Shame on You, Shame on Us

Every resident of Matawan-Aberdeen should be disgusted and disgraced by the below story.

What kind of staff does the district employ that nobody is willing to loan $2 to a five-year old boy in our schools so that he can eat lunch? Shame, Shame, Shame!

The following - as reported by ABC Eyewitness News

MATAWAN, N.J. (WABC) -- Parents in New Jersey are outraged after learning their autistic son was forced to go hungry all day at school.

That's because the school denied the boy his lunch over a billing issue.

So the 5-year-old just sat there at Cliffwood Elementary in Matawan and watched others eat.

It was John Robert Caravella's fourth day of kindergarten in a new school.

But no one, not the principal, not the teachers, and not the aides, helped this 5-year-old autistic child get his lunch Tuesday. So he sat in the cafeteria and ate nothing.

"Really, for $2, you couldn't feed the kid?" said Silvia Caravella, John Robert's mother.

John Robert left for school at 8:45 a.m. and didn't get home until 4 p.m. And all that time, all he ate was a bag of mini muffins his parents packed him for a snack.

John Robert is a non-verbal autistic child. I pray someone in the administration find someone for that school who cares enough to notice a 5-year old child doesn't have lunch and does something about it. >>> Read more!

Upcoming School Board Elections

I write this piece with some reluctance.  If Aberdeen residents won’t protect themselves from their elected leadership, why should I?

Last February, two-thirds of the Matawan-Aberdeen School Board voted to strip residents of their right to vote on the school budget and nobody showed up to protest.

Last July, the school board voted to approve a Memorandum of Agreement with the teacher's union regarding the terms of a new teachers contract and nobody asked to see the memorandum. No residents, no reporters, nobody. Nobody but me, that is, and I no longer live in Aberdeen. At first glance, it's a good deal for the district with 7.5% increases over a four-year period and the lion's share of increases going to new teachers. I'll comment further once I see the signed contract.

Nor did anyone complain when the school board voted to increase spending by $1.64 million during a sustained period of high unemployment. Or when the school business administrator comment he could have cut $200,000 from the budget but preferred to spend that money rather than allow the residents to keep it.

While on the school board, I worked hard to implement new goals, such as how to objectively measure progress. Now that I'm gone, so are those measurements. No longer do we report where our graduates go or how likely they are to complete any post-high school education. No longer do we compare ourselves to high-achieving districts.

Still, I have many dear friends in Aberdeen and I continue to hope someone will step forward to lead.

Regarding the upcoming school elections, it's sometimes hard to determine who will better serve the community but it's relatively easy to look at a candidate's experience and determine if he was part of the solution or part of the problem.

This year, Aberdeen is fortunate to have more candidates than available seats -
>>> Read more!

Madness Run Amok

I know, like, and respect many of the school board members but I will no longer try to understand them. A year ago, I wrote, “the scary thing is the school board will likely allow [Healy] to take the lead.” I was correct but I never imagined it would get this bad.

Recently, the school board voted to strip the citizens of their right to vote on the school budget. They claimed to do this because the citizens were too stupid, ignorant, or partisan to simply rubberstamp the school board’s rubberstamp of the administration’s proposed budgets.

What were those proposed budgets that they couldn’t risk putting before the good people of Matawan-Aberdeen? In two years, during a recession and housing crisis, they’ve raised spending by 6.4%. All that extra money coming from the state could’ve gone to tax relief but tax relief will never be on the agenda. Taxes will keep going up forever.
>>> Read more!

Shut Up and Pay

What do you do when the citizenry keeps voting down tax increases? Take away their right to vote.

That’s exactly what the Matawan-Aberdeen Regional School Board did this month when it voted to move school elections to November.

From now on, so long as school tax increases are kept under 2%, residents will no longer have the right to vote on the budget. Doesn’t take a genius to guess how much the school administration plans to raise taxes each year. No doubt the teachers union will be licking their chops. The district bloat can rest easy as well since the Sword of Damocles is no longer hanging over their heads to cut the fat.

According to School Board President Kenny, “When a very, very fiscally responsible and conservative budget is not passed in an election by a small group of people who may be entrenched or have other interests, we may not be able to serve the very students we are charged to serve.” I guess he’s already forgotten the Barza years.

Or maybe the board thinks a 2% annual increase is reasonable. For the average homeowner, that’ll be about a hundred-dollar increase each year on top of municipal, county, state, federal, plus a host of increases from government fees and regulations.

Over a ten-year period, that’s a $5,500 take from the average homeowner.

>>> Read more!

Committed to Providing a Safe and Supportive Environment

Recent news reports of violence among the high school students are extremely troubling. Multiple arrests for aggravated assault against police officers. Two fifteen-year-olds brawled on school grounds resulting in a broken jaw as their schoolmates watched. One student was caught with a knife.

This was on the tail of a separate incident involving school athletes that’s gone unreported but resulted in the suspension of five high school football players. And these follow other reports of an uptick in school violence and bullying.

The school’s mission statement declares “We are committed to . . . providing a safe and supportive environment where educators inspire, empower, and encourage students to excel.”
>>> Read more!

A Lesson in Bureacratese

Let’s take the following hypothetical from a board member’s perspective.

The state awards your school district nearly $600,000, no strings attached. Your superintendent insists the school district spend the money “for the children”. Yet, you’re reluctant. Your district is being ravaged by high unemployment and a wave of foreclosures. Your district is among the highest taxed in the county and, even discounting the windfall, the district has already increased spending by 4%.

The superintendent sees your reluctance and quickly outlines a plan for spending the money. Over a $100,000 will be spent on books. For the children. Who can be opposed to books? And, to make it more palatable, he insists it’s a can’t fail, “research-based” program to create classroom libraries.

You’re wondering why, if it’s such a sure thing, isn’t everybody doing it? And how does sticking books in a room really improve language arts scores? And why isn’t this concept, that’s “research-based”, listed in the federal Department of Education’s What Works Clearinghouse?
>>> Read more!

And Then There Were None

Pat Demarest’s resignation from the Matawan Aberdeen School Board marks the end of an era. On the school board, it’s the end of Barza, a political machine that corrupted the school district. Come January, the entire town council will be a group of rookies.

Will the new era mark an improvement? I believe we’re already seeing the changes taking effect despite their glacial pace. From improved budgets to greater transparency to more responsive service, the town is slowly getting better. In the school district, we’ve seen smaller tax increases and improved programs. I just hope they quicken the pace.

Whatever reasons Demarest had for returning to the board, things plainly didn’t pan out as she had planned.

In January of last year, during her run for the school board, she submitted an affidavit on Wayne Spell’s behalf, stating “I believe it is reasonable to interpret Board Policy 4117.51 as being applicable to . . . increment withholdings related to school administrators.”

(Mr. Spell’s salary increment withholding resulted from his failure to properly administer the TERRA NOVA exams, which resulted in the entire district failing the exam.)

Her stand against the school district was so egregious, she wasn’t allowed to participate in or be privy to any board deliberations regarding the matter.

On April 21, 2011, the Commissioner of Education rejected Demarest’s position and stated, “the Commissioner found that several due process safeguards articulated in Policy 4117.51 were provided to petitioner, notwithstanding that they appeared on their face to be intended for the protection of teachers.”

(The sad thing is that the board was prepared to settle with Mr. Spells and reinstate his increment. However, Mr. Spells never offered an apology to the board and we had a slam dunk case to prove we were taking a hard line with the unions.)

Ms. Demarest also lost her two allies on the board, Rubino and Ruprecht, when they both chose to not seek reelection.

To add insult to injury, Ms. Demarest was seated directly across from Ken Aitken, one of her least favorite people. (That’s an old trick. Majority, in coordination with the administration, determines the initial seating order. All board members are free to move their seats but nobody ever does.)

Following Aitken’s election, Demarest stopped attending most of the board meetings. She held on for the opportunity to present her son a diploma at graduation.

Finally, it’s become easy, even vogue, to resign from the school board in recent years; so many of us have done it.

As for the challenges that lie ahead, it’s nice to know that, despite their differences, everybody on the school board is fighting, first and foremost, for the children and the community. >>> Read more!

Staff is Policy

"Elections Shouldn't Matter as Much as They Do" – Nancy Pelosi

The real question is why don’t elections matter more. Since 2009, not a single Aberdeen representative on the town council or school board has sought reelection upon completing a full term. (On the school board, Demarest took a break and then ran again when an uncontested seat opened.) This January, Aberdeen will have its freshest crop of elected representatives in a decade. And, yet, the expectation for change is rather subdued.

In Washington, an old axiom declares, “Staff is policy”. A corollary is you can’t change policy without changing staff.

To give a couple examples, in 2007 the school administration maintained the budget had already been cut to the bone and that additional cuts would undermine critical areas. Then O’Malley was hired and the district miraculously discovered millions of dollars that could be cut without impacting the district’s core mission.

We were told controlling expenses for legal and special education was beyond our control. Then we hired a new attorney and new director of special services. Legal expenses dropped by over half and out-districting has dropped by ten percent.

Again and again, policy is driven by staff.

For years, it’s been frustrating to file OPRA requests to obtain copies of town ordinances. Regulations were posted but not ordinances. There was no legitimate reason to not post the ordinances (just as there’s no legitimate reason to not post minutes from the planning and zoning boards) but such was the township’s practice.

Recently, Ken Aitken requested the ordinances be posted. There was no objection from the interim town manager, the town council approved, and presto, they’re now posted. Having said that, some of what’s posted is truly disturbing and points, once again, to the need to change staff.

Bond Ordinance 2-2011 aims to raise $1,709,735 for ” THE MAKING OF ROAD IMPROVEMENTS AND THE ACQUISITION OF NEW INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY EQUIPMENT”.

The title gives the strong impression that the bond is necessary to fund “road improvements” and “information technology equipment.” Not so. As detailed in the ordinance itself, the IT equipment only costs $7,000 and has an expected shelf life of five years; hardly the “capital improvement” you would bond for any more than a homeowner would refinance his mortgage to buy a new stereo system.

Why then did the township include the $7,000 purchase in the bond notice? Because everybody knows that “road improvements” is synonymous with CME Associates, the town engineer and underwriter for the town council’s upcoming election efforts.

These shenanigans will never end so long as the town council continues engaging in pay-to-play. Specifically, the township needs to hire a town manager untainted with the scent of corruption (as is the interim town manager), and replace the town attorney, town engineer, and town auditor. Until that’s done, no matter who’s elected, the townsfolk should expect more of the same.

The same holds true in the school district. Despite replacing nearly every administrator at the district level, educational gains have been modest and will continue to be restrained so long as the teachers are represented by a leadership faithful to former AFT President Albert Shanker’s dictum, “When school children start paying union dues, that 's when I'll start representing the interests of school children.”

Staff is policy and you can’t change policy without changing staff. Every elected representative hoping for change needs to understand this. >>> Read more!

Making Goals Mean Something

About a year and a half ago, the Matawan-Aberdeen school board had agreed upon three goals:

• Grade level reading/writing proficiency for all students
• Among a pre-selected group of twenty-five school districts, ours rank among the top fifteen on all state assessment exams
• The district would not raise taxes above 2% in any year

Since that time, we haven’t heard much, if any, discussion related to those three goals. That’s a mistake. Like the mission/vision statement, those goals should be a constant focus of the school board.

In the meantime, how are we doing?

Reading/Writing Proficiency
I think it’s a mistake to use the state exam as a standard. Proficiency should not be defined as knowing half the material nor should we rely upon the state to set consistent standards.

Still, considering the resources being used to train our students to pass the state exams (curriculum rewrites, professional training, consultants, etc.), it’s certainly fair to ask how we did.

Here are the results. Don’t get too excited by the 11th grade LAL. The state dumbed down the exam resulting in a big jump across the state. That’s why school ranking is a better indicator of performance than year-over-year score improvement.

	09-10	08-09	Change
3rd LAL TP	78.4	70	8.4
4th LAL TP	64.8	69.2	-4.4
5th LAL TP	65.5	69.2	-3.7
6th LAL TP	73.5	74.3	-0.8
7th LAL TP	77.1	77.8	-0.7
8th LAL TP	88.9	89.2	-0.3
11th LAL TP	90.5	86.9	3.6

Top 15 Ranking
The school board selected 25 districts in the GH district factor group (one above Matawan-Aberdeen) and set a goal to rank among the top 15 in both total proficiency and advanced proficiency for each state exam.

Click here for the full report on the Top 15 ranking.

As seen in the chart below, Matawan-Aberdeen’s Top 15 ranking increased from 8 to 12 categories out of 32, including all 3rd grade categories. On the downside, the district finished dead last in 11th grade math. More on that to come.

	Rank	Percent	Goal	Above/Below	1-Yr Change
3rd LAL AP	19	7.6	7.6	0.00	2.6
3rd LAL TP	3	78.4	68.9	9.50	10.1
3rd Math AP	13	53.2	47.2	6.00	3.8
3rd Math TP	9	90.7	88.1	2.60	0.2
4th LAL AP	11	12.1	12.1	0.00	3.3
4th LAL TP	18	64.8	71.7	-6.90	-9.2
4th Math AP	14	39.8	42.7	-2.90	-3
4th Math TP	15	81.5	86.5	-5.00	-6
4th Sci AP	18	53	51.6	1.40	3.6
4th Sci TP	23	95	96.9	-1.90	-1.3
5th LAL AP	19	8.9	10.9	-2.00	4.7
5th LAL TP	25	65.5	71.6	-6.10	-4.6
5th Math AP	18	48.7	44.6	4.10	7.4
5th Math TP	19	83.6	87	-3.40	-0.4
6th LAL AP	18	8.7	9.4	-0.70	5.3
6th LAL TP	22	73.5	76.2	-2.70	-1.5
6th Math AP	18	30.9	28.8	2.10	5.5
6th Math TP	20	81.9	79.7	2.20	3.2
7th LAL AP	23	19.4	21.1	-1.70	3.6
7th LAL TP	22	77.1	77.9	-0.80	2.6
7th Math AP	9	34.3	28.3	6.00	7
7th Math TP	17	78.7	74.8	3.90	-2.6
8th LAL AP	19	21.8	24	-2.20	-1.6
8th LAL TP	18	88.9	90.9	-2.00	-0.6
8th Math AP	8	41.9	36.7	5.20	2.5
8th Math TP	9	77.5	78.7	-1.20	-5.2
8th Sci AP	25	34.1	39.8	-5.70	-5.5
8th Sci TP	16	89.5	90.9	-1.40	9.3
11th LAL AP	21	19.9	22.3	-2.40	2.1
11th LAL TP	21	90.5	93.6	-3.10	1.2
11th Math AP	26	16	25.9	-9.90	-0.9
11th Math TP	24	67.1	81.3	-14.20	-3.2

Tax Increase of 2% or Less
Given the state’s newly mandated 2% cap on school budget tax increases, this goal doesn’t sound as impressive as it did when first passed. Unfortunately, the district has used newfound state funding to avoid the aggressive cost cutting still needed for taxpayer relief.

Although the proposed tax hike is only 1.69%, at $61.8 million the proposed budget will increase spending 4% during a recession.

We can save over half a million dollars from outsourcing personnel (bus drivers, secretaries, guidance counselors, child study teams, teacher aides, etc.) and another half million by cutting extraneous personnel.

Let’s make sure the 2% is a cap and not a target. More can be cut.

The board set goals. Let’s make those goals mean something. >>> Read more!

School Board Takes Back Seat to Another Superintendent

Despite opposition from within the administration, the Matawan Aberdeen School Board appointed David Healy to replace outgoing superintendent, Dr. Richard O’Malley. Healy is well known to the district and therein lies the dispute – in 2005, then superintendent Quinn appointed Healy as a high school principal and, suffice to say, Healy never made tenure. Most recently, Healy was director of operations at Middletown.

True to form, the Barza wing of the school board, now reduced to Demarest and Ruprecht, were noticeably and non-coincidentally absent the night of Healy’s appointment. (Apparently, they lacked the courage to put their opposition on the record.)

However, Healy’s remarks to the Independent reveal a disturbing trend in school governance; Healy made it very clear that he’s in charge and he’ll be setting the agenda for the school district. Not once in his published remarks does he defer to, or even mention, the school board. And the scary thing is the school board will likely allow him to take the lead.

That’s not how it’s supposed to be. The superintendent is supposed to be an agent of the school board, enacting school board policies and achieving school board goals. The district mission statement should be his and the board’s guiding light.

Unfortunately, the school board is only too happy to take a back seat, to let someone else shoulder the responsibility, and thereby make themselves unaccountable for any failures but free to share any praise.

During my brief stint on the board, Ruprecht once told me he would not consider or discuss any proposal that had not been offered by the superintendent. While the board majority doesn’t share his opinion, their actions lead to the same result.

Ask the school board if Everyday Math should be discontinued? Should elementary students be allowed to use calculators? Should high school graduates be expected to speak a foreign language? Should guidance counselors have an expanded role overseeing students’ curricula and performance? How are the academies being evaluated? Are we providing sufficient opportunities and incentives for our most gifted students? How are we partnering with the parents to educate their children?

In each case, the board will likely defer to the superintendent, forgetting that he doesn’t set policy but merely enacts it. The superintendent doesn’t set goals. He achieves them.

I wish Healy luck and I can perfectly understand his enthusiasm and excitement in becoming chief. However, somebody on the school board needs to remind his colleagues that accountability begins with them and they must set the policies, the goals, and the expectations. The school board must take the lead. That’s what they were elected to do. >>> Read more!

Lessons Learned on the BOE

If You Want Change, Join the BOE
Shortly after joining the BOE, Mr. Somma, a local resident and New York City schoolteacher, began petitioning the school board to change the start time for high school to a later hour. He appeared before the board on several occasions and provided studies showing that high school students don’t get enough sleep, the benefits of getting a full night’s sleep, and the experiences of other school districts that moved to a later start time. Selma then proposed a brilliant idea – Most of our students graduate with more credits than the state requires. Allow those juniors and seniors who are performing well in class and are on track to graduate with extra class credits to substitute one of their non-core classes for an online class on condition that they will be responsible for morning transportation.

The idea presented a win-win scenario – Teenagers would get more sleep, students would have an incentive to do well in class to earn the privilege, and the district would save money by offering fewer classes.

Intrigued by the idea, then-board member Larry O’Connell requested the administration to provide the board with guidance, which it did. Later in the year, the administration considered the idea as a means to cut expenses.

So, what happened? Absolutely nothing. It remains a great idea and one that would have board support but, without a champion within the administration or on the school board, it will go nowhere.

Board Members Have the Power to Make Changes
Any board member who’s informed, well liked, and has a good relationship with the administration can deeply affect the school district. Most board members only appear at meetings to raise their hands but they do have the power to take the initiative.

Board Members Are Not the Best Informed
Before joining the board, I once asked then-president Demarest whether the $2 million a year Response to Intervention program was helping or hurting students. She didn’t know.

Aside from the public agenda, board members receive three things – Information from the superintendent, updates from the attorney, and financial reports from the business administrator. Board members also have the privilege of access to the superintendent and business administrator. Ultimately, board members only know what they’re told by the administration. Their access to raw data is no different from the public’s access.

Ask a board member how many students take at least one advanced placement class and he probably won’t know. (It’s about 10%) Or how many students are expected to earn a bachelor’s degree. (Less than 30%) Or the cost per student for a ceramics class. (Over $700)

Aside from legal issues, personnel, and criminal activity, the board may know information before the public but they rarely know more than any involved member of the public.

Elections Matter
Elections do matter. The battle within the school board is focused upon the following lines –

• Should the district’s sole focus be student achievement or should the district also consider public service (i.e. giving preference to hiring local residents)?
• Should we measure student achievement through objective measurements or teacher feedback?
• Should the focus be educational and character achievements or opportunities offered?

If the former, you’re among the standards wing that currently control the board. If the latter, you’re among the “progressives” or Barza wing.

However, despite the importance of elections, the electorate cares little about board issues and is woefully uninformed. As a result, the winners of any board election are usually the first two names on the ballot.

Where I Was Wrong
I don’t regret a single vote I cast. However, there are two areas where I changed my mind upon joining the board.

The first is the issue of grants. The vast majority of grants support new spending, not ongoing operations. That means grants can only be used for short-term projects. Otherwise, you run the risk of creating new programs that keep running long after the grant funding has vanished.

The other issue was my perception of the community. I had assumed the vast majority of parents wanted their children to receive an excellent education and, once they knew the truth of what was happening in the classrooms, they would demand improvements.

I was terribly wrong. Only a minority of parents value education as an end in itself. A large percentage of parents considers school as substitute parenting. And a majority of parents view education as merely a gateway to a better livelihood.

Those kids who learn just enough to get decent grades and graduate high school are unlikely to develop the skills necessary to succeed in college. And with over a third of our graduates going to a college whose only entrance requirement is a heartbeat, many of our students don’t challenge themselves in high school and then are shocked to discover they’re woefully unprepared for college academics.

Where I Was right
Aside from preferring my original mission statement – To build scholars and leaders – I still believe Everyday Math is a terrible curriculum that doesn’t provide a foundation for higher level mathematics and we should have outsourced as much staff as possible in one fell swoop.

Where I Was Surprised
I was shocked by how weak, incompetent, and dangerous the teachers union is. Weak, because the only people they’re able to intimidate are children. Incompetent because, despite multiple opportunities, the union leadership has consistently failed to work to the mutual benefit of their members and the community. Dangerous because their only tactic is to threaten harm to the children.

If teachers wonder why they don’t get the love and respect so many of them richly deserve, they only have to look at the rodeo clowns who represent them. In the meantime, considering the economic reality and their union leaders’ disdain for the rank and file, more school staff should expect to be outsourced next year.

Where I Failed
I would have liked to establish clear expectations for what education and experiences a student should obtain prior to graduation. I also would have liked to have had a hand in contract negotiations. However, my single greatest failure was not establishing a social organization to recruit and develop future community leaders. For now, the only people doing that are the Aberdeen Democrats, the parent groups, and the sports leagues.

When People Care
For the most part, people don’t care. Excluding the union stampedes, the only time the school board ever sees members of the public is when somebody’s child is being directly affected or when students appear to defend a teacher or program. Considering the sky high property taxes and the rock bottom test scores, you’d think the community would care more but it doesn’t. Or at least not enough to actually do anything.

The Teachers
During my stint on the school board, only one teacher ever came before the board with a proposal to change the class curriculum to better prepare students for college – Dr. Kaplan, the physics teacher.

Considering our poor academic record, you’d hope teachers would take the initiative to raise standards but, by and large, they don’t. If the students’ education and futures were the primary concerns of our teacher body, I certainly didn’t see any evidence of it.

When English teachers don’t test writing, when math teachers support a math curriculum that promotes calculators for hard problems, when history teachers use a textbook that devotes more time to the Zoot Suit Riots than Benjamin Franklin, and when high school students are assigned Harry Potter, then teachers are part of the problem.

No Accountability
We have a system where no one is accountable. Everybody blames everybody else. Until parents have the power to choose the best school for their kids and thereby force the educators to become accountable, the system will never work.

Predictions for the Future

• The draconian cuts to staff and funding won’t have any measurable impact on the quality of education
• At some point, the Barza wing will regain control
• Educational progress will be stifled by teachers who are not highly educated or motivated and by parents who don’t know better

>>> Read more!

Setting the Stage for Union Negotations

Considering the MRTA’s declaration of an impasse, not to mention the superintendent’s and business administrator’s imminent departures, it would appear contract negotiations between the Matawan-Aberdeen school district and its teachers union are on hiatus. That would only be technically true. The competition for public opinion is afoot.

The first volley was lobbed by the teachers union in its condemnation of the “wasteful” spending in Board President Kenney’s communiqué as to the status of negotiations. Sadly, the union’s cry of waste is particularly hypocritical in this instance as it was the union’s actions and history that necessitated the letter.

During the last negotiation, MRTA President Kosmyna had complained of “working without a contract”. That was not true then as any similar claim would not be true now. Under law, the teachers continue working under the “expired contract” until a new contract is in place. Practically, there is no difference for any school employee between an expired contract and an un-expired contract.

Given the union’s decision to declare an impasse before negotiating any terms, the school board naturally assumed the worst and chose to pre-empt any miscommunications from the teachers union.

(Note: The following two paragraphs were slightly edited to note a staff member's "step" on the salary guide is frozen under an expired contract.)

The next charge from the teachers union will likely be the teachers aren’t receiving any raises. Well, that's true but not the whole truth.

Once the new contract is settled, teachers and other staff qualify for two raises – moving up the salary guide and adjustments to the salary guide itself. (Though it's a subject of negotiations, those raises are often retroactive.)

Taking this year as an example, let’s say the salary guides for all employees are frozen for one year. In the common parlance, this would mean the staff is getting a 0% salary increase.

But that 0% only applies to the guide itself, not staff moving up the guide. Even with a 0% increase, the staff units represented by the MRTA would receive the following average salary increases during the 2010-11 school year -
Teachers – 2.1%
Clerical – 5.8%
Drivers – 3.6%
Maintenance – 2.2%

To be fair, this doesn’t include the 1.5% employee contributions to healthcare but, to be fair, was it ever fair that teachers didn’t have to contribute to their own health care?

Remember, the above increases assume a 0% increase to the salary guides. Any negotiated raises will be in addition to the above. (On a side note, the teachers union has already conceded the above numbers during negotiations.)

However, if the school board hopes to garner public support, they need to let the public know what’s at stake. For example, one of the board’s priorities is the elimination of “past practices” and a relaxation of work rules.

For instance, the school district must pay a fee to any union officer who is required to proctor his final exams to his classes because proctoring exams does not qualify as a “teaching duty” and the teachers contract exempts union officers from non-teaching duties.

Another example is when the union leadership advised teachers to no longer help children on and off school busses without compensation. To the teachers’ credit, they ignored the recommendation and placed our children’s safety first.

Then there was the question of whether teachers had to be paid extra for analyzing their classes’ assessment scores during school hours to determine how to improve their curriculums and class instruction.

And the list goes on.

This is a public relations campaign the school board needs to win. Remember Marlboro.

On a final note, the school board should inform the union leaders that intimidation tactics and/or a work slowdown will not be tolerated. In addition to further outsourcing, the board has two other arrows in its quiver - the infamous “custodian email” whereby the union threw the custodians under the bus and the case of employee theft.

For a number of years, several teachers, including union leaders, received compensation for work never performed. I uncovered the fraud two years ago but was asked to keep it quiet. Dr. O’Malley immediately halted the practice.

Considering how widespread the practice was and how several administrators were in the know, I don’t foresee any criminal charges, but I wonder how eager these teachers are to have their records permanently stained with the label “thief”. All the information is public and the payouts were part of the board agendas. But nobody had bothered to check if the work was actually being done.

Labor leaders are expected to fight vigorously on their members’ behalf but intimidating board members and poisoning the school environment are beyond the pale. The school board should let the MRTA officers know that unacceptable behavior will have consequences. >>> Read more!

The Aberdeener Grievance

For the past six months, the Matawan Regional Teachers Association (MRTA) leadership has been spreading a rumor that they filed a grievance against me. The implication was that not only were they fighting back but that I must be guilty of something.

The truth is the MRTA filed an unfair labor practice against the school board in a shameless attempt to silence me. Either they were too cowardly to charge me with a violation or they knew they had no case and I would respond vigorously.

The union must have believed they could file this baseless charge without repercussions since they were free to quietly smear me and threaten the school district with costly legal fees while keeping confidential the actual complaint since grievances are normally exempt from OPRA.

But they were wrong.

New Jersey’s Open Public Records Act excludes “Any grievance filed by or against an employee”. However, the MRTA’s grievance doesn’t list a single employee, position, staff duty, compensation, or contractual obligation as a subject of the complaint; the grievance is solely by and for the union’s organization and doesn’t fall within the exemption.

I kept the grievance sequestered at first because of litigation and later because of the media blackout during negotiations. However, the grievance has since been withdrawn and there is no media blackout due to the union’s declaration of an impasse.

So, here it is, the Aberdeener Grievance.

Before I respond point-by-point, allow me to provide a quick summary. The MRTA’s legal position is that school board members are not allowed to criticize the teachers union or its leadership. Furthermore, the MRTA argues, the school board has an affirmative obligation to monitor its members’ speech and repudiate any critical comments. For relief, the MRTA requested the school board ask me to shut my mouth or resign.

The case’s wanton silliness is demonstrated by the fact that even if the MRTA won this unprecedented legal argument and got all the relief it requested, I would still have been allowed to retain my board seat and continue writing on my blog exactly as I had before the complaint; nowhere did the union request an order for me to cease and desist. So, even the teachers union implicitly concedes I acted within my rights.

What makes the charge truly ironic is the MRTA alleges the school board violated N.J.S.A. 34:13A, which forbids “Interfering with, restraining or coercing employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed to them by this act [or] . . . Dominating or interfering with the formation, existence or administration of any employee organization.”

That same statute also states “Employee organizations, their representatives or agents are prohibited from interfering with, restraining or coercing employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed to them by this act.”

That must be news to the MRTA because the union openly and regularly interferes, restrains, and coerces employees in the exercise of their rights. To give just one example, here is an open letter from the MRTA to the district staff instructing them to “not apply for extra curricular positions that are currently being filled by our members.” That same letter further states “If you have concerns regarding fellow workers and their job performance, don’t go to an administrator.” In other words, the union will choose who gets the stipends and the union will handle all personnel complaints. Or else.

We also need to question the MRTA’s priorities. The union wouldn’t contribute one penny towards saving three longtime members’ lifetime health benefits but was prepared to spend thousands in legal fees for a baseless claim in hopes of garnering a public reprimand against a local blog.

So, without further ado, here is the Aberdeener Grievance. My responses are in red-italics.

The Matawan-Aberdeen Regional Teachers Association is the recognized majority representative for, among other professional and support staff titles, all non-supervisory certificated teaching staff members employed within the Matawan-Aberdeen Regional Board of Education.

The Matawan-Aberdeen Regional Board of Education is a public employer within the meaning of the New Jersey Employer-Employee Relations Act and is subject to the Act's provisions.

The Matawan-Aberdeen Regional Board of Education (hereinafter the "Board") and the Matawan-Aberdeen Regional Teachers Association (hereinafter the "Association") are parties to a collective negotiations agreement covering the time period between July 1,2007 through June 30,2010. The parties are presently negotiating a successor collective negotiations agreement.

Joseph Warren (hereinafter "Warren") is a member of the Board of Education and has been a member of the Board since approximately April, 2009.

Board member Warren maintains a blog; i.e. the Aberdeener, that this Board member has used, in part, to both criticize the leadership of the Association and to attempt to negotiate a successor contract by his efforts to convince teaching staff members and support staff represented by the Association to repudiate the contract proposals regarding contract negotiations that have been submitted by the Association's Negotiations Team.

The following are summaries of only some of the many blog entries of Board member Warren that have been critical of the Association's leadership and that have also divulged confidential contract negotiation positions of the Association to members of the public:
What follows is the MRTA’s strongest evidence that the school board, not I, acted illegally.

Board member Warren called the Association's Union President Carl Kosmyna a liar and referred to the Association's "ludicrous claim" that the Association had offered a pay freeze and that this proposal was rejected by the Board of Education. (April 12, 2010 blog entry).
I have never called Kosmyna a liar. Nor have I ever claimed he isn’t. As for the “ludicrous claim” comment, I’m happy to see the MRTA finally acknowledge they did make this ludicrous claim of having offered the school board a pay freeze.

Board member Warren referred to the Leadership of the Association as "rodeo clowns" and referred to the Association's responses to threatened layoffs as being representative of the Association's "latest antics and utter incompetence". (March 25, 2010 blog entry).
I proudly stand by my comments.

Board member Warren stated, in part, that "the Union has orchestrated political theatre from heckling Board members at a public meeting to frightening the community into believing the District will replace our beloved custodians with pedophiles". (March 25, 2010 blog entry).
I sure did say that. Remember those school board meetings or the fliers warning parents the school board was endangering their children?

Board member Warren maintained that "the Union has not offered any concessions or suggestions on how to cut costs and save jobs" and maintained that "Union Officers receive full pay for reduced work load to permit extra time for Union activities". He also stated that "the Union has filed a slew of grievances demanding extra pay which, if victorious, will result in more job losses". (March 25,2010 blog entry).
Once again, I said it and it’s all true.

Board member Warren, in continuing his vituperative and defamatory charges against the Association Leadership, concluded one of his blog entries with the following statement: As every rodeo clown knows, you can distract the bull, deceive the bull, and avoid the bull, but stick around too long and you will get trampled. The Union leadership can no longer distract, deceive or avoid the public or its membership. (March 25,2010 blog entry).
Yeah, that rodeo clown comment really stuck them. I guess the truth hurts.

Board member Warren published the salaries of Union Executive Board members over the past four years and attacked the negotiating of what Board Warren referred to as "a bewildering array of stipends", while he consciously omitted the fact that the salaries he reported in the blog included coaching salaries and other negotiated stipends.
So, let’s see. I claimed the staff received a “bewildering array of stipends” and neglected to mention they were receiving stipends. Ooooh, I’m so bad.

By the way, district salaries are public information.

To date, the Board of Education has taken no action to prohibit Board member Warren from his malicious attempts to replace the existing association leadership and to coerce the Association into contract concessions by disseminating misrepresentations about the terms and conditions of employment of Association teaching staff members and support staff. The Board therefore has supported the efforts of Board member Warren to dominate and/or interfere with the existence and administration of the Association in violation of N.J.S.A. 34:13A-5.4(a)(2).
Here’s that legal ninjitsu – by doing nothing, the board was illegally interfering in the union’s business. Also, notice how it was perfectly acceptable for the teachers union to picket in front of former board member Ken Aitken’s house and spend thousands of dollars to prevent his reelection but my personal comments against the MRTA leadership is “malicious”.

The actions of the Board in refusing to repudiate the statements of one of its Board members, Joseph Warren, has also engaged in actions designed to interfere with, coerce and restrain employees represented by the Association in violation of N.J.S.A. 34:13A-5.4(a)(l).
More legal ninjitsu. Doing nothing constitutes “actions designed to interfere with, coerce and restrain employees”. Is that like teachers who do nothing are still considered to be teaching?

WHEREFORE, the Matawan-Aberdeen Regional Teachers Association seeks an Order from the New Jersey Public Employment Relations Commission:

(A) Finding and declaring that the Matawan-Aberdeen Regional Board of education has violated the of N.J.S.A. 34: 13~-5.4(a)(l) and N.J.S.A. 34:13A-5.4(a)(2);
I.e., by doing nothing, the school board has coerced and restrained employees.

(B) Finding and declaring that the actions of individual Board member Joseph Warren, as supported by at least the majority of the Board of Education, represents efforts to illegally dominate and/or interfere with the existence and administration of the Teachers Association;
Since Joseph Warren, acting by himself, constitutes a majority of the board, of course.

(C) Finding and declaring that the Board has acted to interfere with, restrain and coerce employees represented by the Association in the exercise of rights protected by the New Jersey Employer-Employee Relations Act;

(D) Requiring the Board of Education to repudiate in writing all of Board member Warren's defamatory & hominem attacks on the Association's leadership and his consistent misrepresentations about the content of and status of contract negotiations and pending Association grievances;
How childish. Should the school board have also given me a timeout and taken away my circle time?

(E)Requiring the Board of Education to advise Board member Joseph Warren to cease and desist from including any comments in his blog, the Aberdeener, that relate to ongoing contract negotiations issues and other personnel and labor relations matters involving the Association and the Board or, in the alternative, request that Warren resign as a Board of Education member;
Should the state also require the school board to say pretty please?

(F)Requiring the posting of appropriate Notices to Public Employees advising said employees of the Board's illegal conduct;
Why stop there? Let’s have a mass mailing to the entire district. The cover page would say the “Matawan-Aberdeen Regional School District, without commenting upon the truth or accuracy of Mr. Warren's statements, repudiates all of the following” and then staple it to a copy of all the offensive blog articles.

(G) For such other and further relief as the New Jersey Public Employment Relations Commission deems to be appropriate under the circumstances.
Like ice cream for all the union leaders whose feelings were hurt.

Teachers, welcome to your union representatives. I hope the rodeo is worth your money and your colleagues’ livelihoods. >>> Read more!

I Know What You Did Last Winter

In honor of the Matawan Regional Teacher’s Association latest negotiation tactic, a blunder so incredibly stupid that one wonders if the union leadership should be placed on suicide watch, I’d like to dedicate the Bedroom Intruder newscast and its accompanying music video to our dear Rodeo Clowns.

As part of negotiations, the union and school board had agreed to a media blackout – neither side would make any public statements regarding negotiations – so long as neither side declared an impasse. That is why I refrained from attacking the union leadership on this blog.

Recently, the school board changed its entire negotiating team (yes, there’s a story there but I’ll save it for later in case Fearless Marty chooses to run again) and hired a new negotiating attorney. At this point, the only items successfully negotiated were the rules of negotiation and some meeting dates. Not a single contractual item was ever discussed.

So, what happened at the very first negotiations meeting with the new team and the new attorney, before anything is even negotiated? The MRTA declared an impasse.

That means the media blackout no longer exists and school board members are free to discuss negotiations or the lack thereof.

For example, the school board is free to discuss the sweetheart deal it offered the teachers union last January to save the custodial positions, an offer made before the board realized how desperate the district’s financial situation would become. Or, better yet, the ridiculous counter-offer demonstrating the union leadership cared more about themselves than their members. (And the counter-offer was made in writing should the rank and file care to see it.)

Or we could discuss the custodial negotiation session in April when the union leadership had the outsource bids in their hands. They knew the district would save over a million dollars a year from outsourcing even though the school board was only requesting half of that in concessions to save the custodial positions. Regardless, the union offer (also in writing), fell so far short that the school board voted unanimously to outsource rather than waste more time in bad-faith negotiations.

Or maybe we could discuss some of the ludicrous labor grievances that were also part of the negotiations?

Or how about the union offering the district virtually nothing to save three long-time union members from losing their lifetime health benefits.

I’m tempted to post everything online but these are the types of shots that can only be fired once, so I’m going to let this play out a bit more. Let’s see if the union attempts to intimidate board members’ children, picket at their homes, or try to frighten the community again.

I’m also tempted to see what the union membership will do. Scores of jobs are potentially at stake next year. Bus drivers, secretaries, teachers aides, child study teams, and guidance counselors can all be outsourced. Without increased funding from the state (unlikely at best), there will need to be more cuts through either outsourcing or reductions in force to cover increases in salary, healthcare, and pensions.

As for the teachers union leadership, I leave you with this quote from the Bedroom Intruder Song – “You don’t have to come and confess. We’re looking for you. We gonna find you. We gonna find you.” >>> Read more!

An Unjust Punishment

On April 2, 2008, I lambasted Jan Rubino for soliciting campaign contributions from school district staff. I charged Ms. Rubino with violating school board bylaws. The story was reported in the local press. Ms. Rubino won a landslide victory and was appointed school board vice president. All this is old news. Or at least it was until a judge made an unusual and unwarranted recommendation.

Weeks after the 2008 election, the School Ethics Commission received a complaint against Rubino. A year later, the commission referred the case to an administrative law judge. A year after that, the judge considered the evidence and issued her findings and recommendation on July 19th, which must still be reviewed by the ethics commission and approved by the newly installed commissioner of education.

Judge Sanders is the acting director and chief administrative law judge. She considered four charges against Rubino:

• N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24(e) prohibiting solicitation or acceptance of a gift or political contribution based on an understanding that the contribution is for the purpose of influencing the candidate in the discharge of his or her duties
• Same concerning an email to the board attorney
• N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1(c), which prohibits the taking of private action that could compromise the Board
• N.J.S.A. 18:12-24.1(f), which forbids the use of the schools for personal gain or the gain of friends

The charges stem from three emails –

• An “unkonwn” email sent by Rubino to a group of friends, including school staff members at their school email addresses
• A similar email sent by her running mate, Marty Ruprecht, that included three staff members at their school email addresses
• A third and similar email sent to the school board attorney, Michael Gross

The email to Gross was deemed a communication soliciting legal guidance, not a political contribution, and was discarded. Ruprecht’s email was deemed an independent communication. Since the statutes only restrain office holders, not candidates for office, the judge properly discarded his email as well.

That left one email and three charges. Namely, Rubino solicited political contributions from district staff with the implicit understanding that such support could influence her actions as a board member, which would compromise the board. And, since Rubino used the school district email system to solicit the contributions, she made an illegal use of school property for personal gain.

We have no idea what was in that email or who received it, only Rubino’s testimony that it may have included some long-time teachers who were old-time friends who “may” have contributed to her campaign. Rubino testified that she regularly purges her computer of old emails and deleted the email during one of her routine purges, unaware the email may become critical to any pending or likely future hearing.

Judge Sanders believes Rubino fibbed about accidentally deleting the email, forgetting who was on the recipient list, and forgetting whether any of the recipients contributed to her campaign. The judge therefore, considering Rubino’s entire testimony and its context, made it a finding of fact that Rubino had solicited school staff at their school email addresses and received political contributions from them. Judge Sanders found Rubino guilty of all three charges.

Up to this point, Judge Sanders acted reasonably and within her discretion. However, her recommendation to the ethics commission was unduly harsh – that Rubino be suspended from participating on the school board for six-months. Judge Sanders even went a step further saying she would have recommended removal had Rubino not testified that she refrained from voting upon all personnel matters for one year.

It is obvious from Judge Sanders’ decision - her tone, findings, and harsh recommendation - that she is seeking to punish Rubino, not for the actual violations of which Rubino is accused, but upon Judge Sander’s belief that Rubino destroyed evidence and committed perjury.

Judge Sanders claims to have rejected the more appropriate punishment of censure on the scant case history that board members generally incur censure in cases of one violation, not multiple violations. On this point, Judge Sanders plainly erred.

When recommending a penalty, the determining factor is not the number of violations but the severity of the offense(s). A school board member (or a candidate for that office) soliciting money from school district staff is wrong and illegal but, on a moral barometer, is not much more offensive than state officials pursuing political contributions from state labor unions. The only ethical difference is that our state representatives outlawed such behavior for others but not themselves.

Any violation could conceivably “compromise the board”. Sending someone an email at his school address is no more considered “the use of the schools for personal gain” than mailing someone a letter at his place of business. Rubino’s offense was soliciting school employees. The secondary technical violations don’t aggravate the original transgression nor does Judge Sanders suggest they do.

Had Ms. Rubino’s offense been considered truly heinous, the ethics commission and the administrative law judge wouldn’t have waited until Ms. Rubino nearly finishes her term before rendering punishment. Had the ethics commission truly wanted a copy of the offending email, it could have requested a copy from the school administration, which regularly makes archival backups of email in case of a system malfunction. Had the ethics commission been truly concerned whether Ms. Rubino refrained from voting upon personnel matters, it could have spent twenty minutes to review the dozen board minutes posted online at the district website.

Perjury, destruction of evidence, and obstruction of justice are serious offenses because they undermine our legal system’s ability to administer justice in accordance with our laws. If Judge Sanders believes Rubino committed any of those offenses, there are legal remedies, each of which would provide Rubino an opportunity to defend herself. However, to convict Rubino of one offense and then punish her for a separate uncharged crime is a miscarriage of justice.

Jan Rubino solicited political contributions from a handful of school employees who happened to be in her email address book. That’s the charge. Nothing more and nothing less. The appropriate punishment is censure. >>> Read more!

Our Government Friendly Press

One of my rules of thumb for public office is “If it’s not in the newspapers, it never happened.” This has been borne out time and again by major stories and scandals that were never covered and remain mostly unknown or disbelieved. However, the moment a story hits the papers, it’s considered gospel.

Another rule of thumb is “The papers will only report what we say.” In the two years I”ve been blogging, I can only recall four investigative stories involving Aberdeen-Matawan. Two never got published and one only involved a reporter’s personal observations. The three reporters following those stories have since left town. The local papers simply lack the resources to investigate local news unless they have Pulitzer Prize-winning potential. Instead, most articles just stick to official pronouncements, public statements, and feel-good stories. It’s far easier to quote people then research the facts.

Recently, two news stories have brought this reality into sharp contrast.

Last week, school board member Patricia Demarest voted against renewing Business Administrator Sue Irons’ contract.

The APP reported the vote as follows:

Board member Patricia Demarest cast the lone dissent without comment. Demarest later said she voted against the contract because Irons now will have tenure.

"That will commit the district to both the person and salary nearly permanently," Demarest wrote in an e-mail after the meeting. "We recently eliminated several teaching positions, administrators and all of our custodians. In these economic times, I feel it would be irresponsible to give tenure to a nonteaching position at that salary at this time."

The statement almost sounds reasonable until you put it in context; Demarest voted to fire one of the best business administrators our district has ever had.

Here’s a brief snapshot of Ms. Iron’s nearly three-year tenure in MARSD.

• Cut the school budget by $1.5 million
• 3-year average annual tax increase of 1.33%
• Implemented corrective action in the financial office to comply with auditor’s recommendations and industry best practices

That last item deserves more discussion. Prior to Ms. Iron’s arrival, some of the auditor’s eighteen findings included:

• In a random sample of purchase orders, twenty-five percent were either blank or for non-earmarked items
• A $134,000 shortfall in budgeted expenditures
• A $1.7 million shortfall in the listing of capital assets

Following Ms. Iron’s corrective actions, the number of findings fell from eighteen to six, only one of which Ms. Irons bore primary responsibility - $22,600 of grant money wasn’t spent. (Meaning it should have been listed as spent and other money either put into surplus or, since that was maximized, accelerate spending on other items.)

Dr. Delaney, who works for the New Jersey Department of Education in Monmouth County, reported that Ms. Irons is ranked among the top three business administrators in the county.

Ms. Irons is also compensated about 10% below her peers managing similar sized school districts. Additionally, her latest contract will result in slightly reduced compensation since her salary remains the same but her benefits have dimished.

Ms. Demarest knows all this. During her term as board president, Demarest worked with Dr. O’Malley and Ms. Irons to propose a school budget that cut expenses by $600K and had no tax increase, the first budget to pass in eight years.

Yet, Pat Demarest voted to fire Sue Irons. Why? “In these economic times, I feel it would be irresponsible to give tenure to a nonteaching position at that salary at this time.” So, in Ms. Demarest’s six years on the school board, her only recorded vote to terminate an employee was against the one business administrator who cut year-over-year spending.

Interestingly, Ms. Demarest’s only vote opposing someone’s appointment was against Superintendent O’Malley.

Of course, you’d never know any of this from reading the APP article.

The other story was about the revised housing plan on County Road, reported in the Independent.

The total number of units to be developed on the [County Road] property has been reduced from 132 affordable units to 115 units, with some at market rate and some affordable.

Of the 115 units, the plan includes 78 market rate units for sale and 37 affordable units for rent, responding to the community’s concerns to spread the township’s affordable housing requirement throughout the town.

“There were a number of residents in the immediate neighborhood who expressed concern that there was too much [affordable housing] on that property and there should be consideration to distributing the number of affordable units more evenly,” Coppola said. “We did a number of changes to the plan that has been worked on by the developer under the direction of the COAH work of the governing body.”

All of the units to be developed on the property will be townhouse units instead of apartment units, providing either a one- or two-car garage, which Coppola said will limit the need for on-street parking.

“This will aid with the appearance of the development,” he said. “All the townhouse buildings will have pitched roofs, where apartment buildings have flat roofs.”
The townhouses, required by COAH, will have different bedroom distributions. The market-rate units will contain two and three bedrooms, and no affordable or market-rate unit will contain more than three bedrooms.

All great news but the article gives the impression these changes were made upon the township’s initiative. Not so. Following loud and angry opposition to the original affordable housing plans for County Rd., the developer (RCM) contacted the Cliffwood Housing Association (CHA) and offered to make the above changes in exchange for community support. The revisions, a severely reduced number of affordable housing units, a high proportion of market-rate units, and townhouses in lieu of apartments, is a dramatic improvement over the original plan and both the CHA and RCM deserve our thanks.

However, the story also points to what the town council and planning board could have achieved long ago had they invited community participation in the beginning and considered our concerns. Instead, the town council engaged in backroom deals that risked our COAH certification and foisted upon us a development that nobody wanted.

Now, thanks to the developer and our community activists, we have a new and better plan but the town council and planning board get all the credit. Notice the article never mentions the Cliffwood Housing Association.

However, the article does mention that William Bocra of Silver Oak Properties, who spent time in prison for attempting to bribe his IRS auditor, was re-appointed developer for the proposed transit village. This is the same developer who cost Matawan hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees for refusing to grant him the same designation.

Of course, the article doesn’t mention any of the back-story.

I don’t blame the newspapers or the reporters. On the contrary, I think they’re doing the best they can in a challenging environment with limited resources. (Note Newsweek was just sold for $1.) Still, I can’t help but wonder if people would be willing to pay a bit more for real news. It’s sure something I hope someone would try. >>> Read more!

I Do Hereby Proclaim

In contrast to Matawan’s professional and understated resolution, Aberdeen Township chose to attack the school board and the administration. I don’t know of a single other instance when one local governing body unanimously voted to denigrate another governing body. The fact that Aberdeen’s resolution is full of distortions and factual errors just aggravates an already egregious breach in protocol.

In response, I issued my own “proclamation” at Monday night’s school board meeting. Below is the text, in full.

Whereas Aberdeen’s Town Council has unanimously approved Resolution 2010-83 certifying Matawan-Aberdeen’s Regional School District’s budget

Whereas said resolution contains many clauses attacking this school board and our administration

Whereas said resolution purposely distorts the facts and our record

Whereas said resolution intentionally avoids mentioning a single accomplishment, academically or financially, of this school district under Dr. O’Malley’s administration

Whereas said resolution violates confidentiality by disclosing private conversations between representatives of the school board and the town council

Whereas the town council breached protocol by publicizing the resolution without first notifying the superintendent of the proposed budget

Whereas the town council, in violation of the sunshine laws, failed to give the public adequate notice of the budget vote

Whereas the town council, in violation of the sunshine laws, has never given the public adequate notice of the school budget vote for over half a decade, at least

Whereas the town council rejected a proposed school tax increase of $280,000 for Aberdeen Township but has submitted a preliminary budget calling for a municipal tax increase of $2,000,000

Whereas, over the last three years, the school district has raised taxes less than 2% compared to the town council’s projected three-year increase of more than 30%

Whereas Aberdeen Township has the fifth highest property taxes in Monmouth County due to the town council’s inability to attract commercial development

Whereas the town council, in violation of the sunshine laws, secretly authorized a Memorandum of Understanding with a local developer for the construction of 194 new residential units

Whereas the town council is using a Payment in Lieu of Taxes program to divert over $400,000 a year from the school district toward the municipal budget

Whereas the town council is obscenely compromised by pay-to-play

Whereas Aberdeen Township pays the town council’s largest political donor over $1.2 million a year for professional services

Whereas the town council only awards professional services to campaign contributors and the politically connected

Whereas town council members raised $40,000 during the most recent general election but didn’t disclose a single contributor

Whereas the town council retains one attorney who misrepresented crucial facts during a public meeting and another attorney who threatened residents, including members of this school board, with police action

Whereas town council members pay themselves tens of thousands of dollars a year in salaries while school board members work for free

Whereas Resolution 2010-83 leaves the ludicrous impression that the town council is better qualified to manage the school district than the board of education

We, the undersigned, award the Town Council of Aberdeen Township the Lifetime Chutzpah Award and hereby present to you the ceremonial boot.

--Since no one is here from the town council to accept the ceremonial boot, I am ashamed to accept it on their behalf.--

P.S. The above remarks have not been endorsed by Ms. Jan Rubino. >>> Read more!

The School Board Votes to Outsource

Last night, about two hundred MRTA members and their supporters attended the Matawan-Aberdeen school board meeting to oppose the sole agenda item – outsourcing custodial services. In contrast to the March meeting, the staff acted with great decorum and restraint. Most of the speakers had prepared statements and attacked the concept of outsourcing, not the board members’ motivations. The crowd allowed each of the board members to speak without interruption.

The union proposed allowing labor negotiations to proceed in hopes of reaching a settlement that would save the custodial positions. The board members responded the union had ample opportunity to offer concessions that would match the expected savings from outsourcing but, unfortunately, the union concessions were too little too late. In the end, the school board voted unanimously to outsource the custodians.

The story hasn’t quite ended because there are three custodians in their 25th year of service. If the school board can reach accommodations with the union, it’s possible those three custodians will have the opportunity to complete their 25 years and thereby acquire lifetime health benefits.

I’d also like to respond to some of the issues raised at the meeting.

The district expects to save $500,000 this year and $700,000 next year from outsourcing the custodians. Despite the “substantial concessions” offered by the MRTA, they weren’t enough. I assume that if any board member thought the MRTA might match those savings through additional concessions there would have been a motion to table the issue.

For everybody who remembers the bumps we had (and still have) privatizing the substitute teachers, if we hadn’t voted last night, the vendor may have had difficulties properly staffing, processing, and training its employees by July 1st.

The district has not provided all the documentation the union has requested. Personally, I prefer full disclosure when reasonable and I don’t believe the union has made any unreasonable requests. Even if the administration is within its rights to withhold certain documents, I disagree with its decision to do so.

Lastly, I stand by me earlier comment of “Show Me the Money”. After college, I took a sales job. My manager told me that what differentiated a great salesman from a failure was attitude. A great salesman began his day with a plan to succeed. A failure began his day with a hundred excuses why nothing was his fault. Excuses are like butts, he told me, everybody has one and they all stink.

Right up to the moment the board voted, the union leadership had an opportunity to save the custodial jobs. Their excuses for failure are just that – excuses. All they had to do was offer to stick with the current salary guide for one more year. For MRTA members, the difference would have been $1,000-$1,500 per year before taxes. That’s how little they cared for their colleagues.

If it’s not about the money, then what is it about? >>> Read more!

The Custodians’ Last Days

Tonight’s school board vote on whether to outsource custodial services marks a sad turning point for Matawan-Aberdeen. Our custodians have been long-serving, dedicated, and hard-working employees. They’re being unceremoniously dumped because we can no longer afford to retain them. It didn’t have to be this way. The teachers union had the ability and the opportunity to save the custodians but, given a choice between saving the custodians and taking their raises, the union leadership preferred to take their raises.

Three companies submitted bids to provide custodial services and Pritchard was the lowest bidder at $3.1 million. That’s nearly half of what we’d pay to retain the custodians. For guidance, we can look to Marlboro. In 2006, Marlboro had a projected cost of $2.77 million for 35 custodians. Pritchard, the lowest bidder, was awarded a custodial contract for $800,000. We’ve been in touch with Marlboro and they’ve been pleased with their services and continue to use Pritchard.

For Matawan-Aberdeen, next year’s projected costs are $2.9 million for 36 custodians. On a per employee cost basis, that’s only a 1.8% increase over Marlboro’s estimates despite four years having elapsed. Like Marlboro, that cost includes “salaries, health benefits, pension contributions, Social Security and workers' compensation”.

In March, the teachers union membership argued vociferously to retain the custodians but not one speaker suggested he was prepared to offer any concessions aside from voting to raise property taxes.

The union leadership has had multiple opportunities to save the custodial positions. They could have negotiated healthcare contributions before it became state mandated. They could have offered concessions as a sign of good faith to help the budget pass. They could have given the membership an up or down vote on a pay freeze to save the custodians and other positions.

Today, however, we have a failed budget and a vendor’s bid substantially below expectations. Nothing short of a one-year pay freeze would suffice to offset those savings.

Never again will the union membership be able to proudly wear buttons proclaiming “I CARE about our kids”. When given an opportunity to join in our community’s shared sacrifice and to save their colleague’s and fellow union members’ jobs, the union said no. Next time the union leadership organizes a show of force, maybe they should distribute buttons saying “Show Me the Money”. >>> Read more!

The School Board's Three-Legged Race

On April 20th, three candidates will vie for two seats on the Matawan-Aberdeen school board – Incumbent John (Jeff) Delaney, former board president Patricia Demarest, and Reverend Thelma Gattis. Only one will lose. Tragically, the booby prize will likely go to Rev. Gattis; a comeback for Demarest is a setback for the rest of us.

Historically, voters unfamiliar with the candidates tend to vote for those at the top of the list and Rev. Gattis will appear last on the ballot. Worse, Rev. Gattis is little known beyond the Cliffwood community, where she has been pastor of the St. Mark A.M.E. Zion Church since 2004. Additionally, voters may be wary of supporting someone who only changed her legal residence to Aberdeen in 2007, has had minimal involvement with the school district, and doesn’t pay property taxes. Nor is there any indication of Reverend Gattis running a strong campaign.

A Gattis victory would require very high negatives for her two opponents, which simply don’t exist beyond this blog.

Dr. Delaney’s main negative is his friendship with me. (Full Disclosure: Although I have not participated in any campaign meetings or made any campaign contributions, I do intend to support him.) Delaney is a highly credentialed longtime resident with an amazing personal story who’s been deeply involved in our school district for several years. During the past year alone, Delaney co-authored two of the board’s three goals and got our school policies in compliance with state law. (Our district scored 100% on QSAC.) Although he did not vote for Dr. O’Malley’s raise, last year, Delaney has been a strong supporter of our superintendent.

Ms. Demarest is presenting herself as the “everywoman” candidate. If you like Dr. O’Malley, she can point to her work with him during her term as president. If you don’t like him, she can point to her vote against his appointment. If you want low taxes, Demarest can point to the small tax increases during the “O’Malley” years. If you want more spending, she can point to her earlier years of large spending hikes.

Unfortunately, a Demarest victory would send a terrible message that our community is either oblivious to what happens on the school board or just doesn’t care. Here is the Demarest record:

• Played the race card through Reverend Gattis just days after promising to "poll the board members to get their preference on the timing" of filling a vacant board seat
• Testified against the school district in a personnel grievance to garner support for her election
• Voted to set her own salary as a poll worker and then voted again to pay herself
• Voted against O’Malley’s appointment and accused him of malfeasance in a sworn affidavit
• Voted for the school reorganization
• Voted to spend $46,000 on a study to describe a $500,000 project
• Voted to bypass a public referendum on the football field
• Prior to O’Malley’s arrival, allowed the budget to balloon from $50.6 million to $61.3 million in just four years despite the budget being defeated each time

A vote for Demarest is a vote against everything our district has achieved under Dr. O’Malley’s administration. Writing programs have been integrated with class curricula. For the first time, every school made AYP (adequate yearly progress) under No Child Left Behind. We’re now above average in state testing for our District Factor Group in over half of the exams. Spending levels are falling. We’ve reduced out-district placements by 10%.

Yet, Demarest opposed O’Malley’s appointment and still does. And for those who don’t think there’s reason to be afraid, remember this – One year ago, Demarest represented the majority.

Those who forget Pat Demarest’s history may doom our community to repeat it. And those who want Dr. O’Malley to stay shouldn’t be giving him reasons to leave. >>> Read more!