When Republican Scott Brown of Massachusetts defeated Democrat Martha Coakley, a presumed shoe-in for Ted Kennedy’s U.S. Senate seat, there was much glee among the GOP that the newly-minted Senator Brown would provide the filibuster-proof incremental Senate vote required to prevent President Barack Obama from passing his health care bill.
Democrats were downcast and Republicans were jubilant.
In this blog, on January 19th (check the archives) I wrote: “Logically, this defeat should shock Mr. Obama into workable bi-partisanship. But don’t bet the farm on it: He and his chief advisors can be expected to hunker down even more now, and to railroad the legislation through the Congress. Hope I’m wrong about that.”
It looks as though I may not have been far off the mark. Earlier today, President Barack Obama was on the stump in Ohio, and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi claimed to have the necessary votes required to pass the legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives this week.
Somebody is counting chickens too soon, and we won’t know who won until a few necks have been twisted and the meat is served up on the table for dinner.
As my Mom was always wont to remind me with one of her many aphorisms of advice, “There is more than one way to skin a cat.” (Cat lovers: Don’t be offended, it was an innocent time for me in my Bay State hometown way back when.)
Monday, March 15, 2010
Sunday, March 14, 2010
The Bridgewater-Raritan School District Budget Conundrum
The main thing about the Bridgewater-Raritan school budget surprise is that it is a surprise at all. It’s been clear for at least several years that the situation was building up to crisis level, but few were paying attention – perhaps few wanted to.
I don’t blame anyone in particular for this. Everyone in Bridgewater and Raritan wants the best educational system possible – I don’t doubt that. But there is a cost to everything. Sometimes that cost simply gets too high or, as in this case, it grows beyond the ability of people to pay. The national and state financial crises have focused Americans upon that fact in a way that nothing else could.
Some have attributed the fault in this school district’s budget shortfall to Governor Chris Christie, because he recently withheld $4 million anticipated by the B-R School District as part of $475M in state aid for all other districts. But placing the onus on Christie is a fool’s game – the problem is very big, pervasive, and structural. It needs a major fix.
Still, there is no doubt in my mind that, over the years, the B-R School District has been adversely shortchanged by a succession of administrations in Trenton; as well as by the Education Law Center which successfully convinced the New Jersey Supreme Court to siphon disproportionate amounts of cash to the Abbott Districts.
There is nothing we can do to change the past. But we can learn from it. Governor Christie is not the bogeyman in this game. He may be the one person that New Jersey has who can give this state the medicine that it needs.
Thanks for reading. Stay engaged.
I don’t blame anyone in particular for this. Everyone in Bridgewater and Raritan wants the best educational system possible – I don’t doubt that. But there is a cost to everything. Sometimes that cost simply gets too high or, as in this case, it grows beyond the ability of people to pay. The national and state financial crises have focused Americans upon that fact in a way that nothing else could.
Some have attributed the fault in this school district’s budget shortfall to Governor Chris Christie, because he recently withheld $4 million anticipated by the B-R School District as part of $475M in state aid for all other districts. But placing the onus on Christie is a fool’s game – the problem is very big, pervasive, and structural. It needs a major fix.
Still, there is no doubt in my mind that, over the years, the B-R School District has been adversely shortchanged by a succession of administrations in Trenton; as well as by the Education Law Center which successfully convinced the New Jersey Supreme Court to siphon disproportionate amounts of cash to the Abbott Districts.
There is nothing we can do to change the past. But we can learn from it. Governor Christie is not the bogeyman in this game. He may be the one person that New Jersey has who can give this state the medicine that it needs.
Thanks for reading. Stay engaged.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Bridgewater-Raritan School Budget Arithmetic
Even with my background, I find that one of the hardest things to do is to try to absorb all of the intricacies of a school budget presentation. I find that to be especially true when my first exposure is to observe a 19-page PowerPoint pitch which summarizes the impact of a larger 59-page detailed budget handout.
I’m not complaining. The administration has done its best to present data in a very short period of time, one which of necessity does not permit the listener to ask questions as the presenter is speaking. Although there is a 5-minute opportunity to ask questions later in the open-to-the-public portion of the meeting, that’s hardly enough. Besides, the atmosphere in this school district at the moment is very much emotionally charged.
With that as a caveat, let me do my best to summarize my understanding of where the district finds itself financially, and what the impact is on your pocketbook.
In December, 2009, the B-R BOE voted to accept a preliminary budget of $136.9 million for the school year beginning July 1, 2010. As I mentioned in one of my prior blog posts, this number rarely changes and is usually presented to the public in the following April’s school election as is. Not this year. Enter Chris Christie as our new governor. He is determined to close a state budget gap.
Christie cancelled $4M of anticipated state aid to this district. (Ouch, that hurts!): A frenetic scramble began to lower expenses. In the first round of cuts on February 23rd, the B-R BOE sliced $2M from the budget by reducing expenses and by pulling back surplus funds that had been allocated to the 2011/2012 school year’s budget: Pouf! Gone, just like that.
Tuesday evening, at the JFK School in Raritan, the board announced a second round of $2.4M in cuts, resulting in a total reduction of $4.4M so far. This drops the current proposed budget expenditures to $132.5M, a 0.51% reduction (one-half of one percent) from last year’s actual school expenditures of $133.2M.
According to Michael Schilder and Peter Starrs this is the first time that there has been an expense reduction to total B-R school expenses since at least 1992/93.
You might think that an expense budget lower than last year’s would result in a reduction to your real estate bill in Bridgewater and Raritan. But hold on. Your taxes are still going up. The total tax levy is increasing from last year’s $113.4M assessment to $117.9M, a 4% increase, the maximum permitted under New Jersey law. This means that your tax rate per $100 of assessed value will go up by 5.2% to $1.22 if you live in Bridgewater; and, by 3.3% to $1.27 if you live in Raritan.
Why? State aid for Bridgewater-Raritan is $9.9M for 2010/2011, higher even than last year’s state aid distribution of $8.7M. However, according to numbers presented last night, the B-R BOE School District was banking on $12.3M in state aid, as it built the first draft of the 2010/2011 budget. Therefore, despite expense levels close to those of last year, it would take further cuts to offset wage increases and lost state aid.
Presumably, I haven’t bored you with numbers. Remember: every dollar of reductions in this budget has in some way affected a BR-BOE employee. Thanks for reading and remain engaged.
I’m not complaining. The administration has done its best to present data in a very short period of time, one which of necessity does not permit the listener to ask questions as the presenter is speaking. Although there is a 5-minute opportunity to ask questions later in the open-to-the-public portion of the meeting, that’s hardly enough. Besides, the atmosphere in this school district at the moment is very much emotionally charged.
With that as a caveat, let me do my best to summarize my understanding of where the district finds itself financially, and what the impact is on your pocketbook.
In December, 2009, the B-R BOE voted to accept a preliminary budget of $136.9 million for the school year beginning July 1, 2010. As I mentioned in one of my prior blog posts, this number rarely changes and is usually presented to the public in the following April’s school election as is. Not this year. Enter Chris Christie as our new governor. He is determined to close a state budget gap.
Christie cancelled $4M of anticipated state aid to this district. (Ouch, that hurts!): A frenetic scramble began to lower expenses. In the first round of cuts on February 23rd, the B-R BOE sliced $2M from the budget by reducing expenses and by pulling back surplus funds that had been allocated to the 2011/2012 school year’s budget: Pouf! Gone, just like that.
Tuesday evening, at the JFK School in Raritan, the board announced a second round of $2.4M in cuts, resulting in a total reduction of $4.4M so far. This drops the current proposed budget expenditures to $132.5M, a 0.51% reduction (one-half of one percent) from last year’s actual school expenditures of $133.2M.
According to Michael Schilder and Peter Starrs this is the first time that there has been an expense reduction to total B-R school expenses since at least 1992/93.
You might think that an expense budget lower than last year’s would result in a reduction to your real estate bill in Bridgewater and Raritan. But hold on. Your taxes are still going up. The total tax levy is increasing from last year’s $113.4M assessment to $117.9M, a 4% increase, the maximum permitted under New Jersey law. This means that your tax rate per $100 of assessed value will go up by 5.2% to $1.22 if you live in Bridgewater; and, by 3.3% to $1.27 if you live in Raritan.
Why? State aid for Bridgewater-Raritan is $9.9M for 2010/2011, higher even than last year’s state aid distribution of $8.7M. However, according to numbers presented last night, the B-R BOE School District was banking on $12.3M in state aid, as it built the first draft of the 2010/2011 budget. Therefore, despite expense levels close to those of last year, it would take further cuts to offset wage increases and lost state aid.
Presumably, I haven’t bored you with numbers. Remember: every dollar of reductions in this budget has in some way affected a BR-BOE employee. Thanks for reading and remain engaged.
Monday, March 8, 2010
The Contrast in Two Local School Districts
The newspaper excerpts in this post, the first concerning the Bridgewater-Raritan Board of Education, and the second about the Franklin Township Board of Education present two very stark approaches to public access in the current school budget discussions.
The issue in question is the extent to which the public should or should not be able to sit in and listen to deliberations of board members concerning the very real problem of trimming down the school budget for the next school year. Bridgewater-Raritan chose one approach. Franklin Township chose another, very different one.
At the beginning of March, Kara Richardson reported in the Courier News that the B-R BOE’s “Finance Committee will meet in a closed session (emphasis mine) today (Tuesday) to discuss how to shave another $2.4 million from the budget.”
That committee, which consists of three board members, is chaired by Lynne Hurley and includes Pat Breslin and Anda Cytroen; with Al Smith as the alternate should one of the others not be able to make a meeting.
Bridgewater-Raritan School Superintendent Michael Schilder and Peter Starrs, School Business Administrator/Board Secretary are usually expected to participate at such committee meetings.
In contrast, the Franklin Township Board of Education chose to take a completely open approach to discussing its cuts totaling about $7 million:
Today in the Courier News print edition, Mary Ann Bourbeau reported that Shirley Pietrucha, President of the Franklin Board of Education said “The board’s finance committee has expanded to the board as a whole, so all of the board members will be present at the budget workshop. As a result, the workshop will open to the public, (emphasis mine) but public comment only will be permitted during the first 30 minutes.”
Good for you, Franklin Township.
I’ve always been a strong proponent of having as many committee meetings and full board meetings as possible open to the public. Usually, though, boards of education tend to interpret New Jersey’s Sunshine Law (the Open Public Meetings Act) in a far too restrictive manner, thereby shutting out the public from the scope and content of its deliberations.
The issue in question is the extent to which the public should or should not be able to sit in and listen to deliberations of board members concerning the very real problem of trimming down the school budget for the next school year. Bridgewater-Raritan chose one approach. Franklin Township chose another, very different one.
At the beginning of March, Kara Richardson reported in the Courier News that the B-R BOE’s “Finance Committee will meet in a closed session (emphasis mine) today (Tuesday) to discuss how to shave another $2.4 million from the budget.”
That committee, which consists of three board members, is chaired by Lynne Hurley and includes Pat Breslin and Anda Cytroen; with Al Smith as the alternate should one of the others not be able to make a meeting.
Bridgewater-Raritan School Superintendent Michael Schilder and Peter Starrs, School Business Administrator/Board Secretary are usually expected to participate at such committee meetings.
In contrast, the Franklin Township Board of Education chose to take a completely open approach to discussing its cuts totaling about $7 million:
Today in the Courier News print edition, Mary Ann Bourbeau reported that Shirley Pietrucha, President of the Franklin Board of Education said “The board’s finance committee has expanded to the board as a whole, so all of the board members will be present at the budget workshop. As a result, the workshop will open to the public, (emphasis mine) but public comment only will be permitted during the first 30 minutes.”
Good for you, Franklin Township.
I’ve always been a strong proponent of having as many committee meetings and full board meetings as possible open to the public. Usually, though, boards of education tend to interpret New Jersey’s Sunshine Law (the Open Public Meetings Act) in a far too restrictive manner, thereby shutting out the public from the scope and content of its deliberations.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Zuckerman Excoriates Obama
I must share with you, faithful readers, that I was stunned when I heard and read the criticism of Barack Obama by Mort Zuckerman, publisher of the New York Daily News, and editor-in chief of US News & World Report.
Zuckerman is one of several very wealthy and influential Americans who publicly supported the candidacy of Barack Obama and his rise to the presidency of this country. But Mr. Zuckerman has since articulated a reversal of position, primarily due to the Obama administration’s bungling of the priority and effectiveness of its policy initiatives.
I, your blogger of modest means, am one of many who did not support Mr. Obama from the very onset of his campaign.
Nevertheless, while disagreeing, I respected the view of those who advanced logical reasons for Obama’s candidacy (excluding, of course, the ones who seemed to have raised him to the status of deity – that is anything but logical).
In a radio interview yesterday, to which I tuned in on my way back home from laps at the JCC, Mr. Zuckerman verbally took the president to the woodshed, using phrases such as, “He has worn out his welcome . . . diminished his credibility. He is (now) more of a politician, less of a leader. He hasn’t focused on what is by far the greatest problem, the economy . . . . (he has spent) too much time on health care . . . (there is) too much debt in the long term." On it went.
That criticism is in character with several full length articles which Zuckerman wrote: One of them can be found at U.S. News & World Report entitled “The Incredible Deflation of Barack Obama.”
Mort Zuckerman is (as certainly am I) very dissatisfied with Obama’s performance. In his column, he writes of Obama, “His promiscuity on TV has made him seem as if he is still a candidate instead of president and commander-in-chief.” Powerful words indeed, and Zuckerman has more where those came from.
Zuckerman is one of several very wealthy and influential Americans who publicly supported the candidacy of Barack Obama and his rise to the presidency of this country. But Mr. Zuckerman has since articulated a reversal of position, primarily due to the Obama administration’s bungling of the priority and effectiveness of its policy initiatives.
I, your blogger of modest means, am one of many who did not support Mr. Obama from the very onset of his campaign.
Nevertheless, while disagreeing, I respected the view of those who advanced logical reasons for Obama’s candidacy (excluding, of course, the ones who seemed to have raised him to the status of deity – that is anything but logical).
In a radio interview yesterday, to which I tuned in on my way back home from laps at the JCC, Mr. Zuckerman verbally took the president to the woodshed, using phrases such as, “He has worn out his welcome . . . diminished his credibility. He is (now) more of a politician, less of a leader. He hasn’t focused on what is by far the greatest problem, the economy . . . . (he has spent) too much time on health care . . . (there is) too much debt in the long term." On it went.
That criticism is in character with several full length articles which Zuckerman wrote: One of them can be found at U.S. News & World Report entitled “The Incredible Deflation of Barack Obama.”
Mort Zuckerman is (as certainly am I) very dissatisfied with Obama’s performance. In his column, he writes of Obama, “His promiscuity on TV has made him seem as if he is still a candidate instead of president and commander-in-chief.” Powerful words indeed, and Zuckerman has more where those came from.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)