Christie Calls on School Districts and NJEA to

[fiberisgoodforyou]

Governor Chris Christie Calls on School Districts and Education Associations to Work Together to Protect Children and Prevent Property Tax Increases

Trenton, NJ – In a letter distributed today, Governor Chris Christie called on local school districts and education associations to come to the table to work together in finding cost savings and new efficiencies, spending reductions, and budget solutions that protect education in the classroom and prevent property tax increases.

“While the budget challenges for school districts across the state are significant, they are not insurmountable. Achieving the needed savings and finding budgetary stability will require all parties to step up, pitch in, and work toward the common goal of protecting our educational priorities,” said Governor Chris Christie. “I’m confident this middle road can be found if school districts and local education associations come to the table, find common ground, and act quickly to find the difficult, but needed savings in these budgets.”

Through the Department of Education, Governor Christie has already directed the Executive County Superintendents to exercise their authority to closely examine school district budgets that have been submitted in order to identify and disapprove excessive administrative spending and budgeted expenditures that are not essential to education.

“In these difficult economic times, we cannot afford to overlook savings that can be achieved through reductions in administrative and non-educational spending. The Executive County Superintendents, in cooperation with Commissioner Schundler, will be working with school districts to achieve savings in those areas first,” added Governor Christie.

In addition to cutting spending that is not essential to education, Governor Christie called on school boards and local education associations to act on the following cost-savings initiatives prior to April 3, the final date by which all school boards must have their budgets adopted:

· Implementing a salary freeze for fiscal year 2011 in all collective bargaining agreements;
· Requiring that school district employees make contributions to their health benefits that equal those required of State employees under the New Jersey State Health Benefits Program.

These are the types of concessions and shared sacrifice being asked of all public employees. Senate Bill 3, signed into law yesterday, requires a minimum contribution to health benefits no later than upon the expiration of all public employee contracts. The new law will save local taxpayers an estimated $314 million in the coming fiscal year. By extending a similar contribution requirement to all public employees, including those covered by existing contracts, additional savings can be achieved and, together with a one year salary freeze, mitigate any anticipated property tax increases and avert cuts to classroom instruction.

Additionally, Governor Christie has instructed Education Commissioner Schundler to issue guidelines to each school district to implement this call to action. These guidelines will provide a framework for districts and bargaining units to work together, find common ground, and identify the needed reform and savings to protect the quality of education for New Jersey children.

[adefonzo]

This needs to be said....

I am disappointed in Governor Christie in one major respect...

He is a Republican Governor, not "beholden" to the predominantly Democratic Abbot districts...and yet, in the few articles that I have seen about his work with regard to the schools...not one word about dealing with the gross overfunding of the Abbott districts.

Governor Christie, do the right thing. Save the state tens of millions by finding ways and reasons to cut back on the ridiculous funding of Abbott Districts. Everyone else who knows anything about the schools in New Jersey knows that this is potentially huge money saver, why do you not see it??

[richardkelsey]

Apr 5, 2010 12:50:22 GMT -5 adefonzo said:

This needs to be said....

I am disappointed in Governor Christie in one major respect...

He is a Republican Governor, not "beholden" to the predominantly Democratic Abbot districts...and yet, in the few articles that I have seen about his work with regard to the schools...not one word about dealing with the gross overfunding of the Abbott districts.

Governor Christie, do the right thing. Save the state tens of millions by finding ways and reasons to cut back on the ridiculous funding of Abbott Districts. Everyone else who knows anything about the schools in New Jersey knows that this is potentially huge money saver, why do you not see it??

I don't think he can open too many fronts at one time. His war with the NJEA and the political patronage culture of NJ is hard enough. Let's not also forget, the legislature is stuffed with liberals who do not want and would never work with him on most issues.

[adefonzo]

Apr 5, 2010 15:52:22 GMT -5 richardkelsey said:

I don't think he can open too many fronts at one time. His war with the NJEA and the political patronage culture of NJ is hard enough. Let's not also forget, the legislature is stuffed with liberals who do not want and would never work with him on most issues.

I have to disagree with your reasoning. First of all the political patronage battle is one he should have been well aware of when he first put his name on the ticket to run for Governor. The fact that the legislature is stuffed with Democrats (I don't know all of them well enough to call them Liberals just yet) is another thing that he should have known and will affect him with every idea that he comes up with - I doubt the Democrats are fully behind his idea to have teachers take a wage freeze (for example).

As for his battle with the NJEA, that was coming no matter what you do with regard to trying to get New Jersey's schools under control. I have a lot of respect for teachers, but the NJEA (as with most teacher's unions) are a disgrace. The moment anyone even tries to discuss a way to cut money from schools they start screaming bloody murder and how horrible you are because you don't care for the children...it's B.S., it's scare tactics, it absolute nonsense, plain and simple.

So, back to Gov. Christie...

Obviously he knows that schools are struggling, and he knows that state funding for schools is out of control. So, does he go and deal with that one fraction of the schools that are getting the overwhelming lion's share of state funding to the point that they are grossly over funded?? No...he (like his predecessors before him) makes everyone sacrifice, putting school districts like Freehold Boro - who were already behind the 8-ball - even further away from the pack.

And let me be frank...I think that if you strictly look at the numbers, Freehold Boro spends more than enough already on a per-pupil basis to provide a more than adequate education for the students of the town. But the reality is that in the New Jersey environment, with the ridiculous number of unfunded state mandates, the school district falls far short of adequate spending per pupil.

So either you get rid of the mandates, and allow the school to spend money properly, or you cut state funding where is it most easily identifiable as overspending...with the Abbott districts.

[richardkelsey]

Apr 6, 2010 1:22:05 GMT -5 adefonzo said:

Apr 5, 2010 15:52:22 GMT -5 richardkelsey said:

I don't think he can open too many fronts at one time. His war with the NJEA and the political patronage culture of NJ is hard enough. Let's not also forget, the legislature is stuffed with liberals who do not want and would never work with him on most issues.

I have to disagree with your reasoning. First of all the political patronage battle is one he should have been well aware of when he first put his name on the ticket to run for Governor. The fact that the legislature is stuffed with Democrats (I don't know all of them well enough to call them Liberals just yet) is another thing that he should have known and will affect him with every idea that he comes up with - I doubt the Democrats are fully behind his idea to have teachers take a wage freeze (for example).

As for his battle with the NJEA, that was coming no matter what you do with regard to trying to get New Jersey's schools under control. I have a lot of respect for teachers, but the NJEA (as with most teacher's unions) are a disgrace. The moment anyone even tries to discuss a way to cut money from schools they start screaming bloody murder and how horrible you are because you don't care for the children...it's B.S., it's scare tactics, it absolute nonsense, plain and simple.

So, back to Gov. Christie...

Obviously he knows that schools are struggling, and he knows that state funding for schools is out of control. So, does he go and deal with that one fraction of the schools that are getting the overwhelming lion's share of state funding to the point that they are grossly over funded?? No...he (like his predecessors before him) makes everyone sacrifice, putting school districts like Freehold Boro - who were already behind the 8-ball - even further away from the pack.

And let me be frank...I think that if you strictly look at the numbers, Freehold Boro spends more than enough already on a per-pupil basis to provide a more than adequate education for the students of the town. But the reality is that in the New Jersey environment, with the ridiculous number of unfunded state mandates, the school district falls far short of adequate spending per pupil.

So either you get rid of the mandates, and allow the school to spend money properly, or you cut state funding where is it most easily identifiable as overspending...with the Abbott districts.

Knowing that the legislature is filled with dems, and knowing that political patronage dominates every level of Government, does not make a minority Governor any more empowered to stop those items. I think he is committed to it -- I am merely saying that when you are paddling up stream against a formidable current, you can only take on so many passengers at one time and expect to make the journey.

The Governor may be the head of state, but he is not a dictator. Some items he can do without the legislature -- and he is doing well in that regard. However, fundamentally changes in law require the legislature -- and they are not going to help. That is just a fact.

I don't disagree at all with you take on the NJEA. They are part of the problem -- never a part of the solution. They exist not for teachers -- and certainly not for students --- they exist for union leaders and power brokers to milk a broken system. People who don't get that, need only look at the current dispute.

The union is spending the money of teachers in an ad campaign to crush the Governor. They could be making concessions to help the students, protect younger teachers, and be part of the solution. They likewise could be using there political war-chest to help teachers in need.

The Governor made a very shrewd move by putting the young teachers and the students between the union and the cuts. When he announced that districts who agreed to the freeze in wages would receive more aid -- he called the bluff of the NJEA -- who falsely claims that this is "all about the children."

The NJEA is not even all about the teachers. It is about union bosses and protecting the most senior teachers. In a real economic re-org, scores of those senior teachers who under-perform would be released, and younger teachers would be promoted and rewarded.

Anyway -- I think if Christie wants to get serious, he should propose abolishing the New Jersey Department of Education. Teacher certification should be moved to the localities, and state mandates removed. I would offer 50% more aid to any district who voluntarily votes to dissolve its membership in the NJEA. As part of the package, I would offer incentive bonuses for performance. Then, we will find out if good teachers really want to be paid more, and if teachers really want education dollars to go to instruction and helping children.

[BrianSullivan]

Rich wrote:

I don't disagree at all with you take on the NJEA. They are part of the problem -- never a part of the solution. They exist not for teachers -- and certainly not for students --- they exist for union leaders and power brokers to milk a broken system. People who don't get that, need only look at the current dispute.

I agree with this big time! The unions in this state are awful, selfish, and corrupt. They cut off the nose of the union members to spite their face. The NJEA is one of the worst. As far as I am concerned, bust ALL the unions. The membership will be better off without them. Not long ago I was relating some horror stories to Ted Miller as to what I have seen in unions. It is enough to tum most people off.

When it comes to solutions that unions ought to look at, I have been saying it for years that they needed to do something about the skyrocketing costs of health care. AS long as the tax payers keep getting stuck with the bill, the unions did not care. Fast forward to present time, and what do we see? The unions are screaming because they cost too much and the tax payer cannot pay for them. Everything that is happening was foreseeable. What good did the unions do? Nothing. The membership needs to put the blame where it lies.

[BrianSullivan]

Speaking of Abbot and the need to get rid of it, wasn't that a court ordered mandate based on the state constitution? What can Christy do about it without the legislature?

[richardkelsey]

Apr 6, 2010 9:42:34 GMT -5 BrianSullivan said:

Speaking of Abbot and the need to get rid of it, wasn't that a court ordered mandate based on the state constitution? What can Christy do about it without the legislature?

Exactly. This whole nonsense goes back to the NJ Constitutional right to a "thorough and efficient" education.

The Courts -- the Super Legislature of NJ cares only about the what it thinks is the "thorough" component of that requirement. It does not address the "efficient" component. In 1994, I wrote a nice op-ed on this in the APP. I said then the state should have a Constitutional convention to revise the Constitution and take away the ambiguity that allows the Courts to legislate and mandate education requirements. This NJ legislature needs to take its state back from the Courts.

NJ is likewise entitled to an "efficient" education -- and no one is getting one there.

[adefonzo]

Since we are apparently all in agreement regarding the NJEA, let's get to what Governor Christie can do.

First of all, I am not sure of the legal maneuvering that would have to be involved, but when the last governor along with his head of the Department of Education restructured the public school funding formula, they eliminated the use of "thorough and efficient education" as the basis for calculating funding. Nowadays, it's called "adequacy", which as of when I left back in September, I still don't think anyone had a clear definition of what that meant.

Now, if the Supreme Court ruling was specifically related to the Constitutional right of "thorough and efficient", I have to wonder if there is room for anyone to bring a lawsuit against the state saying that the current formula is not Constitutionally valid. Of course the risk is allowing legislation to come from "the bench" once again, which in New Jersey, is always detrimental. But perhaps there is a way to challenge something in the courts somewhere....which then leads to the second problem...who's going to take up that challenge? I can tell you for absolute certain...it won't be Freehold Boro.

Moving on...again I understand the concept of what Governor Christie is facing with the political atmosphere in Trenton, but this is where I feel he went wrong. Think of what is happening on the National level. Christie (in my opinion) should have picked his fight with the Abbott Districts, which would certainly alienate a large number, if not all of the Democrat legislators, not necessarily because they felt it was a bad concept, but because they would be beholden to their party bosses who would be beating the drum on this issue. But then his message to the rest of the state should have been one which shows just how wasteful the money going to the Abbott districts is. This maneuver could have motivated people in voting districts that do not have Abbott schools to start voicing their opinions to their Democratic politicians (I'm not going to call the folks in Trenton "leaders" or "representatives" anymore than I will use those terms for the folks in Washington).

The idea is that there could have been significant pressure put on those Democrats to either listen to their constituents, or face a difficult re-election bid in November. This, obviously, could help swing the balance of power in the state legislature towards the other side of the aisle (of course, benefiting Christie in a number of ways outside of this one issue). But, instead, Christie has chosen to pick a fight with the whole state, cutting funding across the board, which has much less likelihood of getting a groundswell of support from anyone outside of those people (like Brian ) who are always disgusted with the amount of money we spend on public education...but (sorry Brian) those voices are not nearly as loud as the voices you would have heard had you done it the other way (in my opinion).

Is it "divisive politics"...yes, it would certainly be viewed that way, especially by a liberal media, the Democratic politicians in Trenton, and of course, the always fair minded NJEA. But, as it is being seen on a National level, this country is at a tipping point. The people need to be shaken up, shown the truth about how wasteful governement spending has gotten, and I can think of few better examples than the Abbott districts.

Anyway....that's the way I think it should have been played out...but unfortunately, Christie has chosen to punish everyone rather than just those who have been feeding overwhelmingly at the trough for the last number of years without being held accountable for any of the benefits that they have reaped.

[richardkelsey]

Apr 6, 2010 18:16:45 GMT -5 adefonzo said:

Since we are apparently all in agreement regarding the NJEA, let's get to what Governor Christie can do.

First of all, I am not sure of the legal maneuvering that would have to be involved, but when the last governor along with his head of the Department of Education restructured the public school funding formula, they eliminated the use of "thorough and efficient education" as the basis for calculating funding. Nowadays, it's called "adequacy", which as of when I left back in September, I still don't think anyone had a clear definition of what that meant.

Now, if the Supreme Court ruling was specifically related to the Constitutional right of "thorough and efficient", I have to wonder if there is room for anyone to bring a lawsuit against the state saying that the current formula is not Constitutionally valid. Of course the risk is allowing legislation to come from "the bench" once again, which in New Jersey, is always detrimental. But perhaps there is a way to challenge something in the courts somewhere....which then leads to the second problem...who's going to take up that challenge? I can tell you for absolute certain...it won't be Freehold Boro.

Moving on...again I understand the concept of what Governor Christie is facing with the political atmosphere in Trenton, but this is where I feel he went wrong. Think of what is happening on the National level. Christie (in my opinion) should have picked his fight with the Abbott Districts, which would certainly alienate a large number, if not all of the Democrat legislators, not necessarily because they felt it was a bad concept, but because they would be beholden to their party bosses who would be beating the drum on this issue. But then his message to the rest of the state should have been one which shows just how wasteful the money going to the Abbott districts is. This maneuver could have motivated people in voting districts that do not have Abbott schools to start voicing their opinions to their Democratic politicians (I'm not going to call the folks in Trenton "leaders" or "representatives" anymore than I will use those terms for the folks in Washington).

The idea is that there could have been significant pressure put on those Democrats to either listen to their constituents, or face a difficult re-election bid in November. This, obviously, could help swing the balance of power in the state legislature towards the other side of the aisle (of course, benefiting Christie in a number of ways outside of this one issue). But, instead, Christie has chosen to pick a fight with the whole state, cutting funding across the board, which has much less likelihood of getting a groundswell of support from anyone outside of those people (like Brian ) who are always disgusted with the amount of money we spend on public education...but (sorry Brian) those voices are not nearly as loud as the voices you would have heard had you done it the other way (in my opinion).

Is it "divisive politics"...yes, it would certainly be viewed that way, especially by a liberal media, the Democratic politicians in Trenton, and of course, the always fair minded NJEA. But, as it is being seen on a National level, this country is at a tipping point. The people need to be shaken up, shown the truth about how wasteful governement spending has gotten, and I can think of few better examples than the Abbott districts.

Anyway....that's the way I think it should have been played out...but unfortunately, Christie has chosen to punish everyone rather than just those who have been feeding overwhelmingly at the trough for the last number of years without being held accountable for any of the benefits that they have reaped.

I don't disagree with much of what you said -- however -- the notion that safe democrats in super safe districts will be pressured by constituents to abandon abbott districts doesn't seem right to me. Those politicians get elected by the very people who want those abbott districts. Hard-core dems in hard-core dem districts using the money of other communities in their own community -- that is the essence of political power.

In going after the Abbott districts first, politically, Christie would have gotten this.

1) accusations of racism
2) Attacks from the NJEA -- like these, also insinuating racism and a lack of regard for children --particularly children of color.
3) Class warfare political attacks.

Now -- I am not suggesting that he not fix the education system, but I am thinking that he must make this changes in stages, and incrementally in order to pull them off politically.

[adefonzo]

Rich...please believe me when I say...with all due respect...I have found the difference between us.

You...and I say this with a level of respect (please believe this)...are polished. You have the ability to sit back, formulate your thoughts, and deliver them in a way that will work politically.

I...for better or for worse...shoot off my mouth, and believe that if everyone would simply do just that, the world would be a much simpler place.

Of course, I don't base this solely on this most recent topic, but on a number that have come in the past. I am the bull in the China Shop......you are the old(er ) bull on top of the mountain (if you don't know the reference, I will tell you in a private email, the censors would kill me on here if I tried to explain)

Looking at your last post, I am reminded of what I have been searching for in a political "bobblehead" for the last 17+ years that I have been eligible to vote. You talk about, frankly, the "political" risks that Christie would have to take on. I long for the leader (of which, the closest has been Jennifer Beck) who looks at the issue (along with the special interest groups) and says...

"F-you...I am going to do what the majority of my constituents believe in...I'm going to do what's right...not what the media, or the special interest groups deem as the right course. Go ahead and throw your slings and arrows, the media and the special interest groups are, in reality, a small portion of the voting public, and I believe that my constituents will bring me back for standing the ground that they have laid out for me."

I have talked about this before, but I will mention it again...Jesse Ventura was a media and political joke............who just happened to drag out record numbers of Minnessota's voting population to get him into the Governor's office. And the overwhelmingly best part of the man...he didn't seek re-election. As he said when he ran for office (paraphrasing here), "I will do as our founding fathers did...I will serve my time, and then I will return to the real world, so that I can better understand what's going on with the regular folks"

Some will say it was because of the "hollywood attraction"...I honestly believe that it was because he was a man that did not mince words...he told it like it was (an ironic reference to his wrestling commentator career)...and because of that honesty, not only did he get elected, but he was able to motivate a significant portion of the voting public that had remained dormant over the last number of elections.

I long for more people cut from his cloth.

[richardkelsey]

Apr 7, 2010 13:10:50 GMT -5 adefonzo said:

Rich...please believe me when I say...with all due respect...I have found the difference between us.

You...and I say this with a level of respect (please believe this)...are polished. You have the ability to sit back, formulate your thoughts, and deliver them in a way that will work politically.

I...for better or for worse...shoot off my mouth, and believe that if everyone would simply do just that, the world would be a much simpler place.

Of course, I don't base this solely on this most recent topic, but on a number that have come in the past. I am the bull in the China Shop......you are the old(er ) bull on top of the mountain (if you don't know the reference, I will tell you in a private email, the censors would kill me on here if I tried to explain)

Looking at your last post, I am reminded of what I have been searching for in a political "bobblehead" for the last 17+ years that I have been eligible to vote. You talk about, frankly, the "political" risks that Christie would have to take on. I long for the leader (of which, the closest has been Jennifer Beck) who looks at the issue (along with the special interest groups) and says...

"F-you...I am going to do what the majority of my constituents believe in...I'm going to do what's right...not what the media, or the special interest groups deem as the right course. Go ahead and throw your slings and arrows, the media and the special interest groups are, in reality, a small portion of the voting public, and I believe that my constituents will bring me back for standing the ground that they have laid out for me."

I have talked about this before, but I will mention it again...Jesse Ventura was a media and political joke............who just happened to drag out record numbers of Minnessota's voting population to get him into the Governor's office. And the overwhelmingly best part of the man...he didn't seek re-election. As he said when he ran for office (paraphrasing here), "I will do as our founding fathers did...I will serve my time, and then I will return to the real world, so that I can better understand what's going on with the regular folks"

Some will say it was because of the "hollywood attraction"...I honestly believe that it was because he was a man that did not mince words...he told it like it was (an ironic reference to his wrestling commentator career)...and because of that honesty, not only did he get elected, but he was able to motivate a significant portion of the voting public that had remained dormant over the last number of elections.

I long for more people cut from his cloth.

That's funny -- I thought I was the bull in the China shop.

Just to be clear -- I am not suggesting that Christie not proceed with an aggressive plan because of the political effects on him. No sir. I agree that if you run for the job -- you ought to own up and do the job. Heck, I have been beating some familiar Freehold politician over the head about that for 25 years.

What I am saying is -- somethings simply can't be done without political help. (Either the power of the people forcing political opponents to take action, or the power of persuasion to get political opponents to take action)

I rather agree with you. Christie can't even get re-elected unless he does deliver drastic, positive change. That requires radical action. However, radical action does not mean failing to find ways to win against long odds. You and I are discussing tactics, not strategy. The strategy is to re-shape NJ governments, make it smaller, smarter, more efficient, more accountable, and less expensive.

The question is tactics -- how to do that.

All I am saying is that he needs to be smart about his battles to be sure he wins. If being Governor were the same as being a dictator, the path to success would be easier to predict. But I measure success the same way you do -- getting the job done.

I am merely saying that some tactics, appealing as they may be, won't get the job done. I don't think Christie is worried about his approval ratings, and I don't much care about his political approval either -- except that if he losses his popular mandate, he won't get anything done. That is what his opponents will be trying to do to him to chip away at his elective mandate and its representation that people want change. Many of his constituents, don't actually want change.

However, if he is going to go down, he should do so by swinging for the fences. It just doesn't hurt if he choses to swing at strikes. As I tell my players -- people chase the high heat because it is eye level -- therefore very appealing. It's just really hard to hit. Mr. Christie barely made this team. He needs some big hits if he wants to stay on the team and have the team win. The best way to get those hits, is wait for his pitch. We call it, being aggressive inside the zone.