No doubt many of you have been following the local election, namely the Town Council candidate debate as well as various news articles covering the election. During the Town Council candidate forum hosted by the LOWV last week, I noticed one theme was raised by most of the D's which is spend more money on education.
Easier said than done. As a parent with children in our school system (let alone a BOE member) I'd like to know specifics from these candidates. Namely, where do they propose obtaining more funds for education and, more importantly, how do they intend on investing it in our school district?
Specifics please?
There are many residents fed up with election smoke & mirrors being huffed and puffed by candidates. "Spend more money on Cheshire Schools" is nothing more than a blatant attempt to appeal to those parents with children in the school system that are upset (for various reasons) on a perceived lack of investment in education. But these parents have heard it all before and simply saying "Spend more money on Cheshire Schools" isn't going to cut it for them this time around.
Specifics please?
During my 2 years on the BOE and to the best of my knowledge, none of these candidates attended a BOE meeting (be it business or committee) and offered suggestions on how the BOE can/should invest more money in the school system.
In fact, I have yet to see some of these candidate attend a BOE meeting or dialog with the BOE on how they can help the school district. Period.
Of course, this excludes Peter Talbot who is a BOE member.
And speaking of Peter Talbot, his quote "...hack and slash education budgets and assault our children in this town." is the kind of dribble that has turned off some voters in Cheshire. David Schrumm is correct when he stated that this town council did indeed raise the education budget over the last 2 years.
But if the education budget has been "hacked and slashed" then perhaps Peter can explain the following:
The BOE Policy Committee (of which Peter is a member) is preparing a motion for the BOE to consider the following (discussed at the last policy committee meeting):
“Move that the Cheshire Board of Education include a line item in the annual operating budget in the maintenance account designate, “Annual Contribution – Turf Replacement Fund.” It is the intention of the Board to designate those monies currently associated with maintaining the sod field into an account to offset the future replacement cost of the synthetic turf field. The amount of said line item for 2012/13 shall be $13,XXX. The amount contributed each year shall be at the discretion of the Board of Education based on the recommendation of the Superintendent of Schools and shall be based on the status of the budget at the close of the fiscal year.”
If the education budget has been slashed, hacked, burned...then how is it that Peter can support a slush-fund line item for turf in the BOE Operating Budget? I propose that the $13,000 in savings be put towards textbooks, upgraded telecommunications lines, a part-time assistant at Doolittle or towards purchasing technology devices to aid with classroom learning.
Consider that at the end of the 2010-2011 school year, the BOE had ~$24K leftover in it's budget. This money was given back to the town as surplus.
Consider that at the end of the 2009-2010 budget, the BOE had ~$320K leftover in it's budget. This surplus was moved to the Medical Trust Fund.
Consider that as of 10/20/2011, the BOE Medical Trust Fund balance is $3,000,000.
Regarding Peter's comment on Doolittle Enrollment: "Talbot said the average class size at Doolittle School had risen to 23 children and that, should test scores fall in coming years, it would be attributable to a "slash and burn" attitude toward education spending."
Well, what Peter didn't mention during the debate is that the school district received 19 teacher retirements as part of the concession package negotiated with the teachers' union this past spring. Why didn't Peter propose utilizing 1 or 2 of these positions in the budget to add teachers at Doolittle and offset classroom size this school year? With 19 positions, there certainly was wiggle room in the budget. Oh, right, the budget was slashed and hacked.
Peter also forgot to mention that Dr. Florio and the administration implemented a remediation plan for Doolittle by adding additional instructional assistants, increasing reading, writing and math lab time to ensure that the children receive one-one instructional time moreso than the children at Highland.
Now, I singled out Peter here because his comment of "slashing and hacking" is outrageous. I actually like and respect Peter Talbot. During his short time on the BOE, he has been a positive influence. He has good ideas (specifics) on where/how to invest in education. I wish he would focus on those specifics during his campaign.
Peter is not alone. Joe Schmitt made the following accusation: "Rumor has it that the majority on the Town Council want to do away with Advanced Placement". To echo Andy Falvey's reply on this, I have not heard about this either. In fact, not a single Republican member of the town council ever asked me or the BOE to eliminate AP classes at CHS.
But I'll ask Mr. Schmitt this question: Namely, where does he propose obtaining more funds for education and, more importantly, how does he intend on investing it in our school district? The town reserve? Higher taxes? Increased pool fees? Where?!?
When these candidates (any of them) come knocking on your door over the next few weeks, ask them for specifics. Have these candidates done their homework? Can they state fact or propaganda? If these candidates were your investment advisors, would you trust them with your money (i.e. property tax dollars) and that they will invest it wisely in town? Are they accountable, responsible and transparent?
I welcome any candidate interested in the education budget to meet with me and establish communication on how we can work together to better education. I think I speak for many in town when I say that we need candidates that will put party lines aside and demonstrate collaboration not propaganda if our Cheshire is to move forward.
