PTA / PTO to get as many of its members out to the meeting to try and have this issue of school closings be placed on as a referendum vote. Remember every school will be affected thru either closings and or redistricting. Even by the scenarios that were presented they are looking at minimum the following schools Ardena, Southard, Griebling, Memorial, MSN, MSS & Newbury could possibly be affected directly not including the redistricting at the rest of the schools.
Synopsis of Dec. 10, 2008 Howell Board of Education Meeting
12/10/08 BOE meeting recap
Hi and a happy holiday wish to one and all! Here we go....
The Architect presented his report to the board and did a detailed presentation about his analysis of the facilities and grounds. The Board stated that it would post the report on the district website and it would be a worthwhile exercise to take a look at the areas analyzed and the relative building rankings.
Any questions or discrepancies, some of which were pointed out at the meeting, can be directed to the Architect directly or through the Business Office, Mr. Sanasac or Mr. Massa.
The Architect also clarified a remark he heard at the last meeting he presented at regarding the triggering events for building upgrades. Specifically, he said the current Code (I assume he means building/construction code) provides that if a facility, classified as in "educational use," were "mothballed" and later reopened for educational use, the code would not be triggered and upgrades would not be required.
Also, if a facility were leased for an educational use that would not trigger code upgrades nor would the expiration or cancellation of the lease to return the facility to the district's own educational use, if we found we needed the space in the future.
Likewise, renovations to a part of a non-code compliant building (one that is grandfathered, as I understand it), would only require the renovated portion of the facility to be code compliant but would not trigger a building-wide upgrade.
The only thing that would trigger the code and require upgrades is if the use classification changes, from educational to something else. If we lease to another entity (presumably public or private sector) for non-educational use, the code would kick in and somehow the upgrades would have to be addressed (whether the district would make them or require the leasing body to do so would be a subject of contract negotiations between leasor and leasee). Obviously, we would want the leasor to make the upgrades at their cost, but that might not make a lease situation a very attractive option. Leasing a code compliant building, while retaining ultimate title, might be more attractive to both the leasor and the board. But, this is all under consideration at the board level now as it considers the meaning of the Architect's report.
Other than this, the board was updated on the new kindergarten registration procedure, which will be mostly completed on-line by parents and only requiring in person meeting for parents to show proof of residency and child's medical/immunization records. This will save money in terms of not having to pay folks to come out on two Sats. in Feb., as I recall, and should streamline things. If parents do not have internet access, forms will be mailed and appointments scheduled for completion of the registration process.
But, yes, it does not address the issue of for what school the kindergartners will be registering. That should come about, in my estimation, sometime in the spring, hopefully at the latest.
The board did respond to some of the ideas shared by the public at the Forum recently and gave indications that those items are being pursued.
Members of the public spoke about the salary bubble (the $30,000 pay increase received by teachers/school nurses when they enter their 14th year of service and a slightly lower increase, I think about $20,000 or so for maintenance/custodial staff after that same 13 years of service). There was also discussion of the district's labor costs (salary and benefits) compared to other socioeconomically similar districts in our area and that Howell Township seems to be the highest paying district and that our staff hits their bubble (allegedly all districts have them negotiated in their contractual salary guides) much sooner than other districts (13th year vs. 18-24th years).
The board was also asked to contact the union president, Bill O'Brien (teacher's association), to see if his leadership would be willing to meet and discuss any concessions to address our economic crisis.
I do not recall the board specifically saying they would or would not do this nor do I recall a discussion of "the bubble" and comparable salaries from the table, but a few board members suggested individually with members of the public that the information on salary may be deceptive in how it is reported. For instance, Howell does not have an additional longevity pay scale - where, for example, an employee receives an additional amount on top of his/her salary on a progressive scale each year after so many years of service. Rather, our guides reflect the whole salary (but not benefits). It was suggested that other districts have these additional longevity payment so comparing our salary guides to theirs without reference to the additional longevity payment may account for our higher salaries.
An analysis of comparable base salaries (which would include "bubble" and longevity for those districts that offer it) and ours will give a clearer picture of that and I know folks are looking into that.
There was a brief discussion of certified school nurses and the board appeared to concur that the law does not require one per building. The potential savings comes in here where the number of certified school nurses (and several are in the $90,000 range having hit the bubble) could be reduced and that nursing professionals, without the additional educational services endorsement from the State Dept. of Ed., could be brought in at a lower salary without compromising health services to students. It does not mean that there would be no medical staff at any building, which would obviously be a concern to all.
Hi and a happy holiday wish to one and all! Here we go....
The Architect presented his report to the board and did a detailed presentation about his analysis of the facilities and grounds. The Board stated that it would post the report on the district website and it would be a worthwhile exercise to take a look at the areas analyzed and the relative building rankings.
Any questions or discrepancies, some of which were pointed out at the meeting, can be directed to the Architect directly or through the Business Office, Mr. Sanasac or Mr. Massa.
The Architect also clarified a remark he heard at the last meeting he presented at regarding the triggering events for building upgrades. Specifically, he said the current Code (I assume he means building/construction code) provides that if a facility, classified as in "educational use," were "mothballed" and later reopened for educational use, the code would not be triggered and upgrades would not be required.
Also, if a facility were leased for an educational use that would not trigger code upgrades nor would the expiration or cancellation of the lease to return the facility to the district's own educational use, if we found we needed the space in the future.
Likewise, renovations to a part of a non-code compliant building (one that is grandfathered, as I understand it), would only require the renovated portion of the facility to be code compliant but would not trigger a building-wide upgrade.
The only thing that would trigger the code and require upgrades is if the use classification changes, from educational to something else. If we lease to another entity (presumably public or private sector) for non-educational use, the code would kick in and somehow the upgrades would have to be addressed (whether the district would make them or require the leasing body to do so would be a subject of contract negotiations between leasor and leasee). Obviously, we would want the leasor to make the upgrades at their cost, but that might not make a lease situation a very attractive option. Leasing a code compliant building, while retaining ultimate title, might be more attractive to both the leasor and the board. But, this is all under consideration at the board level now as it considers the meaning of the Architect's report.
Other than this, the board was updated on the new kindergarten registration procedure, which will be mostly completed on-line by parents and only requiring in person meeting for parents to show proof of residency and child's medical/immunization records. This will save money in terms of not having to pay folks to come out on two Sats. in Feb., as I recall, and should streamline things. If parents do not have internet access, forms will be mailed and appointments scheduled for completion of the registration process.
But, yes, it does not address the issue of for what school the kindergartners will be registering. That should come about, in my estimation, sometime in the spring, hopefully at the latest.
The board did respond to some of the ideas shared by the public at the Forum recently and gave indications that those items are being pursued.
Members of the public spoke about the salary bubble (the $30,000 pay increase received by teachers/school nurses when they enter their 14th year of service and a slightly lower increase, I think about $20,000 or so for maintenance/custodial staff after that same 13 years of service). There was also discussion of the district's labor costs (salary and benefits) compared to other socioeconomically similar districts in our area and that Howell Township seems to be the highest paying district and that our staff hits their bubble (allegedly all districts have them negotiated in their contractual salary guides) much sooner than other districts (13th year vs. 18-24th years).
The board was also asked to contact the union president, Bill O'Brien (teacher's association), to see if his leadership would be willing to meet and discuss any concessions to address our economic crisis.
I do not recall the board specifically saying they would or would not do this nor do I recall a discussion of "the bubble" and comparable salaries from the table, but a few board members suggested individually with members of the public that the information on salary may be deceptive in how it is reported. For instance, Howell does not have an additional longevity pay scale - where, for example, an employee receives an additional amount on top of his/her salary on a progressive scale each year after so many years of service. Rather, our guides reflect the whole salary (but not benefits). It was suggested that other districts have these additional longevity payment so comparing our salary guides to theirs without reference to the additional longevity payment may account for our higher salaries.
An analysis of comparable base salaries (which would include "bubble" and longevity for those districts that offer it) and ours will give a clearer picture of that and I know folks are looking into that.
There was a brief discussion of certified school nurses and the board appeared to concur that the law does not require one per building. The potential savings comes in here where the number of certified school nurses (and several are in the $90,000 range having hit the bubble) could be reduced and that nursing professionals, without the additional educational services endorsement from the State Dept. of Ed., could be brought in at a lower salary without compromising health services to students. It does not mean that there would be no medical staff at any building, which would obviously be a concern to all.
Letter to Bill O'Brien, Pesident Howell Township Education Association
December 11, 2008
Bill O'Brien, PresidentHowell Township Education Association
Dear Mr O'Brien:
We are writing to you on behalf of our group, Howell T.R.U.T.H. - Townspeople Rooting Out Unnecessary Tax Hikes. Our group formed to educate ourselves on the school budget process so that we could help the district maintain fiscal responsibility in these economically trying times.Our group has poured over the budget, reviewed the adequacy formula, spoken with Federal, State, county and local officials as well as private enterprises, all in an effort to find solutions to our budget crisis and to avoid a school closing. We have offered a number of budget cut suggestions and ways in which we believe the district could utilize its facilities to meet adequacy and generate revenue.The Board of Education is considering our suggestions, none of which have touched on building level staff apart from, sadly, the vice-principals. We do know at this point that closing one or more schools will result in some savings on account of operational costs, but mostly in terms of salary and benefits by a reduction of staff.T.R.U.T.H.'s goal is to pursue options that reduce costs without directly impacting our children as a first option before closing any schools. We believe this benefits everyone, students, parents and staff alike. These are difficult economic times and we cannot rely on what worked in the past. We need new and creative solutions. We recognize that this will require sacrifices on everyone's part and we are prepared to make those sacrifices. However, we want to minimize the sacrifices made by those who are the most vulnerable in this situation - the children and the least senior staff in our district.We are asking you to speak with your membership and to meet with negotiations representatives for the Board to see if there are any items each side could concede on, even if only temporarily, as we search for more ways to bring our district out of this crisis.
Thank you.
The Members of Howell T.R.U.T.H.
Bill O'Brien, PresidentHowell Township Education Association
Dear Mr O'Brien:
We are writing to you on behalf of our group, Howell T.R.U.T.H. - Townspeople Rooting Out Unnecessary Tax Hikes. Our group formed to educate ourselves on the school budget process so that we could help the district maintain fiscal responsibility in these economically trying times.Our group has poured over the budget, reviewed the adequacy formula, spoken with Federal, State, county and local officials as well as private enterprises, all in an effort to find solutions to our budget crisis and to avoid a school closing. We have offered a number of budget cut suggestions and ways in which we believe the district could utilize its facilities to meet adequacy and generate revenue.The Board of Education is considering our suggestions, none of which have touched on building level staff apart from, sadly, the vice-principals. We do know at this point that closing one or more schools will result in some savings on account of operational costs, but mostly in terms of salary and benefits by a reduction of staff.T.R.U.T.H.'s goal is to pursue options that reduce costs without directly impacting our children as a first option before closing any schools. We believe this benefits everyone, students, parents and staff alike. These are difficult economic times and we cannot rely on what worked in the past. We need new and creative solutions. We recognize that this will require sacrifices on everyone's part and we are prepared to make those sacrifices. However, we want to minimize the sacrifices made by those who are the most vulnerable in this situation - the children and the least senior staff in our district.We are asking you to speak with your membership and to meet with negotiations representatives for the Board to see if there are any items each side could concede on, even if only temporarily, as we search for more ways to bring our district out of this crisis.
Thank you.
The Members of Howell T.R.U.T.H.
Letter to Teachers Union Representatives
I am writing to you as a member of Howell T.R.U.T.H. - Townspeople Rooting Out Unnecessary Tax Hikes – and as an Ardena parent.Our group has poured over the budget, reviewed the adequacy formula, spoken with Federal, State, county and local officials as well as private enterprises all in an effort to find solutions to our budget crisis and to avoid a school closing. We have offered a number of budget cut suggestions and ways in which we believe the district could utilize its facilities to meet adequacy and generate revenue.The Board of Education is considering our suggestions, none of which have touched on building level staff apart from, sadly, the vice-principals. We do know at this point that closing one or more schools will result in some savings on account of operational costs, but mostly in terms of salary and benefits by a reduction of staff.T.R.U.T.H.'s goal is to pursue options that reduce costs without directly impacting our children as a first option before a school closing. We believe this benefits everyone, students, parents and staff alike. These are difficult economic times and we cannot rely on what worked in the past. We need new and creative solutions. We recognize that this will require sacrifices on everyone's part and we are prepared to make those sacrifices. However, we want to minimize the sacrifices made by those who are the most vulnerable in this situation - the children and the least senior staff in our district.We are asking you and each building representative to speak with your membership and union president and to meet with negotiations representatives for the Board to see if there are any items the union could concede on, even if only temporarily, as we search for more ways to bring our district out of this crisis.
Teachers salaries
At this link:http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?Category=DATAIf you scroll down a little there is a place to click for teacher salaries.
This link shows starting salaries for teachers: http://www.njea.org/pdfs/40Kminimum.pdf
This link shows starting salaries for teachers: http://www.njea.org/pdfs/40Kminimum.pdf
Howell TRUTH letter to Assemblyman Malone
Dear Assemblyman Malone:
Thank you again for taking the time to speak with me yesterday regarding the budget issues in Howell Township. If I was able to accurately express anything, I hope it was that I and the group with which I am affiliated are trying to work with the Board of Education to offer solutions to our present budget crisis but that we are feeling that our efforts are being met more with platitudes, than with genuine consideration.
I am attaching a document below for you that summarizes our suggested cuts along with some revenue generating ideas we have offered to the Board. The attachment was compiled from previous written statements made to the Board at an open public meeting and have been iterated several times in various public venues (Finance, Community Relations and Facilities Committee meetings, for example). The consensus among my fellow Howell T.R.U.T.H. (Townspeople Rooting out Unnecessary Tax Hikes) members is that a well-reasoned "no" is preferable to no response at all, the latter being all we have received to date. It is our hope that you can assist us in holding the Board and the administration accountable for providing the community with a well-reasoned response to these suggestions.
If you are available this Friday morning, Al Miller (Southard Elementary School PTA President) and I would welcome the opportunity to meet you in your Jackson office or at another mutually convenient location.
I would be happy to provide you any additional information you might wish to have in advance of our meeting, including the most recent school closing/redistricting options.
Thank you again for your kind courtesies.
Respectfully,
Howell TRUTH
Our group recommended the following cuts, which align with State law and the adequacy model:
Reduce the number of certified school nurses. The adequacy model states only one nurse per school. Presently, we have 16 nurses for 13 schools. At a minimum, 3 nursing positions could be cut. In addition, the state statutes do not require a certified school nurse in every building. Additional cuts could be made by removing higher paid certified school nurses and replacing them with registered or licensed nurses under the certified school nurses' supervision at a much lower step on the salary guide. Based on present salaries, we project this could save the district approximately $500,000.
Reduce the number of Vice-Principals. The adequacy models provides for zero vice-principals at the elementary level and one per middle school building. We project a savings of $1.3 million dollars due to this change.
Cap professional development at the adequacy level of $785,000. Most of the items from the November Finance Committee meeting had to do with professional development of our staff, including stipends for conducting these in-services and training sessions and the hiring of substitute staff to cover classes while our teachers attended. We exceed the adequacy model in professional development spending by approximately $560,000.
Eliminate an Assistant Superintendent position. The adequacy model calls for one Superintendent and two Assistant Superintendents and we presently have three. This would save an additional $125,000.
Reduce expenditures on hiring substitutes which are in excess of the adequacy model by approximately $200,000.
Reduce number of Child Study Teams. There have been discussions that about contracting our child study team to the Farmingdale School district. If our child study team has enough time on their hands to time serve another community, that means they are not necessary to this community and could save our district approximately $130,000.
Eliminate courtesy busing. Even accepting the administration's representation that, after the township constructs sidewalks and employs crossing guards (at the taxpayers expense on the municipal side), this would save $200,000.
eliminate Media Specialists at the Middle Schools. While the adequacy model calls for media specialists, there is currently no media instruction at the middle school. A lower paid media assistant could provide any resource assistance to middle schoolers while saving this community $210,000.
Moving HMO employees into the Point of Service plan, for another $250,000 savings.
Eliminate travel expenses. A review of the budget shows that supervisors are requesting $3,000 per year for in and out of district travel. A $20,000 savings here, coupled with those mentioned above could save a building and jobs. Are we really to believe that staff will not forgo this “benefit” to keep our class sizes low, an immeasurable direct benefit to our children?
There may be more cuts than these, but these cuts alone could save the district nearly $3.5 million and stop directly impacting the children. After all, the children are not getting any programs back by their school's closing. All they are getting are larger classes sizes, less individualized attention, longer bus rides and too many other unquantifiable, yet significant, impacts to laundry here.
In addition to budget cuts, our group has looked at some ways to generate revenue by better utilizing our alleged excess facilities.
I recently spoke to our local Head Start program, located on West Farms Road, near the Police Athletic League building. That program, as you may know, is for preschoolers who qualify for preschool educational services based on economic need. The program receives federal funding. This program is most interested in partnering with our board of education, as other Head Start programs in the State have done, to provide services to at risk children. A similar mandate is coming down the pike from the State Department of Education and here we have children in our community already identified as in need. Their director, Sarah Wheelan, informed me that she is currently leasing her facility on a year to year basis at the rate of $3,000 per month. Her thirty four students, or 4 instructional sections in “functional capacity speak,” could be housed in a number of our schools where space purports to exist. There is no need to duplicate these services at the taxpayers' expense.
Private day care owners in the community have been contacted about their interest in leasing our building space to operate a day care, perhaps even for our own district staff, and are found to be “very interested” in such an arrangement.
Finally, I spoke to the Township Administrator in Tinton Falls about the pending Laurel Woods/Naval Weapons Station Earle litigation. As you may know, the Navy entered into an agreement with a developer in 1988 to build 300 on base housing units. Those units were restricted to military personnel and their families for the first 20 years of the lease, which expires in 2010. Thereafter, they would be open for public occupancy. Tinton Falls has been educating the military children, although they are really districted for Colts Neck. The litigation involves challenges to allowing unimpeded access to the naval base by non-military personnel for security reasons and who is responsible for educating any children who come to occupy those units.
A decision will be rendered in this litigation soon. Assuming the court allows public occupancy and that the incoming children become Colts Neck's responsibility, at some point that will mean more students to the FRHSD, including the Howell High School. Right now, it could mean an opportunity for our board to negotiate to take those elementary students into our “extra instructional space.” Both the Tinton Falls and Colts Neck districts might be interested in such an arrangement to put an end to its protracted legal fees. It is worth investigating.
The point is that in under two days, I placed several phone calls and found viable options to utilize our alleged extra space and to possibly generate revenue for our financially strapped district. Other options exist that have not yet been researched, including opening our facilities at night, well after the children have left for the day so no security issue, for adult education programs through a vocation-technical entity, Brookdale or some other higher learning institution, who might enjoy the benefit of our touted technology.
All of this underscores the imperative that we not take drastic measures that we cannot easily undo, such as closing a school for which we may have future need.
It is not particularly desirable to cut programs, staff or courtesy busing, or deny funding for new textbooks, or even temporarily give back a portion of salary or health benefits but these are items that can be picked up again, whereas the move to close a school cannot easily be undone. If the public is sufficiently convinced that it must come to that, then so be it. But, I remain unconvinced by the board that such a necessity exists and that all other possible options have been thoroughly investigated because nothing has been reported to the public on these ideas. All we have been told is that the Freehold Regional High School District is not interested in pursuing the use of our facilities to ease overcrowding at the Howell and Freehold Township High Schools, although it is willing to discuss field usage, and that the Monmouth-Ocean Educational Services Commission is not interested in discussing leasing our facilities for at-risk preschool services, since it appears that funding will not exist for this “mandate.”
Thank you.
Thank you again for taking the time to speak with me yesterday regarding the budget issues in Howell Township. If I was able to accurately express anything, I hope it was that I and the group with which I am affiliated are trying to work with the Board of Education to offer solutions to our present budget crisis but that we are feeling that our efforts are being met more with platitudes, than with genuine consideration.
I am attaching a document below for you that summarizes our suggested cuts along with some revenue generating ideas we have offered to the Board. The attachment was compiled from previous written statements made to the Board at an open public meeting and have been iterated several times in various public venues (Finance, Community Relations and Facilities Committee meetings, for example). The consensus among my fellow Howell T.R.U.T.H. (Townspeople Rooting out Unnecessary Tax Hikes) members is that a well-reasoned "no" is preferable to no response at all, the latter being all we have received to date. It is our hope that you can assist us in holding the Board and the administration accountable for providing the community with a well-reasoned response to these suggestions.
If you are available this Friday morning, Al Miller (Southard Elementary School PTA President) and I would welcome the opportunity to meet you in your Jackson office or at another mutually convenient location.
I would be happy to provide you any additional information you might wish to have in advance of our meeting, including the most recent school closing/redistricting options.
Thank you again for your kind courtesies.
Respectfully,
Howell TRUTH
Our group recommended the following cuts, which align with State law and the adequacy model:
Reduce the number of certified school nurses. The adequacy model states only one nurse per school. Presently, we have 16 nurses for 13 schools. At a minimum, 3 nursing positions could be cut. In addition, the state statutes do not require a certified school nurse in every building. Additional cuts could be made by removing higher paid certified school nurses and replacing them with registered or licensed nurses under the certified school nurses' supervision at a much lower step on the salary guide. Based on present salaries, we project this could save the district approximately $500,000.
Reduce the number of Vice-Principals. The adequacy models provides for zero vice-principals at the elementary level and one per middle school building. We project a savings of $1.3 million dollars due to this change.
Cap professional development at the adequacy level of $785,000. Most of the items from the November Finance Committee meeting had to do with professional development of our staff, including stipends for conducting these in-services and training sessions and the hiring of substitute staff to cover classes while our teachers attended. We exceed the adequacy model in professional development spending by approximately $560,000.
Eliminate an Assistant Superintendent position. The adequacy model calls for one Superintendent and two Assistant Superintendents and we presently have three. This would save an additional $125,000.
Reduce expenditures on hiring substitutes which are in excess of the adequacy model by approximately $200,000.
Reduce number of Child Study Teams. There have been discussions that about contracting our child study team to the Farmingdale School district. If our child study team has enough time on their hands to time serve another community, that means they are not necessary to this community and could save our district approximately $130,000.
Eliminate courtesy busing. Even accepting the administration's representation that, after the township constructs sidewalks and employs crossing guards (at the taxpayers expense on the municipal side), this would save $200,000.
eliminate Media Specialists at the Middle Schools. While the adequacy model calls for media specialists, there is currently no media instruction at the middle school. A lower paid media assistant could provide any resource assistance to middle schoolers while saving this community $210,000.
Moving HMO employees into the Point of Service plan, for another $250,000 savings.
Eliminate travel expenses. A review of the budget shows that supervisors are requesting $3,000 per year for in and out of district travel. A $20,000 savings here, coupled with those mentioned above could save a building and jobs. Are we really to believe that staff will not forgo this “benefit” to keep our class sizes low, an immeasurable direct benefit to our children?
There may be more cuts than these, but these cuts alone could save the district nearly $3.5 million and stop directly impacting the children. After all, the children are not getting any programs back by their school's closing. All they are getting are larger classes sizes, less individualized attention, longer bus rides and too many other unquantifiable, yet significant, impacts to laundry here.
In addition to budget cuts, our group has looked at some ways to generate revenue by better utilizing our alleged excess facilities.
I recently spoke to our local Head Start program, located on West Farms Road, near the Police Athletic League building. That program, as you may know, is for preschoolers who qualify for preschool educational services based on economic need. The program receives federal funding. This program is most interested in partnering with our board of education, as other Head Start programs in the State have done, to provide services to at risk children. A similar mandate is coming down the pike from the State Department of Education and here we have children in our community already identified as in need. Their director, Sarah Wheelan, informed me that she is currently leasing her facility on a year to year basis at the rate of $3,000 per month. Her thirty four students, or 4 instructional sections in “functional capacity speak,” could be housed in a number of our schools where space purports to exist. There is no need to duplicate these services at the taxpayers' expense.
Private day care owners in the community have been contacted about their interest in leasing our building space to operate a day care, perhaps even for our own district staff, and are found to be “very interested” in such an arrangement.
Finally, I spoke to the Township Administrator in Tinton Falls about the pending Laurel Woods/Naval Weapons Station Earle litigation. As you may know, the Navy entered into an agreement with a developer in 1988 to build 300 on base housing units. Those units were restricted to military personnel and their families for the first 20 years of the lease, which expires in 2010. Thereafter, they would be open for public occupancy. Tinton Falls has been educating the military children, although they are really districted for Colts Neck. The litigation involves challenges to allowing unimpeded access to the naval base by non-military personnel for security reasons and who is responsible for educating any children who come to occupy those units.
A decision will be rendered in this litigation soon. Assuming the court allows public occupancy and that the incoming children become Colts Neck's responsibility, at some point that will mean more students to the FRHSD, including the Howell High School. Right now, it could mean an opportunity for our board to negotiate to take those elementary students into our “extra instructional space.” Both the Tinton Falls and Colts Neck districts might be interested in such an arrangement to put an end to its protracted legal fees. It is worth investigating.
The point is that in under two days, I placed several phone calls and found viable options to utilize our alleged extra space and to possibly generate revenue for our financially strapped district. Other options exist that have not yet been researched, including opening our facilities at night, well after the children have left for the day so no security issue, for adult education programs through a vocation-technical entity, Brookdale or some other higher learning institution, who might enjoy the benefit of our touted technology.
All of this underscores the imperative that we not take drastic measures that we cannot easily undo, such as closing a school for which we may have future need.
It is not particularly desirable to cut programs, staff or courtesy busing, or deny funding for new textbooks, or even temporarily give back a portion of salary or health benefits but these are items that can be picked up again, whereas the move to close a school cannot easily be undone. If the public is sufficiently convinced that it must come to that, then so be it. But, I remain unconvinced by the board that such a necessity exists and that all other possible options have been thoroughly investigated because nothing has been reported to the public on these ideas. All we have been told is that the Freehold Regional High School District is not interested in pursuing the use of our facilities to ease overcrowding at the Howell and Freehold Township High Schools, although it is willing to discuss field usage, and that the Monmouth-Ocean Educational Services Commission is not interested in discussing leasing our facilities for at-risk preschool services, since it appears that funding will not exist for this “mandate.”
Thank you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)