Leslie Larson obviously isn't worried about where HER benefits will come from.

Thank you, Shelley, for your excellent, prompt reporting of this matter.

As soon as the teachers/aides started walking out, I was appalled at their behavior all I could think of was 'these are the people who are with my children everyday'. For the most part the aides are fantastic but I have to wonder for how many it is just a job with benefits.

As for the 131 dollars decrease, we've gone through pay freezes, more work less money, high cobra pymts, etc in the past 3 yrs, I would like to see a decrease in our taxes. To the Bullock teacher who guaffawed at the amount, 'it is dinner out', I can't tell you the last time we went out to dinner. How about you pay my 131 for me...plus I would assume many more.

Phew! I am glad I got a $11/month decrease in my taxes, as I just lost my job! As did many, many other Montclair residents...

Angelique been there, paid the 1400 dollars a month cobra payments, currently paying 700 dollars out of our pay check to health care. A lot of people are struggling in this town, assuming you are an aide, you haven't lost your job, there will be a job for you, alright paying less but it is job. The aides came out in droves last night, if it was my job I was fighting for, I would have been at every meeting since October. The MEA let you down, not the taxpayer.

"Phew! I am glad I got a $11/month decrease in my taxes, as I just lost my job! As did many, many other Montclair residents..."

No one is happy about this. This happens in the private sector all the time when recessions occur. Positions are restructured and/or downsized.

We all should have been out there so much sooner to protest this. In my heart, I honestly never thought the outsourcing would go through. Just seems in so many ways clearly the wrong thing for everyone. This is not a job for temps. I'm so shocked and sad this is where we're left. As for the aides and union members storming out - who the heck can blame them? They give everything they have to a job with so little pay, and this is what they get in return? It is shameful. We all bear responsibility for letting this happen.

Not the solution I wanted but a decrease is a decrease. We should really evaluate the number of high salary people, for instance the number of VP’s and SAC’s at the High School. One of those salaries could have saved 6 Aids each. And by the way my reale state taxes still went up!

@Parent of 3- Have a little empathy. Many of these people have been serving our community for more than 20 years. They won't be able to purchase heath insurance. The town with be paying them $20,000 a year.

It's unfortunate that so many people have developed the attitude "my job/benefits suck, so yours should too". In the end, the situation improves for no one.

Let's not forget– Montclair has 65 municipal employees who make over $100,000.

I feel for the aides that have lost their benefits, but most of them will still be able to work through the outsourcing agency. I am now responsible for 3o% of my benefits at work this year and it's slated to go up next, so I feel the pain. This is happening all over the private sector and it's only going to get worse. This is why health care reform is so important. This is the first of the cuts, but we need to do much, much more, our taxes are still slated for a 6.7% increase. Our anger should be directed at those who spent us into this unsustainable position.

What about when this private outsourcing firm's contract expires, and it decides to increase its rate? Won't others come in to bid, and then the price goes up? I'm not familiar with how this firm works but heard that's happened when other services are outsourced.

I can most certainly "blame" them for storming out. It's infantile.

Robin ,

In general a bidding process will keep the cost down.

Right of Center, find something more constructive to do with your life than to "blame" people for feeling abandoned by a system that punishes the most vulnerable -- students and employees -- while continuing to dole out ridiculous salaries to executives. Kind of mirrors the politics in Trenton these days you presumably prefer.

Good morning all--BOE dismissal of aides is destructive and unnecessary. Most impt investment we make is the quality of adults in classrooms with our kids; more impt than tech, furniture, facilities, central ofc HQ. All this trouble to save $131? Undermining the most impt support for our home values--the schools--for $131? $131 is too small a bonus to justify so many months of town disorder. Real BOE goal must be union-busting, to cripple MEA by going after vulnerable aides and use the tax scare as an excuse. Another option was available if BOE thought fairly and creatively: A one-year surtax on ratables ABOVE the median of $650K. That spares families at lower end of home values and fairly asks those gaining most from the schools' solid rep to pay the most. My home is above the median and I would pay the surtax to keep the aides, to calm the waters, to end this union-busting by the BOE, to keep high quality schooling for our kids. Our BOE chose instead the old practice of targeting those with the least power and money, not what educators in a democracy or folks in a classy town can be proud of....thanks for your kind attention, ira shor

The MEA adandoned the aides, not the system. Why don't yhey go picket in front of the MEA offices?

The Board of ed's job educating our students within the budget. The Union seems to think the Board's job is to send them money.

I supposed we will be going after the preschoolers next? afterall, they have less of a voice than the special needs and grade level kids do. But all should be comforting as long as the underlining conservative business agenda is fulfilled which is to bankrupt the public education system to the point that it creates a greater demand for the for-profit private charter schools to come into Montclair. What if you cannot afford it? Well, I'm guessing the BOE will tell you what they told a teacher aide with a sick child who was explaning to the BOE that she will lose her health insurance as a result of the outsourcing and has a sick child, namely, "go ask the people in Bloomfield what to do."

Those who feel that $131 is pocket change can contribute to a donation fund for the aids.

I have a feeling Mr. Drescher you have a hidden agenda. This is no more, no less union busting. It is the "camel under the tent" to begin the privatization process in the public education system here in Montclair. Why weren't the non-instructional staff suggested for outsourcing? It's something to think about. Next, in the target are the teachers when their contract is up in 2012. What has to be done prior to this is for people like you and some others on this blog to try and win the "hearts and minds" of the Montclair public and pit people against the teachers, the private sector employee against the public sector one, the middle class against the poor, etc. It's an old story: "divide and conquer." But some of us will try our very best to not let this happen here.

It's not "my job/benefits suck, so yours should too". Rather, it's "we're making less money so we can afford to spend less money".

I was speaking to someone in the meeting about this. I used the usual "cuts happen in the private sector too", and the person to whom I was speaking asked "did it happen to you?" On one hand, that's a legitimate question. But on the other, it is a repeat of an attitude I've seen in Montclair before: the assumption that we're all wealthy and immune to economic troubles. I politely said "yes", but one woman when asked a similar question at a different meeting a few weeks back started ranting about her husband's job loss, the need to move to downsize their expenses while being unable to afford to move due to the housing market...

People are hurting in this town. I'm sorry about what's happening with the aides at multiple levels, but the MEA's presumption that this is just about "a night out" is offensive. We could/should be working together to solve these problems, but as long as taxpayers are viewed as an eternal and boundless source of wealth that's just not going to happen.

...Andrew

I don't know if an elected school board would have made the same decision as this appointed board just did about outsourcing the aids. No one wants to see lower property taxes than I. Unfortunately, this isn't where I would have made the cuts. Would have much rather seen larger class sizes (some teachers let go since they wouldn't take a pay or benefit cut) with better qualified aids rather than smaller class sizes with unqualified aids. It might be tough to pass NCLB now. Something to think about the next time the referendum to elect a school board comes up. Wouldn't it have been great to be able to vote on this budget?

Drescher, do you even have a kid in the public schools? if you don't.....

Anyone who pays taxes in this town (directly or via rent) has an equal stake in this discussion.

Andrew,
nobody disputes the tax issue as a serious problem and i doubt many -- with the exception of the very rich -- don't get the pain people are feeling. the issue is not so much that something has to be done; it is what should be done within the margin of pragmatism (not gutting the schools' programs and progressive reputation to the point where it further affects home values (and the cuts, indeed, will eventually hurt there) and, yes, compassion. Far as I know, there was no mandate to reduce the school tax burden as much as there was a cry to not increase it for the first time since the invention of the school bus. firing 200 plus employees who strengthened the system by serving the most vulnerable children and were a bargain to boot was a short-sighted and potentially costly maneuver....and not just financially.

and by the way, Christie has done an excellent job of getting everyone to blame everything on local municipalities and the people who provide public services to them, absolving him -- mr. private schools and big business -- from any real responsibility other than to build himself up a national candidate. he is a shameless man.

"margin of pragmatism"

Perhaps like a freeze in teacher wages and keeping the aides? That proposal was refused by the union.

Cristie is telling us to live beneath our means. My regret is that he was not elected much sooner.

how about not firing the aides this year and going after the union's sweetheart perks next year when its contract expires? but that would require not caving in to the knee jerk Cut Everything Now crowd that will destroy us to save us.

Drescher, answer the question: are you a public school parent?

i'm just looking for a little clarity here. if the answer is no, i will better understand your cold, cost-cutting mentality

can't be personal if i do not know you

for the record, Right of Center, yes, the union bears responsibility here as well. and i hope it costs it support next year when the board should have a mandate to demand givebacks. if it comes with the usual threat that we will lose our good teachers, i would say, fine, there are plenty of young ones out there looking for what would still be good jobs.

damn, i am angry today. time to go to the gym. or devour a bag of chips

I volunteer in the Montclair Public School teaching kids to read and do math. I fund raise with the PTA. I volunteered time on a weekend building things for the K. I meet with the PTA pres to better understand her needs. I belong to 2 PTA committees. I do school tours. And yes, I have a child in the school.

You?

What we are all forgetting is there has been much discussion on the salary of the Aides, that is not the problem. The problem is the salary WITH the pension and health care benefits are not affordable. The MEA is well aware of this and were not willing to negotiate. Their attitude was sort of take it or leave it. The BOE nor the citizens of this Town simply cannot afford what is probobly over $50,000.00 all inclusive for Aides. That unfortuntely is the reality here. It is simple.

Don't hold your breath when it comes to the union's next contract. I've witnessed this game before. They will get the same 3-4% increases in salary with the absolute minimal level of further contributions to their healthcare and pensions. Mark my words...There could be one teacher left in the MEA, but the union will ensure that there will be no significant give backs. Revenues be damned. They will sell it as "for the children." Whose children is that? Ours or theirs?

It's all for the kids.

"I am tired of the public getting up at Board of Education meetings and stating that the Montclair Education Association is doing nothing for the members. The public wants their taxes lowered and their classrooms to stay the same. So do I but it does not work that way."

Margaret Astorino, Interim President of the MEA

http://montclair.patch.com/articles/letter-to-the-editor-mea-members-are-team-players

Put 1 through the system from Pre-K on, another in the high school now, strong PTA family, volunteered in grammar and middle school programs, fund-raised like crazy for the high school sports teams, etc. I have my gripes with the system; often, especially at the high school, there is a little too much self-congratulation for the diverse social experience, and too little focus on administrative incompetence and waste. but i know both my kids wouldn't trade their montclair schools experience and believe they have been lucky to grow up here.

Astorino is an idiot, pardon my English

I don't think she's an idiot. She's doing her job for her membership. That doesn't mean I agree with her.

her membership? the aides were part of her membership, the most vulnerable part, and she stands by why they get shoved, 200-plus strong, into the street.

A sad state of affairs when the educators can't read the writing on the wall.

Neither could the autoworkers in Detroit.

People that claim government should "live within its means" simply don't understand government - or much in the way of business, for that matter. It's unfortunate that so many people are so easily fooled, but running a school district, town, state or nation is not as straightforward as balancing a check-book.

Consider revenue. Most people don't have the option to set their own incomes arbitrarily. A government entity does. It could, in theory, set the tax rate to 100% and have no problems paying its bills.

But such a choice has consequences. If taxes are too high, for example, business and citizens depart. Values drop. Incomes drop. Revenue eventually drops.

Set revenue too low, and the government becomes unable to provide necessary services. Business and citizens depart. Values drop. Incomes drop. Revenue eventually drops.

Imagine a highly experienced builder of log cabins. Would you want this person to build a skyscraper? Sometimes, quantitative differences in the task require qualitatively different approaches to the task.

From the perspective of government, education is an investment. It is not the same as buying a TV or experiencing a "night out". It is expected to have a return.

People like Christie aren't talking about investments. They're just talking about spending, and hoping that most voters don't know the difference.
...

...
There's a legitimate conversation to be had around how and how much we should as a society be investing in education. But people like Christie don't want to have that conversation.

Bob Russo made an interesting little speech about Christie starving education during last night's BOE meeting, but even he didn't mention "investment". That's how well Christie has done his job of setting the conversation as one simply about spending.

In a debate, choosing the terms of the conversation is the equivalent of choosing the terrain for a battle. Christie has studied Sun Tzu, and knows that the choice of terrain determines life or death.

By letting Christie and his cohort choose the terms of the conversation, we've already lost. And public education will be starved of the investment we need it to have for us to thrive.

...Andrew

Andrew,
When is $110,000,000 considered starving education?

@Kevin The simplified economic answer is: if we can spend an additional X to gain Y where X<Y then we're under-investing.

Now, this ignores opportunity costs, uncertainty and other factors. As I wrote, this is a legitimate (and interesting!) conversation to have. But it's not the conversation towards which Christie et. al. would lead.

For an overview of how increased investment in education can yield improved economic outcome, see <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/13/opinion/13kristof.html>;. This provides links to some interesting studies in this regard.

...Andrew

"People like Christie aren't talking about investments. They're just talking about spending, and hoping that most voters don't know the difference."

Problem is that when you are in hock to your eyeballs and aren't going to get a raise and can't pay your bills, (unfortunately) "investment" becomes a moot point.

"What happened to "shared sacrifice," from top to bottom?

@Andrew,
The link isn't working however I think I know which articles you reference. (If you have a moment, please send the link and I will be glad to review.)

Mr. Drescher and Mr. Simon - you are trying very hard to "pave the way" to let the outside real estate and business interests "cash in" in Montclair's over forty year efforts to build a community with an incomparable and integrated public school system.

Kevin - I see "the writing on the wall" - and it has nothing to do with the interests of Montclair taxpayers, the educators and/or the children in this town.

What I don't understand is why the BOE would simply just move to outsourcing and cutting aides before considering all of the recommendations of the working groups for cost-saving measures. What happened to all those great ideas? Why not look at equity across the board in all the schools too? Why should some schools have extra related arts teachers and staffing to fulfill their magnet theme when others have lost staff like librarians and world language teachers? Why should one school have an assistant principal when other schools of comparable size make due without one? And why on earth wouldn't they put Renaissance in Bullock School now that it is the feeder? (OK that doesn't save costs, but it does free up the Rand building for the high school). The logic just escapes me.

Mr. Simon, have you lived in town long? how long? do your children go to the public schools in Mtc.?

Francine,
I would be interested in hearing as to what you see as the writing on the wall?

Kevin - I'll defer to you- I have already stated what I see and what I believe is going on - if you want to hear again, here it is: outside real estate and charter school business interests want to "cash in" on Montclair's outstanding reputation for education. Conservative politicians in this state want to break the back of the public sector teacher unions. I don't think I can be simpler than this.

what happened to "top to bottom?" it went to the top and they are going to be darn sure that it stays there!!

Mr. Simon - do you live in Mtc.? Are you at all related to the Peter Simon who was just appointed to the NJ State BOE by Gov. Christie?

Interesting Francine. I don't see that but you may have more insight than I do. I see a union following the path of the steel workers and auto workers. Actually maybe a better comparison to the Bell system. Remember the slogan"One Bell System, it works"? It's long gone now.

@ROC If you're in financial trouble, it may be *crucial* to plan investments now. That may be the best way to get out of financial trouble. At a minimum, it gives you two variables to tweak (revenue and spending) rather than just one.

In some cases, it may turn out that investment doesn't solve the problem. But if one never investigates, one never knows. Ignorance is not knowledge.

Interestingly, this isn't too far beyond "checkbook finances". Plenty of people have lost careers for one reason or another and returned to school to find a new career. In some cases, it can be incredibly tough, meaning even more debt. But these people are smart enough to know that they need to invest their way out of the problem.

...Andrew

If we're to assume that someone wants to "break the back of the union" (which is not an unreasonable assumption given Christie's public comments on this matter), then the smart thing for the union to do is bend.

...Andrew

Great leaders make tough decisions and politics is not always glorious but some one has to do it.

@Francine I know. The budget has already been approved not only by the BOE but also the County Executive. The time for negotiation was many months ago. Now there may be some room to maneuver, but much less than there was.

I saw some of the ideas proposed by the MEA back then (the MEA has made them public), and they weren't too serious. The BOE was considered a small "pay to participate" charge, for example. The MEA proposed a huge version of the same thing.

A couple of meetings back, one of the last meetings before the BOE had to approve the budget, the MEA head didn't even attend, nor was she briefed on the meeting after the fact by someone sent in her place.

I don't know what's going on. Maybe this is just setting up a tough appearance before the negotiation of the teachers' contract. But whatever is behind it, the union isn't taking this all that seriously.

As for "cuts ...billionaires", it is important to frame each situation correctly. I am quite displeased with what Christie has done with respect to education in the state, but the Montclair BOE has no control over that. They simply work with the situation given to them. Obviously, the two situations are related, but the BOE is not to blame for what Christie is doing to New Jersey.

And to be fair, the problem didn't start with Christie. But he does seem to be going out of his way to find approaches to worsen the situation.

...Andrew

Dear Mounties, depriving special needs and grade level children of quality assistance in their classrooms is uncharacteristic of "great leaders" and "glorious polictics" but very similar to "bullying."

At 7:31 p.m., Francine Moccio said: "Do you know for a fact that the union has not tried to bend? "

""The contract is written. It's good until June 30, 2012. We have no intention whatsoever of reopening that contract."

You're right, the words "no intention whatsoever" make perfectly clear that we do NOT know for a fact that the union has not tried to bend. Please forgive our overeager assumptions.

Matt - have you ever participated in negotiations? When you negotiate everything is on the table, it is a very simple principle; the real negotiations go on behind closed doors, labor-management negotiations are never publicized - it is different than BOE meetings or public forums that should be transparent - so don't jump the gun.

@Francine "Real negotiations go on beyond closed doors, labor-management negotiations are never publicized"? Yet the MEA publicized their $131 tax increase proposal. They publicized this earlier proposal: http://www.northjersey.com/news/108860134_To_save_jobs__MEA_suggests_cost_cuts.html

Not that I think this a bad thing. This is our school educating our children and we're paying for it with our taxes. Why shouldn't this all be out in the open?

But I think you need to pay closer attention. The action may be calming down this year, but next is going to be even more interesting. We'll be worried about losing $4.5M from the state, the teachers' contract will be renegotiated, the fund balance will be depleted...

...Andrew

Andrew - I think you misunderstood what I wrote, I mean that "real" negotiations, namely, the back and forth around a negotiating table are not publicized; I was not referring to the formal proposals brought by each side. Hope I made it a little more clear, and I agree with you regarding next year, that is why we have to rise above this artificially manufactured "consent" about public/private sector divisions in our community and realize that we have already all paid our taxes, there is money, but who it goes to will be up to us to decide one way or another; or if we are politically dormant, it will automatically go to those who have power. We are being played against each other = the right paints progressives as irresponsible "tax and spend" liberals as they "tax and take" our services away. They pretend that they are helping the "poor" and "needy" to get a better education by appropriating public tax dollars in the form of vouchers so that these disadvantaged children can go to good charter schools but we know that this not what happens. The parents of poor children cannot afford the rest of the tuition so your tax dollars are not going to help the poor, they will again go to the very rich to subsidize tuition for their children who are already privileged and in private schools to the detriment of public schools where most of Montclair's children go.

Peter - I had misread your message in a different way for some reason, and reread it now and I understand what you are getting at. I apologize for misinterpreting your remarks and for what it is worth, I see your argument now as very lucid and on target.

Peter,

The concessions that the teachers received in exchange for their deferred raises (keep in mind, only the teachers who made over 100k per year participated) were hardly a concession at all. In exchange for this sacrifice, their contracts were extended one more year, most likely in hopes for an economic recovery that would have spurred a new contract with similar increases in compensation as the last. Secondly, by extending the contract another year, they lowered their medical contributions this year to 1/2% rather than what they would have had to pay, which would have been 1.5%. They saved the district 900K which ends up representing less than 1% of the overall school budget. Considering that 80% of the budget is made up of salary and benefits, their concession was nice, but not exactly worth opening the bubbly over.

I think a large issue that so many of us continue to ignore is that a small cut in the compensation to public workers does not necessarily equate to a cut in the quality of the service they provide. When my private sector compensation was cut (worked out to well over 20% of my total compensation) I did not work any less hard. Sure I could apply for employment elsewhere, but the potential of getting hired with near 10% unemployment (real unemployment is much higher of course) was and continues to be highly unlikely. The situation is the same for the public sector. There are plenty of recent graduates who would work very hard to obtain tenure.

Actually it was only administrative staff members making over 75k. It was approximately 35 employees. Not teachers!

Mounties,

Well that is interesting. Let's here it for transparency. It really is a shame that vital information needed to form an honest opinion on these issues is absolutely impossible to find. I almost threw up a little in my mouth last night when I read of some of the changes that will occur to the fire departments compensation practices. First, to reduce overtime, they are now going to actually try to move workers shifts around to cover the 16 person coverage requirement rather than simply pay overtime. How much are we paying our chiefs to not worry about their bottom line? Also, we are reducing the number of holidays (there are 14 of them) which our fire safety providers are able to get paid out on if they choose not to take these days off. I sometimes wonder if such perks are included in the studies that compare private and public sector compensation. I manage a three-shift operation in the private sector and had I offered similar perks or utilized these poor fiscal strategies with my team, I would have been fired for wasting company dollars. It truly bothers me that with so many chiefs running around making six figures, the quality of management and leadership that they offer is questionable. I suppose it's easier to be lax with your p&l when you can always raise taxes. I, unfortunately, don't have that luxury.

I am encouraged by it as well, but much more realistic about what will happen when and if the economy recovers. As a taxpayer, I am involuntarily required to pay for these services. My only wish is for our leaders to keep an eye on the ball. I don't mind paying taxes if the service is good. Kind of like my willingness to spend extra money on a well made pair of shoes, even though I could by ten pairs for the same amount at Payless. But why should such decisions to actually manage with an eye for value only occur when budgets are tight. In the private sector, the profit motive is incredibly powerful. If you don't figure out how to do more with less, then someone else will and you will end up looking for another job. There needs to be some way to ensure efficiencies in the public sector. This way, drops in tax revenues won't necessitate drastic cuts in service. I do worry that once the economy picks up, we'll be right back to where we were before. Not paying attention to where our public dollars go.

Yes Stuart, the private sector is a real model of how you can rip the taxpayer off, and not only get away with it but profit at the same time. Thanks but -- No thanks.

So what's your plan Francine? Turn our entire economy into that of Greece where nearly everyone works for the government? How well did that work out?

Stuart - My plan is to reward corporations who are responsible to the community, penalize those they do not, require them to obey the law and give back to the community that purchases their products and sustains their business. In addition, I strongly support the public school school system and public libraries which are the only hope for prospective equality here. Regarding Greece, if you are really interested, you will have to ask my husband about that - he is a Greek economist.

@Francine I don't believe that you understand "the private sector". You claim that this is a model of "rip the tapayer off", but if you extend the analogy then we taxpayers are the equivalent of private sector shareholders. Corporations limit expenses to, among other things, reward shareholders.

As for "we have already all paid our taxes": keep in mind that we're discussing the budget for next year. That's a new tax payment. The BOE has just saved the average household $131 in those taxes, and that savings will carry over into subsequent years as well. So...I'm just not clear on the point you're trying to make in that regard.

I do agree with your opinion that vouchers won't work as claimed, but the Montclair BOE hasn't proposed these (and in fact is against the introduction of the Charter HS in Montclair).

...Andrew

Andrew - I was referring mainly to Wall Street and hedge fund manager types and the debacle they have caused as well as corporations which are not responsive to their communities. I think your "analogy" regarding the your view of equating public and private sector "shareholders" is very simplistic, private sector is "for profit"; public sector is for the common good - very distinct in terms of goals.

@Francine I'm afraid you are misunderstanding the concept of "profit". You may think of it only in terms of dollars, but in fact increases in "common good" is a profit too. The concept of "profit" is nothing more than an increase in value (or a valued return). The form this increase in value takes can be far more diverse than mere "money".

This should permit you to see that public enterprises like schools can be "for profit".

Schools are especially interesting in this regard in that they provide a benefit that *can* be measured in dollars: the increase in earnings of the students passing through the system. Clearly this is only a single dimension of the value added, but it can be a very useful one.

...Andrew

right, double d - the benefits and pensions are the problem, not the tax breaks, subsidies, bonuses....the theft the top .5% have gotten away with far outdoes anything workers get...and if you haven't been paying attention for the last 30 years, it is the very lack of socialism that got us in this mess...but oooohhhh that's a bogeyman, get out your red scare red herrings and capitalism fetish talking points...you are a supply-side sycophant - go live in dreamland where reagan rides unicorns and candy trickles down on workers...

pay more, value more, allocate funds properly = better education http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/16/education/16teachers.html?_r=4&ref=education

every year montclair does a budget, we hear the same explanations for why increases are needed -- and one of them on the school and municipal sides is the rising cost of health care. even you conservative, union-bashing, corporate-ass-kissing clowns would have to acknowledge the situation is unsustainable ...and yet you demonize everything Obama has tried to do to alleviate this grave problem.....hysterical when the public option seemed like a viable option.....mad as hell at the compromise, which was pretty much what Republicans were proposing as alternatives to the Clinton plan in the early to mid 90s (or before most Republicans had transitioned into creatures beyond humanity, sort of like Jeff Goldblum in the Fly. why are these annual increases -- which outpace even our dreaded real estate taxes -- necessary? where is the money going? where is your outrage? oh, right. it's all tied up in saving $131 to punish special needs students. get a goddamn grip, will ya?

I don't consider myself a mouth breather because I dare to stand up against tax increases in a highly taxed city in the highest taxed state. I have a child who attends MHS, but I feel like it's selfish to run this town into the ground with high taxes. Dude, check out the latest census figures, African Americans are leaving Montclair because it is too expensive, same goes for middle class resident and retirees. "At any cost" thinking can no longer be applied to public education or any institution. I am certainly not saying that teachers are overpaid, they're not, but we collectively need to come up with sustainable solutions, in order to keep Montclair viable for a diverse population. BTW - never, ever, considered Reagan precious, generalizations are a form of prejudice.

Laura,
you have every right to be upset and concerned about local taxes; they are too high and they are punitive for many, if not most, in this community. my point is this: don't stand up like some crazy Tea Party zealot (not saying you are, just not to) and shout cut, cut, cut, without understanding the conditions that have made it so difficult to keep the taxes flat or growing at a less alarming rate. there are ways to methodically attack this issue; whittling away at the school system may ease the pressure temporarily but it is self-destructive to the town's reputation and home values in the long run. real estate brokers cringe at the thought of edgemont school closing, or becoming another province of plofkerville, because buyers are charmed by the vision of the pretty school on the park. those things matter. caring about special needs kids matters. christie can scream all he wants about fiscal responsibility but someone is going to have to provide services to the communities, which means someone is going to have to pay health care benefits for its employees, and if hypocrites like him aren't going to actually do something about the health care problem in this country, how will the local tax issue ever be resolved? all he is doing is abdicating the state's responsibility. it's easy to say, do less with public schools when your kids are in privates.

@Dude You're against school reform? You stand in interesting company. A few months ago, I listened to a school principal heap praise upon American schools in general despite the increasingly dismal showing of our students against many others in the world.

You may hate markets, but some of us keep before us an awareness that our children - the students of the school system today - will shortly be competing in the job market. This competition won't be merely against neighbors that have attended the same schools, but ex-students that have attended schools all over the world - including in nations that have schools that out-perform ours.

To my mind, my central job as a parent is to prepare my children for their future. As much as possible, therefore, I'll do what I can to improve the schools. I don't know if you're a parent, but - if you are - I am curious as to how you see your role as a parent with respect to your childrens' futures.

However, I don't believe that blindly throwing money is a solution. One cannot improve w/o metrics: a way to measure the current state and changes from thtat state. Nor do I wish our schools improved at the cost of the diversity we've built here - diversity which is itself of educational value. Pricing our town beyond the means of any but the wealthy would perhaps leave us with highly-scoring schools, but they'd simply have found a new way to fail.

Is that okay with you?

...Andrew

@Dude Out of curiosity, I wonder how you've come to this certainty that what schools do cannot be measured economically? You may not know how. It could even be possible that nobody knows how. But to blindly assert that it is impossible is no better than our House of Representatives asserting through force of law rather than science that global warming isn't occurring. It goes along with Indiana's House of Representatives in 1897, which declared pi=3.2 in House Bill #246.

In the meantime, studies are showing the *value* of good teaching (see several references in http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/13/opinion/13kristof.html).

But you're certain.

...Andrew

@Laura Something to keep in mind is that parents' contributions aren't always - at least immediately - welcome. I asked the BOE to let us parents do some of the data entry work necessary to get stacks of books donated over years into the database so that kids can borrow them from the school libraries. The response of Central Office was to have the lone data entry person stay longer at Hillside (the library where I volunteer) to get through the backlog.

As a Hillside parent, I'm grateful in the short term. But doesn't that mean that some other school's backlog will be permitted to grow? Whereas using parents would be throwing more resources at the problem throughout the district.

I full expect parents to be helping in this regard eventually. But it is clear that, at least for now, central office is resisting this.

...Andrew

....andrew - cont'd. - - fixing education needs to be part of a broader national progressive movement that includes raising top tax rates to responsible levels, increased wages, universal healthcare, etc. - they're all related - we can't just isolate education - let alone one town's schools - and look at it like it's 1. a business that will respond to market solutions, and 2. decoupled from america's social problems...i do in some way feel bad for people to whom i referred as "mouth-breathers" (to the delight of laura) - because they're fooled into the wrong solutions - but trust me, i'm half broke and feel your anger to - the targets should be the top .5% of wealthy people in this country and the politicians who do their bidding...NOT schools - we have to bear the (expensive) burdens for the right causes until we fix the bigger problems...and (you'll like this andrew) there are models that show that education spending (in the RIGHT ways) has a manifold economic return...those kids we want to help "compete in a global economy" (blech, i hate that wording) will be best equipped to do so by PROGRESSIVE, SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE, FULLY-FUNDED SCHOOLS w/well-paid, happy, unionized, tenured staff - that is the truth that education folks know - any theories to the contrary come from people outside education (including obama and duncan) who don't know what the hell they're talking about...unfortunately, those folks are winning the debate

@Dude So what is this "innovative, progressive way" that is "expensive to do" and which is proven to work and not driven by an ideology? Who is proposing this in Montclair?

...Andrew

Dude, you are one scary guy. I sure hope you don't have access to the kids in school here.

Dude, I do agree with you that fixing education needs to be part of a broader issue. We have to see Education is a way to prepare our kids in the new gobal economy, ie a long term investment for the growth of this nation! Our town has to be more acountable for their decision on how to spend OUR money more wisely. I don't think throwing money at the school is a solution either. I am sure there are many towns across this country with less tax money but have school that run more efficiently than ours.

efficiently, perhaps - but finding efficiencies doesn't save much money - it's worth doing, but not a huge issue - not much fat to trim unless you want to go austere and abandon the magnet system -- proper allocation, yes - now that is an issue that needs discussing - but of course i'm of the camp that says not a penny for sports until we have our academic vision in place, so i'm a bit extreme in that regard - it sucks, but education is expensive - a boatload of money doesn't guarantee anything if it isn't spent properly, but i CAN guarantee you that significant cuts will be very detrimental - ya gotta be in it to win it - you cut enough money, you get missisppi schools

WHY IS CHRISTIE SO ADAMANT ABOUT CAPPING SALARIES OF SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENTS BUT YOU NEVER HEAR A PEEP OUT OF HIM ABOUT THE OBSCENE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT THE FOOTBALL COACH AT RUTGERS MAKES? ISN'T THAT, UH, PUBLIC EDUCATION AND TAXPAYER MONEY? AND HOW WELL HAS THAT GUY DONE HIS JOB? FYI: MONTCLAIR' HIGH PAYS ITS FOOTBALL COACH/PHYS ED TEACHER $125,000.

Montclair parent,
Re: MHS Head Coach/Phys Ed teacher
Are you suggesting that we're overpaying on the Phys Ed part or the coaching part? Or are you suggesting that this is an TitleIX / equal pay issue with girls' sports? Also, unlike many other sports, the coaches have to work 6 days/week. Also, the Municipality has 65 "football coach" equivalents.
PS: why are u screaming so early in the day?

@Dude First: Since none of this is being proposed in Montclair, it doesn't fit as part of a discussion of the current budget. I agree that a separate conversation along those lines would be interesting and potentially useful, but it has no immediate impact upon the issues before us now.

Second: You might look into some consistency. On one hand, you refer to "ideologically-driven" methods as if this were part of the definition of Bad Idea. But you later claim "education w/o ideology isn't real education".

Third: I'd one son in a program w/o testing, and I'm glad to be rid of it. That's a terrific way for teachers to avoid responsibility. Happily, the 2nd grade teacher we had at Nishuane made up for most of the damage, but not all. I'm still quite angry about it.

Forth: While I can understand an excess of homework being a problem, doing without homework is just as bad. Aside from anything else, homework is a terrific way to connect a student's school work with the student's family. It blurs the boundary between family and school, which I believe encourages more family involvement in school.

Fifth: If we don't batch by age, then what metric would be used? I've discussed here the benefits of tracking, and there are plenty that think it the root of all evil. If I understand correctly, tracking is considered anti-progressive in Montclair.

I could go on, but - as I wrote above - these are interesting issues that don't pertain to the issue before us.

...Andrew

@Dude Again, out of curiosity: Why do you hate the phrase "compete in a global economy"? Also, why do you believe that education cannot be successful unless teachers are union members? Do you mean to imply that all schools w/o union staff are substandard?

...Andrew

mounties - ISS plus health/phys-ed; in fact, i think he's just health/phys-ed this semester; i'm not sure how many years he's taught BUT like i said you have to combine that salary PLUS the coaching stipend -look at the range for that part of the salary guide - the most he can make as a coach this year is $13,804; so he'd have to be in the $111-112K range just as a teacher to get to your sated $125k figure (assuming no club stipends or assistant coaching other sports or other extra service contracts), so i'm not sure how accurate your number is ...like i said, i'm on record as "not a penny for sports until our academic vision is in place" but you need to be accurate if you're going to approach the BOE about this...and i'm almost positive a certified staff member has to do ISS, and some TAs do not have full teaching certs

the football coach's salary is not breaking the budget but it is an egregious example of backward thinking.....fire $25,000-a-year aides who work with the neediest kids and overpay for a football coach to prove....what, exactly? and, please, he works 6 days a week, unlike other coaches? which coaches don't work 6 days a week -- soccer, lacrosse, basket ball, baseball? the football program was a mess under lebeida and someone -- the principal or the superintendent or the dozen developmentally stunted townies who stand up in the corner of the bleachers and complain about everyone, including the kids -- decided there was a mandate for montclair to be a football powerhouse. few people even go to the damn games, that's how important it is.

I also don't want a 125k salary sitting in the gym or ISS room with nothing to do. This part of my plan that I will present to the BOE. Reorganizing the PE department. No more rolling the balls out. Our PE is not dynamic looking at Ridgewood PE they are in the gym ¼ the of the year. Their curriculum included making periods of health, nutrition, Anatomy & lastly team sports. They are in the gym 1 making period of the year. The other 3 in a classroom learning……Ridgewood also utilizes cooperative learning where in PE they can also learn science, language arts and math. Let’s not be afraid to be different and dynamic.

aaaaand even if keeping this joke of a tax decrease is such a high priority, the boe could save the aides by making targeted cuts in multiple other areas that add up to the $$ they "need" to "save" the aides... e.g. $300K for expanding slcs in the hs... i'm a huge fan of slcs and think a model of a school where actually every student is in one isn't a bad idea - BUT more slcs while you outsource aides is like fixing s chandelier when your plumbing is busted...you cut that alone, you're about 20% of the way to 'saving" the aides...so yes, every little bit does count - as you know i'm for friggin' tripling the budget if you really wanna get education right and think cutting a budget and property taxes in this climate and with caps coming is criminally negligent, but even i will admit that you could keep it at this number and keep the little 1.4% tax decrease and still save aides - proper allocation is so key when the popular meme is that we have no money/ya gotta cut/a decrease is a decrease....

1. the USSR was not true socialism, and if you don't know that, then you have a lot of learning to do; 2. i agree that, while i'm not in a position to name lousy parents, family and poverty have a huge impact on education - education reform cannot be decoupled from overall economic reforms; 3. if you call it a rant and call justice "nice" and seemingly an unrealistic luxury, call life "unfair" and have such a pessimistic view of so-called "human nature", you are using facile fallacies, and i'd hate to live in your dystopic vision of the world (which kinda sounds like the usssr, actually) 4. if america can't say that all kids deserve the education that the most powerful and privileged among us get, then we are indeed unjust, and millions more "rants" and action are needed...

Dude, you argue like a republican -vitriolic - but woefully lacking viable solutions.

CC,
so your suggestion, based on the sad but true fact that some of our children are woefully disadvantaged, is that life is unfair -- in fact it sucks for some -- and that's just too bad. to that, pardon my french, i would say: go fuck yourself.

Montclair Parent, CC actually had some thoughts and suggestions for improving Montclair schools. CC said that "life is not fair" and that "lousy parents" are most to blame for the success or failure of their children in school. Never did CC say, go %$&* yourself. CC also said that investing in parenting was a good idea. The fact that you bastardize posts that don't support your position is quite telling of who you are as a person. We're looking for solutions here, not self righteous rants.

Laura,
Thanks for the lecture but spare me the rationalization for someone who doesn't know what the hell he is talking about and -- I am guessing -- has never stepped foot in one of our public schools. He says we should have larger class sizes and fewer teachers who are better paid -- what does that mean, exactly? let a well-paid teacher teach 50 kids? what private-school parent would embrace such a notion? he says, "Track the kids so your smart kid doesn't have to be board (or bored) to death by waiting for everyone to catch up to her." Right, just herd the "dumb ones" into a 50-student Siberia and blame everything they fail to achieve on their deadbeat parents. By the way, there is tracking in the Montclair schools by middle school and it is extensive, of course, by high school. And for the record, our really bright students are not suffering -- check out the colleges many of our seniors will be attending next year. The rhetoric coming from CC sounds compassionate at first glance but the implication is this: ultimately life is unfair and balancing a budget by punishing public schools and public workers is more justifiable than what Dude is saying (which is that our culture now leans far too much in the direction of the so-called haves and has been going that way for a generation.

It is not unreasonable to want to reverse that trend to get our budgets and economy under control, as opposed to just blaming everything on public employees and schools. So, yes, I have no patience for that double talk because it is disingenuous, a code for the rich are already taxed enough.

This is an interesting thread with many thoughtful posts, but I want to direct my comment at A. Gideon and others that feel that the private sector (capitalism) should be the model for school reform. I suggest you do some research into Edison Schools, which was the beginning of the privatization trend in public school and was an an ABYSMAL FAILURE. There is also the 21st Century Skills Movement, which was an educational packet of standards spearheaded by major corporations to create students that are prepared for the global market. This movement/effort gave me pause. What is the goal of public schools? I and many educators think the purpose of schooling is to create an informed citizenry, not create little workers that will fill the desks in the private sector. Now, students that receive a sound education will be prepared for this competitive global market that you speak of but not because of the 21st Century Skills Movement and the private companies that decide what students should learn. (As an aside, I do think that media literacy is a skill that should be taught and reinforced as well as critical thinking, both of which this 21st Century Skills promotes.) So, what constitutes a sound education? I don't think it's that much different than what constituted a sound education for you and me--fantastic reading, comprehension and writing skills. Creativity, problem solving, a sound grasp of numbers, a big picture understanding of how the natural world works. TBC.

Okay, now, your assertion that we are falling behind other nations as far as education goes also needs to be addressed. In some ways, this is simply not true. If we put our brightest up against these other nation's brightest, our students do just as well if not better. I also would like to point our right now that the countries that many in the US covet re: education have a school system that is PUBLIC. There are no movements in these countries to privatize education like there is here. The real problem in the US is that 25% of children in this country are poor. That is it! That is the real problem and there is ample research that supports the conclusion that poverty affects educational outcomes more than anything else. So, does this current obsession with school reform address this underlying problem? No, not at all. The pendulum has swung to more and more and more standardized testing and privatization and charter schools and I'm sorry, this is just not the cure. I think the pendulum will swing back but it can't be soon enough. The real problem, which is income disparity btw, is so overwhelming that it's easier to just point our collective fingers at greedy unions and incompetent teachers. And yes, throwing money at the problem will help. It's true! If children of poverty don't have good counseling services, free lunches, fantastic libraries--all of which cost money--then they will fall further behind. TBC.

I would only add to your comprehensive list Browyn -- quality education in public schools was designed with the concept of affording greater equality of opportunity to all. The pay back is in the benefits society reaps in having the best and brightest minds to address societal priorities and problems -- not only the talent of a small elite. I think the conservatives on this thread should realize that like children and parents from wealthy families, low and middle income families and their children aspire to those things associated with and reserved for the wealthy. Working class children also want to be writers, ballet dancers, poets, scientists, artists and professionals, etc. and limiting these opportunities to a small minority who can afford quality education deprives all of us of much needed talent.

Re: teachers, I think the institutions that train our teachers need to be more selective in who they accept and I think many should fine tune their programs. Secondary ed teachers should be encouraged to obtain an advanced degree in their CONTENT area. And to attract better teachers, you need to pay them more. Expect them to contribute significantly more to their health care, do 401K and PAY THEM MORE!

It's mind boggling and actually very interesting to watch this country rail against the evil teachers and their unions and turn to the private sector to be the role model for public education. Who should be the model here? Wall Street? The banking industry has recovered splendidly since the crisis and bailout but studies have shown that as the financial sector has grown, the creation of new businesses has fallen. Entrepreneurship is what will help our economy but I'm starting to get a bit tangential here. What I'm getting at, though, is that all the private sector people think their model is the answer to everything, especially education and they are quite simply, incredibly misguided and wrong.

Okay, now I'm done. Except to say something to Dude. I like a lot of what you say but Alfie Kohn takes it too far in my opinion. No homework at all? That's just crazy talk. More meaningful homework and less homework all together, yes. And no external motivation? That's silly, too. Everything in balance, my friend, everything in balance. Now, I'm done.

Thank you, Bronwyn and Francine for those compassionate remarks. And I would refer everyone here, especially the Cut, Cut, Cut crowd to Bob Herbert's final column in today's New York Times. Though they may dismiss Herbert as just another Times liberal, he alone has had the courage to bash Obama for the war-mongering direction he has gone in Afghanistan and now Libya while the quality of life continues to decline for so many at home. Here is a link: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/26/opinion/26herbert.html?hp