Economics Driving TESD’s Budget Woes . . . EIT to Be Explored

Ray Clarke attended the TESD Budget Workshop last night and provides the following commentary.  I am fascinated that the school district is bringing EIT out of hiding.   There is much misunderstanding about Earned Income Tax – we need an open and thorough airing of EIT.  I would suggest that the TESD and township partner for the discussion, have an outside expert give a presentation (like Easttown Twp did for its residents).  The presentation should be taped and then shown repeatedly on both the school district and township cable networks.  Some people hear ‘tax’ in the Earned Income and then simply shut-down. 

Whether it is the township or the school district we are talking about — we are currently facing tremendous economic hardship and all revenue sources must be explored.  Personally, I don’t want to pay more taxes and my personal household will suffer with EIT (my husband works for Unisys) however, . . .  there is also a reality to the situation.  I applaud the School Board for recognizing the need to explore Earned Income Tax and would hope that the Tredyffrin’s supervisors would be likewise motivated — it’s called exploring options.  Both the township and the school district have been faced with major deficits in their budgets that have required cuts in personnel, services, programming in an attempt to close the gap.  But to what end can we continue to make these cuts?  At what point do we weigh the quality of life that all enjoy in this community vs. increase in taxes?  I do not see how continuing to say, no new taxes  is a long-term solution to the problem.  Comments?

A quick report from the Budget workshop. Only 25 or so residents tonight, probably reflecting that there was little discussion of program changes. The occasion was used mostly to lay out a framework, stake out some board member positions, and set up the important April 12 Finance Committee meeting where the next level of expense reductions will be discussed.

However there were some really significant outcomes, worthy of full attention.

The basic parameters being positioned to balance the budget are:
– Implement the $4 million of expense reductions already discussed
– Tax to the full 2.9% cap
– Use $2 million of fund balance
– Find at least $0.7 million of 2010/11 reductions from $1.5 million of mostly non-educational strategies
Round numbers, subject to tweaking up or down.

The principal dissent came from Dr Brake, who is not thrilled with the proposed changes to the Middle School program. He seems to be the only one on the other side of this.

Dan Waters and Kevin Mahoney lost few opportunities to highlight the fact that these 2010/11 actions leave the structural problem untouched (shades of Tredyffrin’s “structural deficit”!). And they are right: 50% of the $4 million is one year only, and of course the fund balance use can’t continue for ever. The deficit for 2011/12 after the above programs would still be $7.5 million (8.2 – 0.7).

So, the administration is going to do the following:
– Deepen the study of the $2.6 million of class size, CHS period changes, etc. that – practically – can not be implemented until 2011/12. (Strategies 47-56, approximately.) If all were implemented, the deficit would be down to $4.9 million.
– Study the implementation of an income tax. Taxing to a likely 2% Act 1 property tax cap next year would still leave the district $3 million short, so this – to me – seems inescapable.

Some EIT information that’s new to me, and definitely has a major impact on the revenues for TESD: Kevin Mahoney stated that there is the potential to reclaim not only taxes paid to neighboring municipalities, but also to Philadelphia (which would apparently get reimbursed from gaming revenues).

Kevin Grewell has posted a lot of helpful EIT information here. Important features confirmed tonight appear to be that this would be implemented under Act 511, which is coordinated with the Townships. Resident tax is split between School District and the townships, non-resident money is collected by the Township (which turns out to be looking at fire department funding).

Debbie Bookstaber (from the last TSC) asked that the study include a comparison of an EIT and a PIT.

The Board took pains to emphasize that program changes must be fully vetted, particularly in the Education Committee, and subject to public input. Back to that April 12th meeting. Also, decisions will need to be made soon on the health insurance funding and bond issuance as part of the $4 million 2010/11 programs – the former in particular being highly susceptible to assumptions. I’d like to be convinced that all aspects of utilization risk have been thought through

Further School Budget Discussion . . . How will the District fund the gap?

Tonight is an important TESD Budget Workshop — 7:30 PM, auditorium at Conestoga High School.  Yesterday, I posted the agenda and materials for review.  This is our school district and our taxpayer dollars . . . how do you want your dollars spent and how do we fund the district deficit?

There have been many budget-related comments today on Community Matters — several of which were focused on EIT.  For further discussion, below is a commentary received from Ray Clarke.  In the past, Ray has offered his opinion on EIT but has updated his remarks based on TESD’s  current 2010-11 budget information.  Here are Ray’s comments — let’s use this as a starting point for discussion:

I’d like to get away from history (except as a guide to the future) and ponder what needs to be done to secure our kids’ education going forward. I think much of the evidence supports John’s advocacy of an EIT. I’ve posted it here before but here goes again, starting with updated budget numbers:

1. After one round of proposed program changes that have been vehemently opposed by many in the community, plus a 2.9% property tax increase, the school district will still be in the hole by $3 million in 2010/11, $8 million in 2011/12. (Note that it is relatively easy to squeeze expenses for just one year…..). No official word from Tredyffrin yet, but the township will need to fund contracted compensation increases next year, too.

2. A 1% EIT would raise $9 million for both Tredyffrin township and school district, of which $2.7 million is already paid by residents and $2 million would be paid by non-residents. (Easttown would also have to implement the tax.)

3. Perhaps a 2010 Tax Study Commission would ask a question like: “Would you prefer that property taxes increase 15% for all, or that the township residents not now paying a 1% EIT do so and the township gets a 1 for 1 match, worth $4.7 million a year now and increasing with inflation?” Might there be a different answer than to 2007’s question, which referenced only shifting taxes from property to income?

4. There will be in 2011 a county-wide mechanism to collect an EIT at low cost for all the other townships with this tax.

5. An EIT diversifies the tax base among all income earners and wealth holders.

6. The TSC stated that: “Had we been presented with compelling funding needs by the school board that could not be satisfied by the present system we may well have endorsed a change in the manner in which our schools are funded.”

So, given that …

 – There is no willingness by the TEEA to consider deferring accelerating teacher salary increases (6.9% in 2009/10 over 2008/9, and more contracted each year until 2011/12) and sharing health benefit cost increases

 – We need to fund $4 million a year in replacement capital and the capital fund is running dry

– There is no willingness to unlock capital tied up in unproductive properties (note: enrollment is projected to decline in the short and medium term)

 – $2 million of the $4 million proposed expense savings have only a one time impact

 …it seems to me that the need is indeed compelling. Whatever views one might have of past School Boards, it seems to me that the current one has to operate in a very different economic environment and that their actions should reflect that.

Monday, March 15 — 2010-11 School Budget Workshop

Budget Development Workshop
Monday, March 15
7:30 PM
Auditorium, Conestoga High School

Budget strategies for the 2010-11 school district have been discussed at the February and March Finance Committee meetings.  Those budget strategies are reflected in a draft budget which will be discussed in greater detail at the Budget Development Workshop tomorrow night. There will be slide presentation; click here for meeting’s agenda and a review of the slides.  There is much information included on the slides and I would encourage everyone to review.  One slide that caught my eye was the following:

Professional Staff (TEEA)
2009-2010
Teachers, Guidance, Media Specialists, Nurses

• Average years of service in T/E is 10.3 years (10.5 for 2008-09)
• 77% hold advanced degrees (74% for 2008-09)
• Average salary $74,581 ($69,788 for 2008-09)

How does the District intend to close the remaining gap in the 2010-11 budget?  We know that there will be a $2.9% tax increase and the suggested budget cuts total approximately $4 million.  There remains a $2.7 million gap . . . how will that deficit be funded?  floating a bond?  more programming cuts?

In the review of the Looking Ahead slide (pg. 26) we note that the 2011-12 school year budget indicates a deficit of $8.2 million (most of which is not attributed to PSERS increase). When the PSERS increase fully kicks-in for the 2012-13 school year, the deficit sky-rockets to $18.5 million! It continues to climb from that point — seriously, have a look at pg. 26, the numbers are staggering!

The draft budget includes budget strategies from the February and March Finance Committee meetings.  These strategies include:

• Contribution from Food/Nutrition Service Fund to General Fund
• Education Service Center Disposition
• Outsource Print Shop
• Restructure 7th and 8th Grade Program Delivery
• Eliminate Elementary FLES Program
• Restructure Middle School Special Area Classes
• Reduce Number of Regular Education Aides/Paraprofessionals
• Eliminate all Conestoga High School Classes with Fewer than 15 Students
• Eliminate Supervisor of Special Education Position
• Reduce Number of Extra Duty Responsibility Positions and Club Sport Contribution
• Reduce 2010-2011 Budget Requests to 2008-2009 Levels
• Issue Debt for Capital Expenditures/Long Lived Assets
• Explore Self-Insurance for District Medical Coverage
• Hire an E-Rate Consultant
• Reduce Information Technology Budget by 10%
• Reduce Use of IT Contracted Services by 20%

Although I previously provided the budget strategy information, I think it is important to re-post that link for your review.  These informational materials were used for the March 8 Finance Committee Meeting.  The consensus reached by the School Board and Administration was to tentatively use budget strategies #1-12, 14, 31, 39 and 40 for a savings of approximately 4$ million.   What budget strategies would you suggest to fund the remaining $2.7 million budget gap? 

Tomorrow’s Budget Workshop represents one of the few remaining opportunities to let your voice be heard in regards to the 2010-11 budget.  Whether you are a teacher, parent or taxpayer . . . do your homework by reviewing the materials and come to the meeting prepared.  Offer your opinion to the Administration and School Board; speaking up could make a difference in programming and jobs for next year.

TESD Facilities Committee Update

To update . . . I attended the Facilities Committee meeting on Friday morning.  The meeting started at 7:30 AM and lasted until 11 AM!  Dr. Pete Motel is the chairman of the Facilities Committee; school board members Karen Cruickshank and Anne Crowley serve on the committee and attended.  Also in attendance for the meeting was Superintendent Dr. Waters, Business Manager  Art McDonnell, Controller Jeff Curtis, Construction Manager Bob Plyler, and Architect Tom Daley.  School board president Betsy Fadem was in attendance for some of the meeting.  Ray Clarke, Julia Hanson and 2 other residents also attended the meeting.  The agenda included complete updates on all current and planned district construction projects.

I had never attended a Facilities Committee meeting so I was not sure what to expect . . . Pete Motel could not have been more welcoming to me, and much to my surprise, seemed to appreciate my many questions.  There was not a question that seemed to be off-limits; they could not have been kinder or more patient in their responses.  There will be minutes from the Facilities Committee and I will post them when they become available.  Here are some of the meeting highlights. Ray, feel free to add your comments from the meeting.

I asked about the use of Teamer Field, whether it was available to rent.  Teamer Field is not available and the reason is that there is an agreement with local residents to be mindful of the community with lights, noise, etc.  Aside from specific district school usage, they are respectful of the community and the immediate neighbors by not allowing non-district usage.

The 4 houses on Lancaster Avenue will be demolished in June, after school gets out.  The demolition is being coordinated in conjunction with the township sidewalk project.  It is the intention that the work will be Monday-Friday (during daytime hours) and all neighbors are to be notified of the demolition schedule.  Originally slated for additional parking, this land will be seeded and the parking lot project has now moved to the 2011/12 budget.  When pressed, Dr. Motel does not think that the parking lot will ever be constructed, period.  It does not appear that there continues to be a parking need. This will be savings of $1million+ in the 2011/12 budget.   There was a question about whether the Old Lancaster property could be sold — it’s not so much whether or not it could be sold.  Dr. Motel was absolute that the District will hold on to the property; it will not be sold.  The ESC building (next to Easttown Library) is slated for demolition in the fall.  That building has major asbestos issues and its demolition will remove a yearly maintenance cost to the district.

I asked how the land on Old Lancaster Ave and the 1st Avenue (ESC site) would be used in the immediate future. Future usage had not been decided — I made the suggestion that perhaps the space(s) could be used as a community garden or perhaps middle or high school student garden projects.  Just thought that this could create an opportunity for a partnership between the District and the community — maybe even a ‘feed the hungry’ type of garden.  Not sure where I should take those suggestions . . . maybe there is a local nonprofit that would like to get involved.

At the end of the meeting, I thanked all those in attendance at the meeting for their indulgence with my questions.  I can not stress enough — Pete Motel and all in attendence offered complete access and transparency.  I was most impressed!

 

TESD Budget Process Continues at Finance Committee Meeting on Monday, March 8, 7:30 PM

The TESD 2010-11 budget process will continue with further discussion at the Finance Committee Meeting on Monday, March 8.  Due to the expected turnout, the meeting has been moved to Conestoga High School and will begin at 7:30 PM.  Here is the Agenda for tomorrow’s meeting.  The agenda includes goals for the Finance Committee.

Finance Committee Goals:

1. Review and update the 5 year plan incorporating the new known factors (i.e. new contracts, PSERS, determine level and use of fund balance) impacting the plan.  

2.  Formulate the 2009-2010 budget identifying expense cut opportunities with an eye toward protecting the education program.  

3. Continue to explore opportunities for co-op with other local districts for non-public school transportation.    

4.  Study implications and impact of converting TE school district to a charter school district.    

In attempt to make it easier for the public to understand the process, the TESD Finance Committee has put together background materials for the March 8 Finance Committee Meeting.  The document details the proposed budget strategies and includes lists of those strategies that were reviewed and recommended as well as ideas that were reviewed and rejected.  

The School Board will adopt the 2010-11 Preliminary Budget at the May 10 TESD Meeting and the final adoption of the 2010-11 Budget occurs at the June TESD Meeting.  I’d like to applaud whichever school board member(s) responsible for making these details available online for the public.  The information is well-organized, color-coded and easy to follow.  For planning purposes, the future dates of the Finance Committee are: March 8, April 12, May 3, and June 7.  There is a Budget Workshop scheduled for March 15.    

We understand that the school district is facing a looming deficit in the 2010-11 budget. There are miles to go between now and when the preliminary budget gets approval in May.  I encourage parents, teachers and residents to attend tomorrow’s Finance Committee.  This is an opportunity to voice your support and/or concern about programs that may be headed for the cutting block.  Discussion and exchange of information can be useful to the school board as they may critical decisions for the school district.  There will be discussion on the update of the 5-year plan which includes contracts.  I know that Dr. Waters, the district superintendent, recently renewed his current contract for 5 additional years (at his current salary).  When do the district teacher contracts expire?

Views from the High School, Part I: Conestoga Students Support Their Teachers During TESD Budget Discussion

Members of Conestoga High School editorial staff weighed in on the District’s 2010-11 budget deficit in a recent issue of The Spoke. There were a couple of editorials that I found of particular interest and will post them separately.  This Op/Ed piece indicates student support for their teachers; attributing their educational successes to the faculty.  Based on past TESD budget and teacher union commentary on this site, views from our high school students present another interesting angle.  Do you think that the views of these specific students are representative of the student body?  Do you think that the teachers influence the students; in hopes that the students will help influence their parents (the taxpayers)?  Comments, anyone?

With early dismissal of school today, maybe local teachers and students can offer their opinions.  I will provide Views from the High School, Part II in a separate post.

Printed originally on p. 7 of The Spoke’s Feb. 23, 2010 edition.

Unsigned editorials represent the views of The Spoke editorial board, and not necessarily those of the administration, student body, community or advertisers.

      Defining our education

The recent economic downturn is affecting all corners of the country, causing numerous financial problems and leading to the loss of millions of dollars and jobs, both at the national and the local level.

As evidenced by the Tredyffrin/Easttown School District’s budget proposal for next year, the school board is also experiencing economic pressures as it tries to overcome a $9.25 million deficit without sacrificing the quality of the district’s educational program.

Nevertheless, to the consternation of many students and parents, the school board is making an age-old mistake. When tackling budget issues, all businesses naturally target areas with large expenditures. For schools, this leads to the reduction of some very important individuals: the teachers.

In a draft of budget reduction proposals discussed on Feb. 8, the school board’s finance committee acknowledged that “change is particularly challenging in schools where success has become the norm.” While this may be true, the board must also recognize that any success of the students is directly attributable to the high caliber teaching staff we have in the district today.

Still, several proposals in the budget draft will undoubtedly affect some of the most commendable employees in the field. Part of the proposal states that 19 teachers, including those who plan to retire or resign, will no longer be part of the school district next year. An increase in the number of instructional periods for Conestoga teachers is also recommended in the draft.

If this latter suggestion becomes a mandate, high school teachers will have to bear the brunt of extra pressure. An integral part of the school community, teachers serve as accomplished role models for students both inside and outside the classroom. Always available during school, teachers nurture individual student growth and help create learned citizens of the world—all this in a day’s work.

In fairness to the board, we in T/E are facing trying times, and difficult decisions must be made. However, teachers are invaluable resources that cannot be removed simply to alleviate economic woes. They are the most important and influential members of the school community and sacrificing them—though it may offer temporary economic relief—will only have a detrimental effect on the overall growth of students.

The suggestions made in the budget draft are not set in stone, though, and any ideas presented in the proposal can be changed. We, the Conestoga student body, need to step up. If you don’t like certain aspects of the proposal, then make your voice heard. Instead of showing your displeasure through Facebook posts, go to a school board meeting and directly address those who are involved in the decision-making process. It is, after all, your education. It’s your future.

T/E School Board Meeting, 2/22/10 . . . Meeting Highlights from Malvern Resident Ray Clarke

In addition to the Board of Supervisors Meeting last night, at the same time there was a T/E School Board Meeting at Conestoga HS.  As usual, my friend Ray Clarke kindly attended the School Board meeting and took notes.  Here are the notes . . . thank you Ray!

Selected highlights from the School Board meeting, chaired last night with a light hand by Jim Bruce:

1.  The extension of Dr Waters’ contract for a further 5 years.  The last item on the Agenda, but given ample discussion.  Strong support from the Board, led by Kevin Mahoney, and from community members.  There is no salary increase for the full term, and it was emphasized that there are no “side deals” and that effort was made to ensure that this is a “clean contract”  It will be available on the district web site soon.

This support seems to me well-deserved (taking the administration’s response ot the budget deficit elimination challenge as one recent example) and it says much about the Board’s commitment to transparency (a word much used last night) and to fiscal restraint, with its benchmark for future contracts of all types.  One downside to leadership longevity (Dr Waters will have been the Superintendent for 16 years in 2015) is that you might miss the fresh ideas that an outsider can bring.  That perspective can come in part from the Board, and it’s encouraging that we continue to see probing questions from Rich Brake. 

2.  Bill DeHaven reminded us of the times he climbed the fence at Teamer Field to play football, but more significantly spoke of the Citizen Soldier project that has compiled into a book the names of all T/E residents who served in all the nation’s conflicts up to World War II.  The book, available at the CHS and township libraries, is dedicated to its prime mover and my good friend and open space visionary, the late Neil McAloon.

3.  Nothing new on the budget, except that – per the Finance Committee discussion – the strategies are being regrouped to link related items, and this list will be available on the web site likely late this week.  I had hoped we might hear about substantive discussions of the TEEA offers alluded to at the Finance Committee meeting, but it seems there is nothing to report.  Kevin Mahoney emphasized that the Board is taking a 3-5 year perspective on the finances – clearly critical when one element of the near term solution is to use the fund balance, which can only go so far.  The Board has recently met with local legislators about the PSERS problem

4.  Three items related to our district going digital:  a) On line course options will be increased for 2010/11 to 25 courses not currently offered at CHS; b) acknowledgment of the role of blogs like Community Matters as well as all community input (a long list of correspondence to the Board); and c) next year CHS will submit its part of the college application materials electronically – should be a big time-saver, quality improvement and stress-reducer!

Teacher Layoffs: Should Seniority Rule?

A Community Matters reader sent in a link to a recent Wall Street Journal article, Teacher Seniority Rules Challenged.  (The full article is below).  I wonder if the majority of educators favor or disfavor seniority-based layoff protections. I wonder how the majority of citizens feel as well. If I had to guess, I’d venture that most citizens are against teacher seniority serving as the primary determinant of job protection. I’m not sure about public school educators. What do you think?

I know that the challenging of teacher layoffs based on seniority is not a favorable teacher union approach.  But if school administration did not use seniority to make the necessary budget cuts, what credible evaluation system could be properly used? Isn’t the major issue with “merit” based decisions on either pay or layoffs and even staffing is who is deciding?  In the case of the TESD 2010-11 budget, it is understood that the District will not use teacher layoffs as a means to correct the budgetary gap . However, there will be programming cuts which will cause the furlough of teachers.  Within the programming cuts, is it a correction assumption that teacher seniority will determine which teachers stay (or go) correct?  This is an interesting topic; I’d like to hear from teachers, parents, administrators, residents.  But do read the following article, think you will find it of interest:

Teacher Seniority Rules Challenge

With Tens of  Thousands of Layoffs Looming, Government Officials and Parents Want to Change the ‘Last in, First out’ System

By Barbara Martinez 

Teacher seniority rules are meeting resistance from government officials and parents as a wave of layoffs is hitting public schools and driving newer teachers out of classrooms.

In a majority of the country’s school districts, teacher layoffs are handled on a “last in, first out” basis. Critics of seniority rules worry that many effective and talented teachers who have been hired in recent years will lose their jobs.

Unions say that seniority rules are the only objective way to carry out layoffs, and that they protect teachers from the whims and bias of managers, who might fire effective teachers they don’t like.

This year, because of cuts in state aid to New York City, the city could be facing a loss of about 8,500 teacher jobs out of a total of 80,000. The last time the nation’s largest school system laid off a teacher was 1976.If New York City is forced to lay off some of the more than 30,000 new teachers it has hired in the past five years, it is “going to be catastrophic,” said Joel Klein, chancellor of the city’s school system. “We’re going to be losing a lot of great new teachers that we hired” in recent years, the chancellor said.

Mr. Klein added that another problem with “last in, first out” was that because newer teachers earn less than veterans, more teachers will end up losing their jobs.

First-grader Victoria Bernade copies a sentence as teacher Lori Peck goes over sentence structure at Grace L. Patterson Elementary school in Vallejo, Calif., on Feb. 12.

What Mr. Klein “is really trying to say is, ‘I would like to churn the work force by keeping cheaper teachers on the payroll,’ ” said Michael Mulgrew, president of the United Federation of Teachers, the teachers union in New York. “If we can do our work in a constructive and collaborative way, we can avoid the layoffs. That’s where we should be focusing our energy.” Mr. Klein has requested a number of times that the state legislature ban the sole use of seniority in layoff decisions. California’s governor made the same request last month. While politicians in these states are unlikely to enact such bans, the movement is gaining traction elsewhere.

Last year, Arizona passed a ban, and schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee in Washington, D.C., in addition to letting go some new teachers, laid off some who would otherwise have been protected by union seniority rules. Teachers unions in Arizona and Washington sued over the moves, but they lost their court challenges.

“It is a pent-up issue that has been pushed off and pushed off, and now we have to deal with it,” said Tim Daly, president of the New Teacher Project, a nonprofit that helps recruit teachers in mostly urban school districts and opposes seniority-based layoffs.

“It’s not just that you will lose teachers that you invested a lot in,” he said, “these cuts are being made in a quality-blind way.” Mr. Daly said some school districts were forced to lay off teacher-of-the-year nominees last year.

About 60,000 school workers were laid off across the country last year, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, double the number laid off in 2008 and three times the level in 2007. The total number of public education jobs fell in 2009 for the first time since 1984, according to the BLS. Declining state revenues, which result from the country’s economic turmoil and high unemployment, only increase the probability of more large-scale teacher layoffs ahead, said Marguerite Roza, a professor at the University of Washington’s College of Education.

“We would expect that education jobs will be hit harder in 2010,” Ms. Roza said. “Given last year’s layoff trends, we should expect even more layoffs this year.”

Parents in some school districts are beginning to organize over the issue. In Seattle last year, parents started asking, “Why is my great teacher being laid off while this teacher, who everybody knows is not a good teacher, doesn’t get laid off?” said Venus Velazquez, a parent who said she is one of dozens attempting to remove the seniority protection from the next teacher contract. “We don’t want to go back to the ’50s or ’60s, when people were laid off because of the color of their skin or because a woman was pregnant,” said Glenn Bafia, executive director of the Seattle Education Association, a teachers union.

Mr. Bafia said poor-performing Seattle teachers need to be encouraged to leave teaching through an administrative process. “That’s the principal’s responsibility. If the principal refuses to do their job, that’s an issue,” he said. When it comes to layoffs, “seniority is the only objective criteria there is out there.”

For the unions, the pushback is in some cases coming from people who consider themselves liberal and pro-union. “I consider myself a union supporter, but I don’t support the seniority system,” said Lynnell Mickelsen of Minneapolis, who is organizing a community group to oppose the main use of seniority in layoffs. In a shrinking school system, which has resulted in the loss of 1,300 teacher jobs since 2001, “terrific teachers have been laid off, and [some of those remaining] are depressingly, relentlessly mediocre,” Ms. Mickelsen said. “People are so frustrated about this.”

Lynn Nordgren, president of the Minneapolis teachers union, said the union and the system already work together to remove ineffective teachers, pushing out between 400 and 500 teachers in the past 10 years. With poorly performing teachers already being addressed, “seniority gives us a fair way of saying how do we lay people off in a way that’s equitable,” she explained.

 Ms. Mickelsen isn’t buying it: “When it comes to key contract clauses like seniority, the needs of teachers and kids are not the same.”

T/E School Board Meeting Tomorrow – Agenda Posted

In addition to the Board of Supervisors Meeting on Monday evening, there is a Tredyffrin Easttown School Board Meeting; 7:30 PM at Conestoga HS.  Here is the agenda for TESD meeting.

Included in the agenda materials is the Treasurer’s Report as of November 30, 2009 which was interesting to review, particularly in light of the 2010-11 budget discussions.  The last section of the agenda materials included ‘Recommended Action’ that the following policies and regulations be adopted by the School Board Directors. I found some of these policy updates interesting to read. In some cases it had been several years since revisions were required (example, as electronic device usage increases, updated school policy is required)  I appreciate that the school board gave us the old version and shows up the redlined updated revision. 

– Policy 1310: Visitors to School District Buildings and Classrooms
– Policy 1310: Classroom Visits by Community Members, REPEAL
– Policy 5228: Awarding of Diplomas to Eligible Veterans
– Policy 5400: Students’ Freedom of Expression
– Policy 5414: Electronic Devises: Use by Students
– Policy 5420: Unlawful Harassment by and of Students
– Policy 5422: Student Accidents and Injuries – Treatment and Reporting
– Policy 9310: Regular Monthly Meetings
– Policy 9312: Parliamentary Procedure
– Regulation 9331: Review of School Board Policies 

We should review where we are with the TESD 2010-11 budget gap.  The projected gap between revenues and expenditures is estimated at $9.2 million.  The gap was a result of loss of revenues and increase of expenditures.  At the January 25, 2010 regular school board meeting, school board members voted that any property tax increase would be at or below 2.9%, the statewide index.  To close the budget gap, there was proposed strategies presented at the February 8 Finance Committee meeting.  The School Board and administration continue to evaluate each proposed budget strategy.  The following 1-11 strategies were reviewed in detail at the February 8 meeting:

– Restructure the 7^th and 8^th grade program delivery
– Eliminate the Foreign Language in the Elementary School (FLES)
– Contribution from food/nutrition service fund to general fund
– Restructure middle school special area classes
– Reduce number of regular education aides/paraprofessionals
– Eliminate all CHS classes with fewer than 15 students
– Eliminate Supervisor of Special Education position
– Education Services Center disposition
– Outsource print shop
– Reduce number of Extra Duty Responsibility positions and club sports contribution
– Reduce 2010-11 budget requests to 2008-09 levels

At the March 8 Finance Committee meeting (7:30 PM Conestoga HS) and March 15 Budget Workshop meeting there will be continued discussions on the remaining strategies to reduce the 2010-11 budget gap.  The School Board has not made any final decisions regarding the implementation of the strategies.  It is my understanding that the School Board and administration will continue to work towards balancing the budget between now and the June 14, 2010 School Board Meeting.

One of the Community Matters readers posted an article from the New York Times a couple of days ago about teacher seniority and working to change the system for teacher layoffs; I’ll work to get that article up for discussion shortly.

FBI Investigating Lower Merion School District’s Use of Laptop Webcams to Allegedly Spy on Students and Their Families!

Did you hear about the lawsuit filed against Lower Merion School District? In the case of Blake J. Robbins v. Lower Merion School District, the suit claims that laptops were issued to Harriton High School students with webcams that can be covertly activated by the schools’ administrators. The suit claims that the administrators were able to use this webcam feature to spy on students and even their families.

The issue came to light when the Robbin’s child was disciplined for “improper behavior in his home” and Harriton High School Vice Principal used a photo taken by the webcam as evidence. The suit is a class action, brought on behalf of all students issued with these specific webcam equipped laptops.

The Lower Merion School District officials gave all their 1,800 high-schoolers laptop computers to guarantee they would have access to school-based resources. The lawsuit brought by the student and his parents, Michael and Holly Robbins, claims Lindy Matsko, an assistant principal at Harriton High School, spied on the student at home by remotely activating the webcam on his laptop.

The suit alleges that Matsko informed the boy that he was engaged in inappropriate behavior in his home, and cited as evidence a photograph from the webcam embedded in his laptop. The student told his parents about the incident, the suit claims, and the boy’s father confronted Matsko. The suit claims Matsko acknowledged the school could start the webcam and take pictures whenever it wanted to. The lawsuit charges that, “Many of the images captured and intercepted may consist of images of minors and their parents or friends in compromising or embarrassing positions, including, but not limited to, in various stages of dress or undress.”

If these allegations are true, how creepy is this for the students and their families? Think about it . . . I’m sure that a number of these kids have their laptops in their bedrooms where they may be getting dressed, or how about if the laptop is located in an area where there are private discussions with the students families. It is one thing if a school district has the ability to monitor emails or mark inappropriate website visits but to use these computers as ‘bugs’ is horrifying.

Schools all over this country are worried about kids divulging too much personal information online, concerned about pedophiles, embarrassing uploads of photos, etc. that may affect college acceptances or future job opportunities. Kids are taught by parents and school administrators to threat their personal details as though they were precious. And now we have this revelation in nearby Lower Merion School District?

It is my understanding that Lower Merion School District has admitted that the laptops were shipped with software for covertly activating their webcams, but is denying wrongdoing. Late today, the Associated Press is reporting that the FBI is now involved in the case. The FBI is investigating the Lower Merion School District over allegations that a high school in the school district spied on students through their laptop webcams. The official, speaking to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity, says the FBI will explore whether Lower Merion School District officials broke any federal wiretap or computer-intrusion laws.

Lower Merion officials say they remotely activated webcams 42 times to find missing student laptops in the past 14 months, but never did so to spy on students, as the Blake J. Robbins v. Lower Merion School District lawsuit claims.

What is Tredyffrin Easttown School District’s policy on computer usage outside of school hours?  Does the school district have a similar laptop program to Lower Merion?  I don’t think our school district assigns laptops to individual students, correct?  Are any of the district’s laptops permitted to leave the schools?

After 86 Comments re $600K Offer to TE School Board, Community Matters is Starting a New Thread

The following post received 86 comments and I was just asked  to start a new post, same topic.  I guess it was becoming difficult to page through the comments.  So here you go.  We can call this one Part 2.  If you click on the title below it is hyperlinked and will take you to the original post and the 86 comments.  But all new comments should be made here and we can close out the other thread.

Question . . . Has our Local Teachers Union Made a ‘No Strings Attached’ Offer of $600K to the TE School Board?

New thread starting about the TESD budget, Teacher Union offer of $600K, Finance Meeting, program cuts, possible teacher layoffs.  Teachers, residents, administrators, union leaders . . . let’s keep the good commentary going.

Governor Rendell’s Proposed Budget Includes $354 Million in Increased School Funding

Governor Ed Rendell released his 2010-11 budget proposal yesterday. His budget proposes over $11 billion of taxpayer funding for educational services, which includes an increase of $354 million for school funding. Several reasons were cited for the funding increase including advances in achievement scores. In Governor Rendell’s proposed budget, education support services would receive $31.8 million in funding; basic education spending would receive $9.5 billion, for students in pre-kindergarten through 12th grade; and $1.8 billion for higher education with nearly $424 million of that allotted for financial assistance for students. State-aided private schools – including Drexel University and the University of the Arts in Philadelphia – would lose all their funding under the proposal. The exception is the University of Pennsylvania’s veterinary school.

Pennsylvania Secretary of Education Gerald Zahorchak offered that Pennsylvania was leading the nation in achievement improvements. Mr. Zaharchak emphasized a focus on increasing enrollment at a pre-kindergarten level. He feels that that there is an adequacy gap between where students should be performing and where they are currently performing which needs to be corrected. Mr. Zaharchak is suggesting that the gap would need to be filled by taxpayer funded state-subsidies. Accordingly, more than 300 Pennsylvania school districts would require more than $2,000 of taxpayer funding per student from the state to close this gap.

The pressures faced by school districts will result in local property tax hikes unless the state continues its commitment to close the adequacy gap, the Governor said. “On average, it would take a 40-percent increase in local property taxes to generate the same investment as the state will contribute over the course of our multi-year funding formula,” the Governor said. “When the state pays its fair share, school districts can keep property tax increases to a bare minimum.”

Here is Pennsylvania Department of Education 2010-11 Budget if you would like to read the details.

In case you are interested, here is Governor Rendell’s Executive Budget 2010-11 if you would like to see the entire proposed budget.

Will Governor Rendell’s proposed state budget have an impact on TESD’s 2010-11 budget?  Comments Anyone?

TESD Finance Committee Meeting . . . reporting by Malvern Resident Ray Clarke

As we know, it is impossible to be 2 places at once . . . and last night was one of those nights.  I attended the Board of Supervisors meeting but I knew that I had coverage at the Finance Committee meeting with my friend Ray Clarke.  The Clarke family was busy last night, Ray at the Finance meeting and his wife Carol attended the Board of Supervisors meeting!  I thank Ray for providing his notes from the meeting and would encourage other readers to add their comments.

The TESD Finance Committee played to a packed house in the CHS auditorium last night.  We got through about 15 of the potential deficit-closing strategies, with the next session slated for March 8th, where the plan is to complete a pass through all of them.  My take-aways:

– There was great passion from parents and students who had benefited from, or who would be impacted by, the programs slated for change.  Hopefully, understanding the concerns will be helpful in finalizing the new program designs.  Although the majority spoke against change, particularly in the Middle School programs, there were some with experience (for example, of the proposed Advisory period) that spoke to the benefits experienced in neighboring districts.

– The Board expressed confidence in the Administration and, based on their performance, that seems to be well placed.  In particular I thought that Rich Gusick, Director of Curriculum and much else, was knowledgeable and made reasonable arguments.

– The Administration believes that the programs in the first “reference code” (those for the most part previously discussed, although you would not have thought so!) will result in the reduction of 19.3 FTEs, and that reduction could likely be met through retirements (7 known so far) and resignations rather than lay-offs – but this will depend on certifications needed and available.

– The drama came with a prepared speech from TEEA President Ciamacca.  She was very concerned that the possible increase in High School teaching periods from 5 to 6 would leave little time for the many functions performed outside the classroom.  (Note that we were progressing systematically through the strategies from #1 on, and had not reached that – #47 – yet).  She did, though, state that the TEEA wanted to be part of the solution and outlined an offer to work the last three days of 2010/11 for no pay (claimed impact $600,000) and also an early retirement offer (claimed impact $1,000,000).  She handed a letter to Board President Fadem, which I took to contain those offers (and from comments made, I was led to believe that this was the first official communication from the TEEA, and that written offers had been requested before).  Finance Chair Mahoney responded for the Board, welcoming the TEEA as a stakeholder, but sternly chastising the “grandstanding and unfair” tactic of presenting an offer for the TV audience rather than “sitting down across the table as in the past”. 

The devil is always in the details.  Is there in fact a mechanism for forgoing 3 days of pay?  For 2010/11, or for 2011/12 also?  How much would the district have to pay to save the $1 million from early retirement and thus, what’s the present value of that proposal?  Things that do need to be analyzed in a dispassionate way.  There’s clearly a communication problem, and from my perspective, since the TEEA is the only beneficiary of the situation here (compare the salary matrix for 2011/12!), they need to step up to the bigger role that I have advocated to them since last year.  If the objective is to increase compensation to a certain parity level, perhaps it might just be OK to get there in 5 years rather than 2?

– The 15 or so strategies reviewed so far have very real impacts – fewer middle school specials, fewer aides, fewer low enrollment CHS classes, reduced admin position, reduced contribution to clubs, etc. – but it seemed to me that for the most part the impacted areas are spread around, and plans are in place to mitigate the adverse effects.  (But still only the savings, not the costs, of closing the print shop are listed!).

A big issue for me is that many of the big strategies impact only next year: the $1.2 million supply/materials cost deferral, the $0.3 million food service fund transfer (but maybe make food service a profit center?), the $125,000 mothballing of the ESC (why one time?), the $0.3 million from issuing debt for capital items (next month’s meeting will start with an explanation of that (accounting wrinkle?)), and so on.  So the expenses will pop right back up, on top of the next round of contracted compensation increases, and we’ll be right back in the CHS auditorium, but with fewer options. One commentator mentioned a likely 2% Act 1 cap next year.  (And remember, the country is a whisker away from a foreclosure crisis, and school taxes are over two months’ typical mortgage payments…..).  The one time programs account for $2.6 million of the $8.3 million on the table (excluding programs not recommended).

The event seemed to me a good way to get the community engaged and to indicate the amount of thought behind the ideas (although there can always be more!).  We heard, too, about the 800 member Facebook group for students engaged in the dialog.  There could be a lot to learn from, and demonstrate to, that constituency.

Question . . . Has our Local Teachers Union Made a ‘No Strings Attached’ Offer of $600K to the TE School Board?

I am getting bits and pieces about a ‘no strings attached’ offer made by our local teacher’s union to the TE School Board.  It is rumored that the Union offered the School Board $600K (or an equivalent of $1200/teacher).  My understanding is that the proposed good will offer was to show an understanding and appreciation for the TESD budget deficit and an offer to help. Has this offer been substantiated?  It is my understanding that the offer was not accepted . . . any truth to that? What about the district suggestion that the Union open their contract for re-negotiations instead of the $600K offer?

I do not expect school district representatives to comment on the offer.  Are there teachers and/or residents that have factual information that could be offered. Even if you have commented on an older post, I would ask that you re-post your comments here so that we can get them on the front page of Community Matters.  Let’s see if we can get the details quantified. 

It would appear on the surface that this is a very generous offer . . . most of these teachers do not live in the TE school district and are offering to help our district’s  budget deficit.  If this is indeed a ‘no strings attached’ offer can we expect to learn the details of the offer at Monday night’s TESD Finance meeting?

Draft 2010-11 Budget Strategies Released by TESD

As was discussed at today’s TESD Public Information meeting, the district has released a draft 2010-11 budget strategies.  We thank the district for releasing this background information in advance of February 8 Finance Meeting.  These proposed strategies are to aid in the budget gap and I suggest a review prior to next week’s meeting.  Your comments/input on the suggested strategies are encouraged but understand that this a ‘draft’ and should be viewed as a starting point (rather than the end result).

I just received an email from someone who was unable to open the pdf in this post.  I have checked it and it is working on my end.  The document is 50+ pages, so it may take a couple of minutes to upload.  You can also find this document on the school district’s website, http://www.tesd.k12.pa.us/