This New Jersey news page contains an interview with Governor Christie speaking with the editorial board of the Star Ledger.  He states that he will NOT back down on forcing the teacher unions to accept a major reduction in salary increases and requiring a greater contribution to their benefits.

This is the most confrontational speech I have ever heard!  New Jersey is facing a huge budget deficit and is the highest taxed state (New York is #2).

Governor Christie asks the same questions that I have raised:  If the teachers do not get another compounded 4% salary increase and they have to pay something toward their health care, will the educational outcomes change?

He also questions why the unions would rather accept layoffs (that DO affect education) rather than simply doing without their salary INcrease and helping to pay for their health care benefits?

We haven’t heard these questions in New York State….as yet.

Watch this short interview video at:

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/03/gov_chris_christies_proposed_p.html

This video is down the page with the heading: Governor to teachers unions: I will not back down

I am a long-term Brighton resident with an M.A. in Education.  I strongly value our good schools, and appreciate living in an educationally minded community. That said, I had a strong reaction when I read the Brighton School District’s Preliminary Budget for 2009/10. If you would like a preview of what’s in store for school spending, the Preliminary 2009/10 school budget document is now available at the BCSD website (http://www.bcsd.org/district.cfm?subpage=1145). Take a few minutes to look it over, and share your reactions.  I’d like to know what you think! -cmjones

Formatted in big print and pretty colors, the document is easy on my old eyes, if wasteful to print.  I study the graph on page 3, which shows that  Brighton’s budget increases are in the middle of the pack when compared against other Monroe County districts.  The catch?  Every single Monroe County district spends at the very top of the nation’s rankings.  I simply don’t understand what this graph is meant to convey.  Is the District saying that because our neighbors all do it, we also should be increasing our spending at the breakneck rate of 6.6% a year?

The list of per-pupil spending on page 5 gives me no consolation.  No matter where we stand in this ranking, our current $16,310 per pupil is approaching double that of elite private school tuition and is about 1.6 times the national average of public school per-pupil spending. Across the  country, students are receiving excellent education for a significantly lower cost. On page 12, incredibly, the district announces a proposed 4.1%, 2.4 million dollar increase in spending for 09/10.

Depressed by the possible 4.1% hike and its implication for our property tax or rent burden in this economic climate, I gratefully read, starting on page 19, a detailed list of offsetting “potential” reductions totaling $717,799.00.  Painful-looking staff and program reductions give me pause. On the district’s part, this is tried-and-true psychological strategy: I am horrified by the initial 2.4 million dollar proposal, but also dismayed, as we all are, by the human cost of cuts that would “reduce” the increase to “only” 1.7 million.

But in fact I am being offered 2 spending increase alternatives, one bigger than the other. What happened to other possible options : A freeze?  A zero budget increase?  An across the board non-essential spending cut? Why is an increase in spending and in our taxes, particularly in this economic climate, mandatory?

Having been given no composite data with which to judge the overall size of the programs that may be affected,  I  go to the library to take a look at this year’s line-by-line school budget.  If you would like to study the detailed budget, ask for it at the Reference Center at the Brighton Library.  It is a big grey binder. Beware, it makes for a dizzying read.

Here are some highlights: With respect to the staff reductions proposed for the central office and schools, did you know that in addition to the full complement of regular classroom teachers including  special education, media, guidance and health teachers, we currently also employ as many or more non-teaching professionals including speech therapists, psychologists, counselors, nurses and doctors and, in addition, a regiment of clerical and administrative staff who support the non-teaching staff?  Amongst this host of teachers’ helpers there are 28 tutors and 107 teaching assistants. The building cuts propose eliminating 1.5 tutors and one teaching assistant. This can’t be serious.

Our Interscholastic Sports program costs us, with coaching salaries included, almost a million dollars a year. The $14,000, 1.5% cut proposed for this lavish program seems primarily strategic.  As much as we all want a vast array of choices and the best of everything, it bears remembering at this point that the big-picture scenario offered in the “reduced” budget entails a whopping annual expense of $17,314 per pupil, and at this price, each child will require $225,082 for their 13 years (k-12) of education.

I notice that the district spends close to $300,000.00 a year on maintenance and cleaning supplies (not equipment) used by the custodial and grounds staff, and another $83,000.00 just on supplies for the functioning of the central office. This spending is not challenged. Momentarily forgetting my budget concerns, I wonder what happened to all the talk about reducing our carbon footprint.  In the context of overall spending at the 60 million mark, the district’s reduction proposals are at best, lame.

Realize that Brighton’s school spending increases above CPI have been compounding year after year for a decade now and that any school budget increase is funded by increases in your property taxes or rents.

See:  http://www.asibrighton.org/our-overspending-problem

Given that a great many Brighton residents are currently facing salary freezes, layoffs, and declines in retirement savings in the 30% range and worsening, I find the School Board’s proposal unconscionable.

Our current hardship is potentially an opportunity for serious change in longstanding spendthrift habits, but with our school board unwilling or unable to reverse the trend, even in this dire economic climate, I fear that those of our residents that can will be moving to other communities in other states; locations with reasonable state taxes, reasonable property taxes, and excellent schools.  There are plenty of options.

I don’t know anyone who isn’t cutting expenses right now. Some are digging into savings or going into debt just to meet monthly bills. I simply don’t believe our community can bear any additional spending this year. Companies and households are finding ways to cut upwards of 10% in budgets that have fattened over the last decade: Why on earth can’t our capable, hard-working School Board do the same?

The following was read at the School Board meeting December 9, 2008:

I would like to make the Board and any public watching this broadcast aware of two items that came to the attention of our Affordable Schools Initiative group this week.

The first item was the US News & World Report 2008 ranking of 21,000 US public high schools.  (You can read the full article at the following web link:)

http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/high-schools/2008/12/04/virginia-school-tops-the-best-high-schools-list.html

Brighton HS received a silver medal ranking and did not make the top 100 list.  Both Pittsford Mendon HS and Pittsford Sutherland HS were in the top 100.   Last year, Brighton HS was #57.

The Newsweek Magazine rankings for 1,300 public high schools placed BHS at #158 this year.  We were #26 in 2003 and were in the top 100 until this past year.

When Brighton is in the top rankings, the district trumpets our success.  When we fall in the rankings, the district tells us that the measurement criteria are flawed.

Brighton is slipping based on some objective educational outcomes.  We are not educationally the same district that we were 10 years ago.

Does this mean that Brighton is not an educationally good district?  Of course not.  Brighton continues to do an excellent job educating our students.  But it would appear that we are living a bit on past laurels.  The Board should be concerned with this slippage in objective educational outcomes.

This decline comes in the face of a 35% expenditure increase since 2003. There is a clear disconnect between spending and educational results.  Again, we believe the Board should be concerned with this disconnect.

The second item that came to our attention is a Wall Street Journal article written by an economics professor at Loyola and a public policy institute senior fellow.  I will provide you with copies.

The title of the article is:  A Property Tax Cut Could Help Save Buffalo

(You can read the full article at the following web link:)

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB122852270789884347-lMyQjAxMDI4MjA4NjUwMjYyWj.html

The article argues that cutting property taxes will stimulate the economy and that western NY urgently needs property tax relief.

Here are some high points of the article:

• Between 2000 and 2007, western NY has lost 32,000 jobs and continues to lose significant population.
• Upstate school enrollments have fallen by 15,900 since 2000 while 5,000 new teaching positions and 7,400 new non-teaching positions have been added during the same period.
• San Francisco and Boston are cited as two cities that faced similar job and population losses during the 1970s and 80’s.
• Yet today, both San Francisco and Boston are growing.  A key factor to this turn-around was limits on property taxes.

Affordable Schools Initiative is concerned that this coming year, with the serious national and NYS economic condition, the Board may be faced with major financial issues.

Affordable Schools Initiative believes that past budget increases are no longer sustainable…especially if NYS aid stays flat or falls.  We urge the Board to be aware of the economy and the negative effect that increased property taxes will have on our town.  We urge the Board to consider a 2009/10 budget where no property tax increase is required.

Thank you for your attention.

TIME magazine, Nov. 26 edition, features Michelle Rhee, the controversial Washington, DC Chancellor of Education.

While the Washington, DC school district is more similar to the Rochester school district than Brighton, the article is well worth reading.  I suggest that it raises a number of issues that EVERY school district, urban or suburban, should give consideration:  Teacher effectiveness; Test scores;  Tenure…to name a few.

Click the link below to read the TIME article:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1862444,00.html

In a previous Post, I reported a USAToday article from the US Census Bureau that put Rochester, Buffalo and Syracuse in the top 10 cities losing population from 2000 to 2007.

The Rochester Business Journal, July 11, 2008, covered the Census Bureau data in more detail.  The data shows that the Monroe County TOWNS losing population around Rochester include BRIGHTON (-3.5%), Irondequoit (-4.5%), Gates, Greece and Perinton.

The towns gaining population include Webster (+8.9%), Pittsford (+3.9%), and Penfield (+2.5%).

While Brighton does not have the vacant land for building, and therefore the ability to add significant population, it should not be shrinking.

For over 25 years, I have heard (the myth?) that Brighton is one of the most desireable suburbs because of the school district.  Now, we are LOSING population.  What does this imply?  Is the Brighton School District no longer perceived as being significantly better than Webster, Pittsford or Penfield?

USAToday, July 17, 2008, published an editorial titled “Teacher protection racket.” The editorial stated that in New York City, 8 teachers were fired for incompetence in 2006-07. That’s one tenth of one percent of the 55,000 NYC public school teachers.

The cost to get rid of each of these teachers was $225,000 and required 150 hours of principal time. That’s why most NY State school districts (including those in Monroe County) don’t even bother to eliminate incompetent teachers.

In Chicago, only 3 out of every 1,000 teachers received an unsatisfactory rating. 90% got top ratings! Yet Chicago is one of the most troubled urban districts.

Why does this situation exist? Largely because of the power of teacher’s unions.

Per the editorial: “Unions have to realize that educating kids is more important than protecting inept members.”

You can read the full editorial at:

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2008/07/our-view-on-edu.html

How does this editorial relate to Brighton? We certainly have an excellent school district.  And I’m sure the majority of our teachers are excellent.  But:

• It would be interesting to know the statistics related to our teacher evaluations.
• It would be interesting to know if Brighton has ever fired an incompetent teacher.

Our teacher salaries and benefits certainly are competitive with any other school district.  Are we getting the best teachers and eliminating those that are not competent?

And the next time you hear that the Teacher Union is ONLY concerned “about the kids”, read this USAToday editorial.

Did you ever wonder how our $16,000 per-student public school education system is doing as compared to the rest of the industrialized world?

The scores from the 2006 Program for International Student Assessment showed that U.S. 15-year-olds trailed their peers from many industrialized countries. The average science score of U.S. students lagged behind those in 16 of 30 countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, a Paris-based group that represents the world’s richest countries. The U.S. students were further behind in math, trailing counterparts in 23 countries.

The PISA test, given every three years, measures the ability of 15-year-olds to apply math and science knowledge in real-life contexts. About 400,000 students, including 5,600 in the United States, took the 2006 exam.

On the science portion, U.S. students, most of them 10th-graders, received an average score of 489 on a 1,000-point scale, 11 points below the average of the 30 countries. Canada, Japan and Korea were among the countries in which students outperformed U.S. counterparts.

In math, only four countries had average scores lower than the United States. Students in 23 countries had a higher average score, and those in two countries did about the same as the Americans.

Did Brighton 10th graders take this test? If they did, how did they do?

For more information on this testing, click on: http://www.pisa.oecd.org

Here are the NYS standardized 2008 test scores in English and Math for grades 3 through 8.

Pittsford, Victor and Webster are shown for comparison purposes to similar socio-economic suburban districts.

So…”How we doin?” Pittsford looks “ahead” by a bit. But Victor and Webster are close 2nds.

Interesting that, in general, the students in grades 3-5 are doing better than grades 6-8 with a significant fall-off in grade 8.

Per the D&C: “Test scores are never the whole story in a school district. But they shine a certain telling light.”

Newsweek Magazine publishes a ranking of 1,300 public high schools.

While the criteria for any ranking can be questioned, it bothers me that Brighton continues to FALL from the lofty position it held in 2003.

Here are the rankings (for the last 5 years published):

2008 #158

2007 #87

2006 #93

2005 #47

2003 #26

The Brighton budget went UP from (approx.) $43 million to $58 million during this period…a 35% increase to $15,700 per student.

Should our ranking have fallen from #26 to #158 with 35% MORE money being spent on the SAME number of students during this period?

Of interest: Little Rock Central, in Little Rock, AR, ranked #36 this year. This school district is spending $10,614 per student. And 34% of their students qualify for subsidized lunch vs. Brighton’s 9%.

Makes you wonder…..

You can read the full Newsweek article at: www.newsweek.com/id/39380/