The FY 2013-2014 BOE budget kicked off on 1/3 with the superintendent's budget presentation which can be found here. A series of Finance Committee meetings to review the budget starts tomorrow night at Dodd Middle School.
The Finance Committee review meetings will follow a similar format as last year which involves diving into the details behind the budget increase as opposed to reciting each account in the budget. As always, the finance committee welcomes public input into the budget.
January 8, 2013 Public Budget Review
Dodd Middle School – 7:30 p.m. Administrative Review of Accounts
January 10, 2013 Public Budget Review
Dodd Middle School – 7:30 p.m. Administrative Review of Accounts
January 22, 2013 Public Informational Meeting/Board Member Responses to
Superintendent’s Budget/Adoption of a Board of Education Budget, if
possible
Dodd Middle School – 7:30 p.m.
January 24, 2013 (if necessary) Special Meeting of the Board of Education to Adopt a Board of
Dodd Middle School – 7:30 p.m. Education Budget
February 15, 2013 Approved Board of Education Budget Request Transmitted to Town
Manager
April 2013 (Date to be determined) Town Budget Hearing
April 17, 2013 Town Council Adoption of Town Budget
June 28, 2013 Final Budget Must be Approved by Board of Education
Monday, January 7, 2013
Friday, December 14, 2012
Newtown School Shooting Tragedy
A senseless, terrible and cowardly tragedy took place today at Sandy Hook elementary school in Newtown. The lives of innocent children and adults were taken from them. Words....cannot express the anger, sadness and grief that I and many feel about this tragedy.
As a parent, I need to explain what happened today to my children when they arrive home from school. Like many other parents the challenge is not explaining what happened but WHY it happened. Not easy explaining to my 8 and 10 year old girls why such a tragedy can and has happened. I know my wife and I are not alone on this.
There's information available on the Cheshire Public Schools website about how to talk about violence, tips for parents: http://www.cheshire.k12.ct.us/media/41822/talking%20to%20children%20about%20violence%20-%20national%20association%20of%20school%20psychologists.pdf
As a parent with children in the Cheshire Public Schools and a member of the Board of Education, despite this tragedy today I believe Cheshire Public Schools offers a safe and secure environment for our children. This unfortunate and sad tragedy has certainly and rightfully made parents concerned about safety in our schools, all schools.
While the school district routinely reviews school safety....I assure you that as a member of the BOE here in Cheshire, that Board and Administration will review our security mechanisms in light of this horrible tragedy. I anticipate parents will have questions on security after today so please don't hesitate to contact myself, the board or the Superintendent's office.
When your children arrive home from school today, give them a great big hug!
My family's thoughts and prayers go out to the victims and their families. For once, I am at a loss for words over such a needless, senseless loss of precious life.
As a parent, I need to explain what happened today to my children when they arrive home from school. Like many other parents the challenge is not explaining what happened but WHY it happened. Not easy explaining to my 8 and 10 year old girls why such a tragedy can and has happened. I know my wife and I are not alone on this.
There's information available on the Cheshire Public Schools website about how to talk about violence, tips for parents: http://www.cheshire.k12.ct.us/media/41822/talking%20to%20children%20about%20violence%20-%20national%20association%20of%20school%20psychologists.pdf
As a parent with children in the Cheshire Public Schools and a member of the Board of Education, despite this tragedy today I believe Cheshire Public Schools offers a safe and secure environment for our children. This unfortunate and sad tragedy has certainly and rightfully made parents concerned about safety in our schools, all schools.
While the school district routinely reviews school safety....I assure you that as a member of the BOE here in Cheshire, that Board and Administration will review our security mechanisms in light of this horrible tragedy. I anticipate parents will have questions on security after today so please don't hesitate to contact myself, the board or the Superintendent's office.
When your children arrive home from school today, give them a great big hug!
My family's thoughts and prayers go out to the victims and their families. For once, I am at a loss for words over such a needless, senseless loss of precious life.
Monday, October 8, 2012
New 4 Year, 8.93% Teacher Contract Approved, My Vote Explained
During the 10/4 Special Board of Ed meeting, the BOE approved (5-1) a new 4 year teacher contract with the EAC. I was the lone "No" vote and my explanation for the vote is detailed below.
The new contract is unique in that it has a duration of 4 years as compared to the often 3 year term. Indeed, 8.93% over the course of years as compared to 14.4% of the previous contract (prior to the last negotiation) over 3 years seems like a great deal. I believe it is certainly a fair economic deal for both the town and the teachers and representative of the economic climate and challenges we all face.
Breakdown of the 8.93% increase:
Year 1 (2013/2014): 0% Step Increase, 1% General Wage Increase.
Year 2 (2014/2015): 1.63% Step Increase, 1.49**% General Wage Increase
Year 3 (2015/2016): 1.69% Step Increase, 1.00% General Wage Increase
Year 4 (2016/2017): 1.55% Step Increase, 1.00% General Wage Increase
** .25% is applied to Steps 1-13. 1.24% is applied to Step 14
I believe these wage increases are fair. Aside from the Step system itself, I don't have an issue with these wage increases.
In addition to the wage increases, changes have been agreed to in the Medical Benefits portion of the contract. These changes will increase the employee share for higher cost plans and will either reduce the Board's costs for these plans or create more movement to the lower cost plan options available. The employee cost share increases 3.5% over 4 years for the HSA plan. In the Preferred Provider Plan (PPO), the participant will be responsible to pay the difference between a fixed percent cost of the H.S.A and PPO plan.
In essence, teacher's choosing a plan outside of the HSA plan will buy up into PPO plan (if they choose) with no additional cost (premiums) to the school district. I believe this is significant.
It's estimated that the medical benefits changes may save the Board approximately $200,000/yr during the life of this new contract. I use the word *May* because, as we have seen, insurance costs haven't remained stable for us over the last few years. But, nonetheless, the potential for considerable savings does exist and should be applauded.
I plan on providing more specific details about the medical cost/compensation provisions soon.
Another highlight of the agreement is that the teacher's work day increases from 7 hours 20 minutes to 7 hours 50 minutes ONE day per week. This change was made in order to accommodate additional collaboration time between teachers.
The Reason for my "No" Vote
I am supportive of the wage increase, medical cost changes and term of this new contract. I do believe that, economically, it is one of the better contracts Cheshire has seen in some time. I want to thank the EAC, the teachers and negotiation teams for coming together and reaching this deal outside of arbitration. I want to thank the union for their professionalism, cordiality and commitment to Cheshire. Had there been more time available to the negotiation process we may have been able to address more concerns. Time, as always, is of the essence.
I am not voting against what was agreed to. However (this is solely my opinion and not necessarily that of the board) there were 3 more important items that needed attention in this contract. All too often, we tend to focus on the numbers and lose sight of more pressing issues. IMO, the wage/benefit changes are only 50% of what needed attention.
One of the areas I wanted to change was the general Step Increase system in the contract. The contract contains a series of 15 Step increases. These are wage increases that are earned for each year of service. These increases are earned regardless of performance. My goal is to move away from a guaranteed step increase and towards a performance-based pay increase system. The general wage increase part of the contract would still exist.
The intent of a performance pay system is to reward those teachers who are performing well over those teachers that may not be performing as well. It is to reward and recognize those teachers, or teams of teachers, that are making a measurable impact in our school district. Under this system, teachers could see a substantially higher increase if they are performing exceptionally while others may be see a lower, or no increase, if they are performing below proficiency.
In general terms, the framework is not very different than what is being done in the private sector. It is not much different than the successful frameworks I've used to hire and coach hundreds of employees in my career. To make such a performance-based system work, teachers would need to be measured on OBJECTIVE criteria. The objective criteria would be defined by both the teachers and administrators, collaboratively. Such a system can only work and have fair results if subjectivity is taken out of the equation. I don't consider the Step system to be fair as it rewards both effective and ineffective teachers and does not monetarily incentive teachers to perform better or be recognized for their exceptional contributions.
Many are aware of the new CT State law on the teacher evaluations that's scheduled to be implemented at the start of the 2013/2014 school year. In this framework, teachers are evaluated in a series of categories some of which measure student success among other factors. This framework is currently being piloted in certain school districts in CT. In this framework, teachers can be rated among 4 performance levels: Exemplary, Proficient, Developing and Below Standard. As an FYI, Cheshire applied to be one of the Pilot schools this year but was rejected by the State.
My idea would be to incorporate this performance ranking in determining pay increases above and beyond general wage increases. I do agree with the general State law over teach evaluation and it seems to provide an objective framework based on defined measurements in helping evaluate teachers. More importantly, it helps identify teachers that need improvement and I want to give those the teachers the tools and training needed to improve. I believe Cheshire can utilize this system to help reward teachers as well.
It's understandable that such a change in compensation would be met with skepticism. However, my goal was to form an agreement/committee between the union, teachers and administration and study the performance-pay framework over the course of 1-2 years. Then reconvene and possibly implement the change into the contract at a later time. However, the idea was tabled indefinitely and not given enough time or consideration for discussion. I believe if we had more time, this would've been given more thoughtful discussion it rightfully deserves.
A second area of concern I have with the contract is a reduction in force. Under the current contract, when a reduction in force is necessary, the contract stipulates that non-tenured teachers be reduced over tenured teachers. This is not fair by any means. Tenure does not guarantee effective teachers. We've had to lay off new, bright and effective teachers during layoffs who may perform better than their tenured peers simply because they were not tenured.
Rather, I wanted to modify the contract language such that either tenured or "Below-Proficient" teachers may be reduced during layoffs. I don't want to continue losing good new teachers during the course of layoffs should they ensure over the next 4 years. If we lose teachers in school district it should only be those teachers that, despite opportunities for training and improvement, have not improved over time and are ineffective.
It may seem that since the evaluation pilot is currently in "pilot" mode that I may be putting the cart before the horse when it comes to rating teachers on performance and rewarding them accordingly. However, the new evaluation is law and will be implemented in 2013/2014 school year. Soon, our curriculum committee will be studying the pilot and working with administration officials to implement the framework.
I don't believe we can wait another 5 years to address performance pay. The contract does not recognize the evaluation law and has no provision to remove teachers that are ineffective per the new evaluation law. As such, it's highly possible that we may indeed have ineffective teachers that we cannot eliminate because the contract does not address this specifically. It's unclear if the new law trumps termination clauses in current contracts.
When the new evaluation process is rating our teachers as either Exemplary, Proficient, Developing or Below Standard...those teachers who are continually exemplary/proficient i.e. Effective will begin wondering why they are not being paid more for performing better over those teachers ranked at a lower performance level. Performance pay is an inevitable topic of discussion. It's coming. The cart is rolling along and we need to catch up to it sooner rather than later.
I believe that the Cheshire school district has the people to make such a plan work. Between the collective experience of the union leadership, teachers and administrators we can make this idea successful. It's not an easy topic to address but I believe it's the right topic to tackle. Rewarding our teachers for a job well done while identifying and helping those teachers in need of improvement can have not only a positive impact on pay/performance, but more importantly, it can help our students achieve better which is the ultimate benefit.
This is the basis for my "No" vote on the contract.
The new contract is unique in that it has a duration of 4 years as compared to the often 3 year term. Indeed, 8.93% over the course of years as compared to 14.4% of the previous contract (prior to the last negotiation) over 3 years seems like a great deal. I believe it is certainly a fair economic deal for both the town and the teachers and representative of the economic climate and challenges we all face.
Breakdown of the 8.93% increase:
Year 1 (2013/2014): 0% Step Increase, 1% General Wage Increase.
Year 2 (2014/2015): 1.63% Step Increase, 1.49**% General Wage Increase
Year 3 (2015/2016): 1.69% Step Increase, 1.00% General Wage Increase
Year 4 (2016/2017): 1.55% Step Increase, 1.00% General Wage Increase
** .25% is applied to Steps 1-13. 1.24% is applied to Step 14
I believe these wage increases are fair. Aside from the Step system itself, I don't have an issue with these wage increases.
In addition to the wage increases, changes have been agreed to in the Medical Benefits portion of the contract. These changes will increase the employee share for higher cost plans and will either reduce the Board's costs for these plans or create more movement to the lower cost plan options available. The employee cost share increases 3.5% over 4 years for the HSA plan. In the Preferred Provider Plan (PPO), the participant will be responsible to pay the difference between a fixed percent cost of the H.S.A and PPO plan.
In essence, teacher's choosing a plan outside of the HSA plan will buy up into PPO plan (if they choose) with no additional cost (premiums) to the school district. I believe this is significant.
It's estimated that the medical benefits changes may save the Board approximately $200,000/yr during the life of this new contract. I use the word *May* because, as we have seen, insurance costs haven't remained stable for us over the last few years. But, nonetheless, the potential for considerable savings does exist and should be applauded.
I plan on providing more specific details about the medical cost/compensation provisions soon.
Another highlight of the agreement is that the teacher's work day increases from 7 hours 20 minutes to 7 hours 50 minutes ONE day per week. This change was made in order to accommodate additional collaboration time between teachers.
The Reason for my "No" Vote
I am supportive of the wage increase, medical cost changes and term of this new contract. I do believe that, economically, it is one of the better contracts Cheshire has seen in some time. I want to thank the EAC, the teachers and negotiation teams for coming together and reaching this deal outside of arbitration. I want to thank the union for their professionalism, cordiality and commitment to Cheshire. Had there been more time available to the negotiation process we may have been able to address more concerns. Time, as always, is of the essence.
I am not voting against what was agreed to. However (this is solely my opinion and not necessarily that of the board) there were 3 more important items that needed attention in this contract. All too often, we tend to focus on the numbers and lose sight of more pressing issues. IMO, the wage/benefit changes are only 50% of what needed attention.
One of the areas I wanted to change was the general Step Increase system in the contract. The contract contains a series of 15 Step increases. These are wage increases that are earned for each year of service. These increases are earned regardless of performance. My goal is to move away from a guaranteed step increase and towards a performance-based pay increase system. The general wage increase part of the contract would still exist.
The intent of a performance pay system is to reward those teachers who are performing well over those teachers that may not be performing as well. It is to reward and recognize those teachers, or teams of teachers, that are making a measurable impact in our school district. Under this system, teachers could see a substantially higher increase if they are performing exceptionally while others may be see a lower, or no increase, if they are performing below proficiency.
In general terms, the framework is not very different than what is being done in the private sector. It is not much different than the successful frameworks I've used to hire and coach hundreds of employees in my career. To make such a performance-based system work, teachers would need to be measured on OBJECTIVE criteria. The objective criteria would be defined by both the teachers and administrators, collaboratively. Such a system can only work and have fair results if subjectivity is taken out of the equation. I don't consider the Step system to be fair as it rewards both effective and ineffective teachers and does not monetarily incentive teachers to perform better or be recognized for their exceptional contributions.
Many are aware of the new CT State law on the teacher evaluations that's scheduled to be implemented at the start of the 2013/2014 school year. In this framework, teachers are evaluated in a series of categories some of which measure student success among other factors. This framework is currently being piloted in certain school districts in CT. In this framework, teachers can be rated among 4 performance levels: Exemplary, Proficient, Developing and Below Standard. As an FYI, Cheshire applied to be one of the Pilot schools this year but was rejected by the State.
My idea would be to incorporate this performance ranking in determining pay increases above and beyond general wage increases. I do agree with the general State law over teach evaluation and it seems to provide an objective framework based on defined measurements in helping evaluate teachers. More importantly, it helps identify teachers that need improvement and I want to give those the teachers the tools and training needed to improve. I believe Cheshire can utilize this system to help reward teachers as well.
It's understandable that such a change in compensation would be met with skepticism. However, my goal was to form an agreement/committee between the union, teachers and administration and study the performance-pay framework over the course of 1-2 years. Then reconvene and possibly implement the change into the contract at a later time. However, the idea was tabled indefinitely and not given enough time or consideration for discussion. I believe if we had more time, this would've been given more thoughtful discussion it rightfully deserves.
A second area of concern I have with the contract is a reduction in force. Under the current contract, when a reduction in force is necessary, the contract stipulates that non-tenured teachers be reduced over tenured teachers. This is not fair by any means. Tenure does not guarantee effective teachers. We've had to lay off new, bright and effective teachers during layoffs who may perform better than their tenured peers simply because they were not tenured.
Rather, I wanted to modify the contract language such that either tenured or "Below-Proficient" teachers may be reduced during layoffs. I don't want to continue losing good new teachers during the course of layoffs should they ensure over the next 4 years. If we lose teachers in school district it should only be those teachers that, despite opportunities for training and improvement, have not improved over time and are ineffective.
It may seem that since the evaluation pilot is currently in "pilot" mode that I may be putting the cart before the horse when it comes to rating teachers on performance and rewarding them accordingly. However, the new evaluation is law and will be implemented in 2013/2014 school year. Soon, our curriculum committee will be studying the pilot and working with administration officials to implement the framework.
I don't believe we can wait another 5 years to address performance pay. The contract does not recognize the evaluation law and has no provision to remove teachers that are ineffective per the new evaluation law. As such, it's highly possible that we may indeed have ineffective teachers that we cannot eliminate because the contract does not address this specifically. It's unclear if the new law trumps termination clauses in current contracts.
When the new evaluation process is rating our teachers as either Exemplary, Proficient, Developing or Below Standard...those teachers who are continually exemplary/proficient i.e. Effective will begin wondering why they are not being paid more for performing better over those teachers ranked at a lower performance level. Performance pay is an inevitable topic of discussion. It's coming. The cart is rolling along and we need to catch up to it sooner rather than later.
I believe that the Cheshire school district has the people to make such a plan work. Between the collective experience of the union leadership, teachers and administrators we can make this idea successful. It's not an easy topic to address but I believe it's the right topic to tackle. Rewarding our teachers for a job well done while identifying and helping those teachers in need of improvement can have not only a positive impact on pay/performance, but more importantly, it can help our students achieve better which is the ultimate benefit.
This is the basis for my "No" vote on the contract.
Thursday, August 16, 2012
BOE Business Meeting Tonight 8/16/12
BOE Business Meeting 7:30pm Town Council Chambers
* No, the teachers' contract negotiation will not be discussed at the meeting or on this blog due to confidentiality...so don't ask as I can't talk about it. :-)
* No, the teachers' contract negotiation will not be discussed at the meeting or on this blog due to confidentiality...so don't ask as I can't talk about it. :-)
AGENDA
1. Call to Order – 7:30 p.m.
A. Roll Call for Quorum
B. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America
2. Approval of Minutes
A. Approval of Minutes of Board of Education (Business) Meeting Held June 7, 2012
B. Approval of Minutes of Board of Education (Fiscal) Meeting Held June 26, 2012
C. Approval of Minutes of Board of Education (Special) Meeting Held July 5, 2012
3. Correspondence
4. Superintendent’s Report
5. Consent Calendar
A. Approval of Statement on Class Size Policy
B. Approval of ACES Annual Membership Agreement
C. Rescission of Teacher Leave Request
6. Reports of Standing Committees
A. Finance
I. Financial Update
II. Approval of Increase of School Lunch and Milk Prices
B. Personnel
I. Approval of Contract between the Cheshire Board of
Education and Cheshire
Administrative Personnel
C. Planning
I. Report on Status of Construction Projects and Summer Maintenance
II. Update on Capital Budget
D. Other Standing Committees
7. Audience
8. Old Business
9. New Business
10. Adjournment
Thursday, June 14, 2012
New School Bus Technology Uveiled in Wolcott, Cheshire Next
WTNH reports that Wolcott is adopting a new school bus technology that will catch drivers who illegally pass buses. http://www.wtnh.com/dpp/news/new_haven_cty/wolcott-going-high-tech-to-keep-kids-safe
In May, the BOE Planning Committee discussed streamlining bus routes to reduce the number of stops along bus routes and adopt the same technology being used on Wolcotts' school buses. Some routes have elementary school buses (not kindergarten) pickup/drop off in front of individual homes, multiple times, along the same street! It is estimated that reducing the number of stops on our bus routes would save the school district about $50,000 annually in overtime costs. The study will continue over the summer. I will post details on the bus routes as they are made available.
Regarding the school bus technology, Cheshire is going to pilot it this coming school year. The camera will capture license plates of vehicles illegally passing school buses which is a growing problem in Cheshire. Those passing the bus may find a ticket in the mail.
According to WTNH: "Here's how that works: Violators will be slapped with a 450 dollar ticket. The town will get 85 percent of the money and SmartBus will also get a cut."
While bus drivers have been complaining about drivers illegally passing them along bus routes the Planning Committee was surprised to learn that the problem may be at its' worst in school parking lots. Buses are passed in front of school pick up areas illegally which is a concern considering that some school pickups areas don't allow vehicles other than school buses during drop-off/pick up hours. Parking in handicapped spots, parking in fire lanes and leaving the vehicle unattended were also raised.
In May, the BOE Planning Committee discussed streamlining bus routes to reduce the number of stops along bus routes and adopt the same technology being used on Wolcotts' school buses. Some routes have elementary school buses (not kindergarten) pickup/drop off in front of individual homes, multiple times, along the same street! It is estimated that reducing the number of stops on our bus routes would save the school district about $50,000 annually in overtime costs. The study will continue over the summer. I will post details on the bus routes as they are made available.
Regarding the school bus technology, Cheshire is going to pilot it this coming school year. The camera will capture license plates of vehicles illegally passing school buses which is a growing problem in Cheshire. Those passing the bus may find a ticket in the mail.
According to WTNH: "Here's how that works: Violators will be slapped with a 450 dollar ticket. The town will get 85 percent of the money and SmartBus will also get a cut."
While bus drivers have been complaining about drivers illegally passing them along bus routes the Planning Committee was surprised to learn that the problem may be at its' worst in school parking lots. Buses are passed in front of school pick up areas illegally which is a concern considering that some school pickups areas don't allow vehicles other than school buses during drop-off/pick up hours. Parking in handicapped spots, parking in fire lanes and leaving the vehicle unattended were also raised.
Thursday, April 26, 2012
CHS Boys Locker Room Open Discussion
Some of you have contacted me to discuss the CHS Boys Locker room situation on the blog and to allow folks to comment/openly discuss the matter. So I started this post to allow folks to have a discussion around what has become a circus of a project. As always please keep the comments civil.
I'll post my thoughts on the matter over the next few days.
I'll post my thoughts on the matter over the next few days.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)