The recession has created a fiscal austerity for public schooling that is being called the ‘New Normal’, with predictions that the effects of this recession could last 5 years or longer. Few have money to spare--not the Feds, not the State, not the City and certainly not the taxpayer.
The Norwalk Board of Education (BOE) will be voting on the BOE Finance Committees 5 year, approximately $35+/- million Preliminary Capital Budget request on December 6th. Has the BOE done its due diligence, or has it shirked it’s duty and left the hard questions for other government bodies to wrangle with? In times like these, when the BOE asks for $35+/- million of taxpayer money, there should be real clear answers to questions such as--- Is the bulk of this request based on a solid plan of action and solid data? Was the process as transparent as it should have been? Were the tough questions asked—and answered? Is it equitable? Does this request make sense at this time, right now? Have all alternatives been fully investigated? My feeling is that the answer to all these questions is a ‘no’.
Capital budgets, like this request, are primarily about ‘bricks and mortar’ and little of the funding is directly related to student achievement. Norwalk schools biggest problem is student achievement and accountability. This is a 5-year Capital Budget request that isn’t aligned with a 5-year district strategic plan. The tough questions were ignored or sidelined. We’re asking taxpayers to spend millions of dollars of money and we’re not sure where we’re going with it.
Some of the funding that has been requested is clearly needed. There is a need for the asphalt, paving, rigging and gym door repairs. It makes total sense to add A/C to those elementary schools without it to allow for 12 month educational access. A number of left-over Priority 5 ‘must-do’ items from the previous 5 year plan involving repairs at a large number of district schools should be addressed. The technology request is modest. These items alone represent millions of dollars.
As for school additions, we already have unused and underused space in the district. Why are we asking for millions of dollars in additions, in this economic climate, when we have not asked the why and what of those underused spaces? And, what’s the rush? If there is, in fact, such urgency, the school first in line would be Jefferson—and it’s not. Jefferson has 8 portables that have been in place for 6 years, has not been significantly renovated in 40 years, sits on a mere 6 acres of land, has playgrounds with no grass, kindergartens with no direct egress and has had consistent, long-term enrollment increases year after year---no other district school can claim anywhere near the same extent of need or ‘urgency’.
The New Normal, as Ed Secretary Arne Duncan notes, is a future of doing more with less, thinking before spending, a time to explore productive alternatives to the old way of doing things, an opportunity to innovate and a time of using what you’ve got and using it very well. The Preliminary Capital Budget request that will be voted on December 6th is not the New Normal, but rather the same old same old and I will vote no.
Sue Haynie
Republican Board of Ed Member
The opinions expressed in this post represent those of the author and not NorwalkNet.com
Posts
Go Sue!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteDitto. Thank you Sue!
ReplyDeleteSue: Finally, someone is speaking up for Jefferson. Thank you so much.
ReplyDeleteThe nearly 600 children in that building deserve better. The elected officials in the City of Norwalk should visit and see for themselves.
There is a lot of unnecessary costs that can be cut from the BOE budget. The schools need to start trimming their budgets like every other district has been doing. What is the point of having an "intervention specialist" in every building when you have a full time social worker and an assistant principal? What about all the secretaries downtown? The corporate world has been down sizing for years. In these economic times do we really need so many secretaries? How about the smart-boards the teachers do not even use? Does anyone have a clear understanding of what all those central office staff actually do? Are all these administrators necessary. The principals seem to spend an unusual amount of time in their offices. It is unclear why and what they are doing. There is obviously a lot of unnecessary para's that can be let go. Norwalk needs to tighten the belt and get these taxes under control. Maybe there needs to be retirement incentives. It is time for fiscal responsibility instead of out of control liberal spending.
ReplyDeleteWell done, Sue.
ReplyDeleteI agree 11:19.....but is anyone listening? In my book, AP's are a huge waste whenthey have so much support for them......are they really necessary? There is a lot of waste but be sure that the first thing the board will look to cut is programs from our kids.....lets start from above right from the start!
ReplyDeleteI have a few questions about the capital budget request:
ReplyDelete1. What is the state reimbursement rate? During previous capital budget discussions, earlier this decade, it was roughly 33%. This is extremely important since it determines how much Norwalk will actually pay for much of the construction.
2. How does the 5-year plan affect the interest payment portion of the operating budget? I believe interest payments have leveled off -- after a spike caused by the previous school renovation plan -- but are we in a position to allow them to rise again, considering the economy?
3. How many portables are being used in the district? Are they being leased, do we own any of them? How much are they costing the city? Can they be moved around? It should be pointed out that long-term use of portables is frowned upon in many states, and time limits have been imposed on their usage. I don't believe that is the case with Connecticut; nonetheless, Jefferson can't continue to use them indefinitely.
6:34 You are very correct. If they keep the AP's then they should cut the intervention specialists. It is ludicrous that reading specialists would be let go instead of AP's and intervention para's. The BOE need to review the job descriptions of all the central office staff. Who is necessary and who is not. I wonder how much they spent on smart-boards that collect dust in classrooms. We need fiscal responsibility that meets the needs of the students, not excess spending to support the principals.
ReplyDeleteI have a question: The BOE is scheduled to vote on the capital budget Tuesday night; has there been a public hearing on the budget? I cannot recall one. Nor can I recall the Board or the Common Council ever voting on a budget without first allowing the public to express its views at a public hearing.
ReplyDeleteThe teachers need to tell us who is necessary and who is not. The intervention specialists may indeed be important. They can remove a single child who upsets an entire classroom. That is money well spent. Many of the literacy specialists seem to be useless. Don't throw out the people who are really doing the work teachers require. Ask the teachers what works and what doesn't!
ReplyDeleteBruce,
ReplyDeleteThere was a Finance Meeting which some parents attended - not sure if one would considered this meeting a Public Meeting because those that attended were the ones that "Steve C." spoke to. In other words, most of the folks there were supporting the three main schools that are getting the 'capital funding' attention. There are other schools that need more attention and other schools that have the space available for kids - its a mess that no one wants to untangle.
Anonymous-
ReplyDeleteThe meeting agenda for last month's Finance Committee meeting was publicly posted, as is required by law.
I did go one step further, however, and email the administrators and PTO/PTA officers of the three schools that Dr. Cook had placed as the first three schools to receive funding for more detailed design plans. I had also invited the Common Council president to attend the meeting.
One of the issues that I felt was critical to address was that the individual school communities needed to know that the specifics of the respective plans (as prepared by the experts retained by the BOE as part of their analysis of our elementary schools) were subject to further review and that it would be important for all stakeholders to be involved in the ultimate final design process.
Although you appear to be critiquing my providing too much notice to groups about the meeting, I am happy that we have finally turned the corner where a BOE committee chair is chastised for inviting too many people to an important meeting. I do welcome hearing all points of view and will continue to encourage those folks who agree and disagree with me to speak their mind at the committee meetings I chair.
I thought that a Magnet School has a set number of students and is not driven by neighborhood population. If that is the case, why is Jefferson overcrowded? Please correct me if I'm wrong.
ReplyDelete