Fairfield Considers Expanding School Capacity - Again?
New K-5 School Enrollment Projections Still Appear Optimistic
BOE Urgency to Add More K-5 Capacity Makes No Sense
Connecticut’s Growing Fiscal Crisis Should Restrain All Local Funding Decisions
*****
• New K-5 enrollment projections are lower, but probably still too optimistic.
• The BOE continues to understate our K-5 school capacity by calling a “576” school a “504,” and then insisting that we can put only “428-454” kids in it – that’s basically 75% of actual capacity.
• Fairfield has more than enough K-5 capacity for the next several years, and perhaps much longer.
• There is no rush to do anything until we see what actually happens with enrollments.
• Connecticut faces a serious and deepening financial crisis that is likely to have significant adverse effects on our Town, including lower, if any, reimbursements for school construction.
BOE Urgency to Add More K-5 Capacity Makes No Sense
Connecticut’s Growing Fiscal Crisis Should Restrain All Local Funding Decisions
*****
• New K-5 enrollment projections are lower, but probably still too optimistic.
• The BOE continues to understate our K-5 school capacity by calling a “576” school a “504,” and then insisting that we can put only “428-454” kids in it – that’s basically 75% of actual capacity.
• Fairfield has more than enough K-5 capacity for the next several years, and perhaps much longer.
• There is no rush to do anything until we see what actually happens with enrollments.
• Connecticut faces a serious and deepening financial crisis that is likely to have significant adverse effects on our Town, including lower, if any, reimbursements for school construction.
Fairfield Told to Fix Schools' Racial Disparity
Nothing Fairfield has done in the past decade has helped lessen the racial divide between its McKinley School and the district’s 10 other elementary schools. Putting a preschool in Greenfield Hill hasn’t worked. Offering empty seats to students in neighboring Bridgeport has thus far failed as well.
So, somewhat grudgingly, the state Board of Education approved a multiyear plan Wednesday that relies on school expansions, turning McKinley into a magnet school and ultimately redistricting some 773 students across the 31-square-mile community.
“If other ideas don’t work by June 2019, we are talking about redistricting as a recommendation to the board,” Fairfield School Board Chairman Philip Dwyer told the state board. The actual remapping could take until 2023. Read More: CT Post 9/6/17
So, somewhat grudgingly, the state Board of Education approved a multiyear plan Wednesday that relies on school expansions, turning McKinley into a magnet school and ultimately redistricting some 773 students across the 31-square-mile community.
“If other ideas don’t work by June 2019, we are talking about redistricting as a recommendation to the board,” Fairfield School Board Chairman Philip Dwyer told the state board. The actual remapping could take until 2023. Read More: CT Post 9/6/17
Fairfield Taxpayer Believes it is Time for the BOE to Reconsider its K-5 School Expansion Plans
- Despite declining enrollments, the BOE wants to spend millions of dollars to add more capacity to our eleven elementary schools based on projections of higher future enrollments.
- However, those optimistic projections assumed a rebound in births that is not happening.
- Our K-5 schools are currently operating at only 78% of real capacity, and based on the most optimistic enrollment projections, without adding more seats, they would be operating at only 81% of capacity in 2025-26.
- Based on lower actual births, capacity utilization in 2025-26 may be only 66%, with more empty seats (1,925) than all the seats currently in Dwight, Holland Hill, Jennings and Mill Hill (1,776).
- At a time when we will probably be forced to cut spending on our education programs due primarily to the State’s fiscal crisis, it makes no sense to add more excess capacity in our schools.
Teachers Union Wants to Run Fairfield Like the Unions Have Run Our State
Hartford is 60 miles away, but Hartford politics are right here and right now in Fairfield.
Listen to what Bob Smoler, the President of Fairfield’s Teachers Union (the FEA) and a Westport resident, tells his members: we “need to do whatever we can to help elect democrats” . . . because “our new contract will be coming up for a vote this fall” . . . and “the democrats will put up a very pro-education candidate.”
So, Fairfield teachers spearheaded the effort to force a special election on June 6th for the Board of Selectmen, after which Union President Smoler said: “I can’t thank all of you enough for the incredible job you did. We only had six days to take action to make a special election possible, and you, the FEA, pulled it together.”
The next step is likely to be a Union-led get-out-the-vote effort for the special election complete with teachers once again knocking on our doors.
Do we really want more of our Town boards controlled by Union-endorsed members like our Board of Education is after the 2015 election, the same BOE that negotiates and approves teacher and other school salaries, benefits and work rules that determine almost half of Fairfield’s total spending?
Fairfield Taxpayer asks all voters to consider whether it is good for Fairfield to elect public officials who are endorsed and supported by the Teachers Union, only 30% of whose members are Fairfield residents.
More detail in this Fairfield Minuteman article:
Controversy continues over special election
Fairfield Minuteman 3/31/17
Bridgeport Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellis ruled on March 10 that a special election must be held to fill a seat on Fairfield’s Board of Selectman that was vacated by Republican Laurie McArdle in December, and set June 6 as the date for that election. The vacancy was initially filled, in accord with past practice, by Republican Ed Bateson, a candidate recommended by the Republican Town Committee, with the bipartisan consent of Democratic First Selectman Mike Tetreau and Republican Selectman Chris Tymniak.
However, citing State law that allows a special election for such a vacancy if at least 5 percent of voters sign a petition in favor of one, the Democratic Town Committee led a successful effort to gather the necessary signatures. The Republican Town Committee maintains that the State statute would apply only if the vacancy had not been filled within 30 days, in accord with the Town Charter, and may appeal the Judge’s decision to the State Supreme Court.
“I believe the judge’s decision was right in line with our Town Attorney’s opinion on how the special election process should proceed,” said Tetreau. “The judge ruled there is no conflict between the Town Charter and the State statutes. She ruled the voters have a right to call for the special election. My two colleagues on the Board of Selectmen have a serious conflict of interest in trying to prevent the vote and deny the special election. It threatens their majority on the board and it threatens Mr. Bateson’s position on the board. I am surprised that they have voted and have taken this action against the obvious rights of the voters, especially the over 3,000 people who signed the petition. I have to question – What are they afraid of? While there is talk of an appeal, I would think that they would consider that continuing to deny the people a right to vote has no legal basis. I would hope they honor the court’s ruling.”
Meanwhile, some observers have raised concerns about how the necessary petition signatures were obtained, and particularly the role of the Fairfield Education Association (FEA), which is the union representing Fairfield’s teachers.
Robert Smoler, President of the FEA, a teacher at Fairfield Warde High School, and a resident of Westport, told the Minuteman, “Speaking as President of the Fairfield Education Association (FEA), the teachers did participate in gathering signatures for the special election. The FEA is a strictly nonpartisan organization and support both Democrats and Republicans for office. We have long felt that you support and elect a person, not a party. Given the amount of time left on Ms. McCardle’s term (three years), we felt it was important and appropriate that the voters of the Town of Fairfield have the ability to select who they want in the selectman’s chair over that period of time. After all, that person is going to vote on the next three town budgets and at least one teacher’s contract.”
Another FWHS teacher and Westport resident, Michael McGarry, told the Minuteman, “The process of gathering signatures demonstrated how positively people felt about the prospect of a special election. People were enthusiastic to both sign the petitions and help gather signatures. We more than met the legal threshold.”
However, James Millington, chairman of the Republican Town Committee, has raised concerns about the teacher union’s role in obtaining signatures. “In the days and weeks following the collection of signatures by the Democrats, I have heard from many people who apologized for signing the petition as they did not realize what they were signing,” he said. According to Millington, in addition to being misinformed that there was a vacancy on the Board of Selectmen when that vacancy had already been filled, “people were also told that if they did not sign the petition, curriculum was going to be cut, teachers would be laid off and that teachers pensions were at risk.” “All of these statements were completely false and not under consideration by the Board of Selectmen.”
Fairfield resident Bud Morten, co-founder of the local advocacy group Fairfield Taxpayer, is also concerned about the union’s role in Fairfield’s affairs. “I doubt most people in Fairfield realize what the Union has been doing,” and he notes that “Connecticut’s growing fiscal crisis is the strongest possible object lesson about what happens when public employee unions gain political influence over the elected officials who negotiate and approve their contracts.” As examples, Morten says the FEA “endorsed five candidates for the BOE in 2015, all of whom were elected; endorsed two local candidates for the State Assembly in 2016, one of whom was elected; supported the Democratic Town Committee’s recent petition efforts for as special election; operates a PAC that makes contributions to political candidates; regularly packs the room with teachers whenever union contracts and school budgets are up for approval, and at events like Saturday’s Board of Finance public budget forum.” In the recent petition effort, he says, “teachers, only 30 percent of whom are residents of Fairfield, exploited their special relationships with parents to get the necessary signatures.” He notes, “How does a parent say ‘no’ to their child’s teacher/coach when they are approached at a holiday concert and asked to sign a petition to save their job?”
In his statement to the Minuteman, Mr. Smoler stated that “Ed Bateson, who is a fine individual that has a distinguished record of service to the Town of Fairfield, was appointed to the selectman’s position by the Republican Party. He was not elected by the voters in town. If we have a special election and Ed wins that seat, so be it. That’s the democratic process and the people will have spoken. The voters should be given that right to speak and that’s why it has been so disappointing that the Republican Party has worked to block the special election. As for the FEA itself, we are very hopeful there will be a special election.”
According to Morten, “Whatever high-minded motives Mr. Smoler may claim for his union’s political activities, his recent emails to his members, which have been widely circulated by parents and others, speak for themselves. Quoting these e-mails, Morten says that Mr. Smoler exhorted teachers to get people to sign the petitions “because our new contract will be coming up for a vote this fall,” because “the Democrats will put up a very pro-education candidate,” because “the person (elected) is going to hold tremendous sway over the next two teachers contracts and the next three education budgets,” and therefore “we need to do everything we can to help the Democrats get the signatures they need.” And in his December 22, 2016, message congratulating his members, Morten quotes Mr. Smoler as saying, “I can’t thank you enough for the incredible job you did. We only had six days to take action to make a special election possible, and you, the FEA, pulled it off.”
The Fairfield Republican Town committee Tuesday unanimously endorsed Ed Bateson as its selectman candidate for the upcoming election while Kevin Kiley, former Republican now Democrat, was unanimously endorsed as a selectman candidate by the Democratic Town Committee. “Fairfield has excellent school systems, and we must maintain our education system through proper and prudent funding,” Kiley said.
-Kendra Wingate
Listen to what Bob Smoler, the President of Fairfield’s Teachers Union (the FEA) and a Westport resident, tells his members: we “need to do whatever we can to help elect democrats” . . . because “our new contract will be coming up for a vote this fall” . . . and “the democrats will put up a very pro-education candidate.”
So, Fairfield teachers spearheaded the effort to force a special election on June 6th for the Board of Selectmen, after which Union President Smoler said: “I can’t thank all of you enough for the incredible job you did. We only had six days to take action to make a special election possible, and you, the FEA, pulled it together.”
The next step is likely to be a Union-led get-out-the-vote effort for the special election complete with teachers once again knocking on our doors.
Do we really want more of our Town boards controlled by Union-endorsed members like our Board of Education is after the 2015 election, the same BOE that negotiates and approves teacher and other school salaries, benefits and work rules that determine almost half of Fairfield’s total spending?
Fairfield Taxpayer asks all voters to consider whether it is good for Fairfield to elect public officials who are endorsed and supported by the Teachers Union, only 30% of whose members are Fairfield residents.
More detail in this Fairfield Minuteman article:
Controversy continues over special election
Fairfield Minuteman 3/31/17
Bridgeport Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellis ruled on March 10 that a special election must be held to fill a seat on Fairfield’s Board of Selectman that was vacated by Republican Laurie McArdle in December, and set June 6 as the date for that election. The vacancy was initially filled, in accord with past practice, by Republican Ed Bateson, a candidate recommended by the Republican Town Committee, with the bipartisan consent of Democratic First Selectman Mike Tetreau and Republican Selectman Chris Tymniak.
However, citing State law that allows a special election for such a vacancy if at least 5 percent of voters sign a petition in favor of one, the Democratic Town Committee led a successful effort to gather the necessary signatures. The Republican Town Committee maintains that the State statute would apply only if the vacancy had not been filled within 30 days, in accord with the Town Charter, and may appeal the Judge’s decision to the State Supreme Court.
“I believe the judge’s decision was right in line with our Town Attorney’s opinion on how the special election process should proceed,” said Tetreau. “The judge ruled there is no conflict between the Town Charter and the State statutes. She ruled the voters have a right to call for the special election. My two colleagues on the Board of Selectmen have a serious conflict of interest in trying to prevent the vote and deny the special election. It threatens their majority on the board and it threatens Mr. Bateson’s position on the board. I am surprised that they have voted and have taken this action against the obvious rights of the voters, especially the over 3,000 people who signed the petition. I have to question – What are they afraid of? While there is talk of an appeal, I would think that they would consider that continuing to deny the people a right to vote has no legal basis. I would hope they honor the court’s ruling.”
Meanwhile, some observers have raised concerns about how the necessary petition signatures were obtained, and particularly the role of the Fairfield Education Association (FEA), which is the union representing Fairfield’s teachers.
Robert Smoler, President of the FEA, a teacher at Fairfield Warde High School, and a resident of Westport, told the Minuteman, “Speaking as President of the Fairfield Education Association (FEA), the teachers did participate in gathering signatures for the special election. The FEA is a strictly nonpartisan organization and support both Democrats and Republicans for office. We have long felt that you support and elect a person, not a party. Given the amount of time left on Ms. McCardle’s term (three years), we felt it was important and appropriate that the voters of the Town of Fairfield have the ability to select who they want in the selectman’s chair over that period of time. After all, that person is going to vote on the next three town budgets and at least one teacher’s contract.”
Another FWHS teacher and Westport resident, Michael McGarry, told the Minuteman, “The process of gathering signatures demonstrated how positively people felt about the prospect of a special election. People were enthusiastic to both sign the petitions and help gather signatures. We more than met the legal threshold.”
However, James Millington, chairman of the Republican Town Committee, has raised concerns about the teacher union’s role in obtaining signatures. “In the days and weeks following the collection of signatures by the Democrats, I have heard from many people who apologized for signing the petition as they did not realize what they were signing,” he said. According to Millington, in addition to being misinformed that there was a vacancy on the Board of Selectmen when that vacancy had already been filled, “people were also told that if they did not sign the petition, curriculum was going to be cut, teachers would be laid off and that teachers pensions were at risk.” “All of these statements were completely false and not under consideration by the Board of Selectmen.”
Fairfield resident Bud Morten, co-founder of the local advocacy group Fairfield Taxpayer, is also concerned about the union’s role in Fairfield’s affairs. “I doubt most people in Fairfield realize what the Union has been doing,” and he notes that “Connecticut’s growing fiscal crisis is the strongest possible object lesson about what happens when public employee unions gain political influence over the elected officials who negotiate and approve their contracts.” As examples, Morten says the FEA “endorsed five candidates for the BOE in 2015, all of whom were elected; endorsed two local candidates for the State Assembly in 2016, one of whom was elected; supported the Democratic Town Committee’s recent petition efforts for as special election; operates a PAC that makes contributions to political candidates; regularly packs the room with teachers whenever union contracts and school budgets are up for approval, and at events like Saturday’s Board of Finance public budget forum.” In the recent petition effort, he says, “teachers, only 30 percent of whom are residents of Fairfield, exploited their special relationships with parents to get the necessary signatures.” He notes, “How does a parent say ‘no’ to their child’s teacher/coach when they are approached at a holiday concert and asked to sign a petition to save their job?”
In his statement to the Minuteman, Mr. Smoler stated that “Ed Bateson, who is a fine individual that has a distinguished record of service to the Town of Fairfield, was appointed to the selectman’s position by the Republican Party. He was not elected by the voters in town. If we have a special election and Ed wins that seat, so be it. That’s the democratic process and the people will have spoken. The voters should be given that right to speak and that’s why it has been so disappointing that the Republican Party has worked to block the special election. As for the FEA itself, we are very hopeful there will be a special election.”
According to Morten, “Whatever high-minded motives Mr. Smoler may claim for his union’s political activities, his recent emails to his members, which have been widely circulated by parents and others, speak for themselves. Quoting these e-mails, Morten says that Mr. Smoler exhorted teachers to get people to sign the petitions “because our new contract will be coming up for a vote this fall,” because “the Democrats will put up a very pro-education candidate,” because “the person (elected) is going to hold tremendous sway over the next two teachers contracts and the next three education budgets,” and therefore “we need to do everything we can to help the Democrats get the signatures they need.” And in his December 22, 2016, message congratulating his members, Morten quotes Mr. Smoler as saying, “I can’t thank you enough for the incredible job you did. We only had six days to take action to make a special election possible, and you, the FEA, pulled it off.”
The Fairfield Republican Town committee Tuesday unanimously endorsed Ed Bateson as its selectman candidate for the upcoming election while Kevin Kiley, former Republican now Democrat, was unanimously endorsed as a selectman candidate by the Democratic Town Committee. “Fairfield has excellent school systems, and we must maintain our education system through proper and prudent funding,” Kiley said.
-Kendra Wingate
Aresimowicz offers phase-in compromise on pension bills for CT towns
House Speaker Joe Aresimowicz offered a compromise Wednesday on one of the stickiest points in Gov. Dannel P. Malloy’s budget: asking communities to gradually assume a portion of skyrocketing teacher pension costs.
Aresimowicz, D-Berlin, suggested cities and towns assume one-third of these pension costs — or possibly less — but do so in stages over the next five fiscal years. Read More: CT Mirror 3/29/17
House Speaker Joe Aresimowicz offered a compromise Wednesday on one of the stickiest points in Gov. Dannel P. Malloy’s budget: asking communities to gradually assume a portion of skyrocketing teacher pension costs.
Aresimowicz, D-Berlin, suggested cities and towns assume one-third of these pension costs — or possibly less — but do so in stages over the next five fiscal years. Read More: CT Mirror 3/29/17
Impossible to Assess Racial Imbalance Plan without "Open Choice" Cost Information
As part of the need to respond to the State’s request for revisions to Fairfield’s Racial Imbalance Plan, there will be a public hearing on this topic on Tuesday, March 14, beginning at 6:45 pm at BOE headquarters, 501 Kings Highway, 2nd Floor.
Fairfield Taxpayer fully respects the intent of the State law, but believes it is unfortunate that it is being rigidly applied to Fairfield’s McKinley School, where families are apparently so happy with the school itself, with its culture and with its performance, that none of them wants to leave. Read More
Fairfield Taxpayer fully respects the intent of the State law, but believes it is unfortunate that it is being rigidly applied to Fairfield’s McKinley School, where families are apparently so happy with the school itself, with its culture and with its performance, that none of them wants to leave. Read More
Teacher Pension Costs to Surge, Widen Hole in Next State Budget
State spending on retired teachers’ pensions is set to surge $282.7 million next fiscal year – a 28 percent increase the state is obligated to fund and is likely to push the next state budget further into deficit. The new pension contribution levels, if accepted by the Teachers’ Retirement Board Wednesday, are larger than those anticipated in next fiscal year’s nonpartisan deficit forecast by $47 million and in the 2018-19 projection by $42 million. Read More: CT Mirror 11/1/16
State spending on retired teachers’ pensions is set to surge $282.7 million next fiscal year – a 28 percent increase the state is obligated to fund and is likely to push the next state budget further into deficit. The new pension contribution levels, if accepted by the Teachers’ Retirement Board Wednesday, are larger than those anticipated in next fiscal year’s nonpartisan deficit forecast by $47 million and in the 2018-19 projection by $42 million. Read More: CT Mirror 11/1/16
Observations on Connecticut's Public Education System
It is interesting to read what some schools can accomplish, under very challenging circumstances, for $7,500 per student. Read More: Fairfield County Catholic Oct. 2016
It is interesting to read what some schools can accomplish, under very challenging circumstances, for $7,500 per student. Read More: Fairfield County Catholic Oct. 2016
New Fairfield Superintendent to Hold Meet and Greet
Dr. Toni Jones, who was recently appointed Superintendent of Fairfield Public Schools by a unanimous vote of the Board of Education, will visit Fairfield next week for a meet and greet. Jones will visit Fairfield and attend the meet and greet on Wednesday, Sept. 21 at 8 p.m. at 501 Kings Highway, second floor. Read More: Fairfield Patch 9/16/16
Dr. Toni Jones, who was recently appointed Superintendent of Fairfield Public Schools by a unanimous vote of the Board of Education, will visit Fairfield next week for a meet and greet. Jones will visit Fairfield and attend the meet and greet on Wednesday, Sept. 21 at 8 p.m. at 501 Kings Highway, second floor. Read More: Fairfield Patch 9/16/16
Connecticut Judge Orders Lawmakers To Fix Schools His Way; What If He's Wrong?
A judge in Connecticut has ordered the legislature to come up with a wholesale restructuring of the state’s educational system within 180 days, to fix what he calls unconstitutional differences in educational outcomes between rich districts and poor. And those differences are stark: While wealthy towns like New Canaan and Greenwich have among the best public schools in the world, a third of the high-schoolers in nearby Bridgeport fail to meet minimum reading standards. The unusual thing about Judge Thomas Moukawsher’s ruling is what isn’t in it. Nowhere in the 90-page opinion and 160-page appendix does he list how much the rich and poor districts actually spend per student, usually the critical factor judges zero in on in disputes about disparate results in education. (Answer: Bridgeport spends around $14,000 per capita, less than $19,000 in New Canaan but comfortably above the national average of $11,000.) Read More: Forbes 9/9/16
A judge in Connecticut has ordered the legislature to come up with a wholesale restructuring of the state’s educational system within 180 days, to fix what he calls unconstitutional differences in educational outcomes between rich districts and poor. And those differences are stark: While wealthy towns like New Canaan and Greenwich have among the best public schools in the world, a third of the high-schoolers in nearby Bridgeport fail to meet minimum reading standards. The unusual thing about Judge Thomas Moukawsher’s ruling is what isn’t in it. Nowhere in the 90-page opinion and 160-page appendix does he list how much the rich and poor districts actually spend per student, usually the critical factor judges zero in on in disputes about disparate results in education. (Answer: Bridgeport spends around $14,000 per capita, less than $19,000 in New Canaan but comfortably above the national average of $11,000.) Read More: Forbes 9/9/16
Post-Regulatory School Reform: Making the Case for Charter Schools and Other Choice Options to Boost Educational Performance
At the turn of the twenty-first century, the United States was trying to come to grips with a serious education crisis. The country was lagging behind its international peers, and a many-decade effort to erode racial disparities in school achievement had made little headway. Many people expected action from the federal government. Read More: Harvard Magazine Sept/Oct 2016
At the turn of the twenty-first century, the United States was trying to come to grips with a serious education crisis. The country was lagging behind its international peers, and a many-decade effort to erode racial disparities in school achievement had made little headway. Many people expected action from the federal government. Read More: Harvard Magazine Sept/Oct 2016
Fairfield Schools’ 2016 Smarter Balanced Test Scores
The percentage of students statewide meeting or exceeding English standards rose by 3.3 points to 55.7 percent and 3.9 points to 44 percent in math. The 2014-2015 test administration was a baseline year for Smarter Balanced exams, which have new and higher standards for students that assess critical thinking skills. “These gains are a testament to the commitment of our students for rising to meet the challenge of higher standards and to our families, teachers, and leaders for instilling critical thinking skills and a love of learning in our students,” Education Commissioner Dianna R. Wentzell said. Read More: Fairfield Patch 8/25/16
The percentage of students statewide meeting or exceeding English standards rose by 3.3 points to 55.7 percent and 3.9 points to 44 percent in math. The 2014-2015 test administration was a baseline year for Smarter Balanced exams, which have new and higher standards for students that assess critical thinking skills. “These gains are a testament to the commitment of our students for rising to meet the challenge of higher standards and to our families, teachers, and leaders for instilling critical thinking skills and a love of learning in our students,” Education Commissioner Dianna R. Wentzell said. Read More: Fairfield Patch 8/25/16
CT to be a Test Case for Education Rights under U.S. Constitution
A group of high-profile attorneys have put Connecticut at the center of a decades-old debate over whether the federal government is responsible for ensuring that children in the U.S. are provided a quality education. In a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court Tuesday, attorneys for seven minority students from Hartford and Bridgeport asked the court to recognize education as a new right in the U.S. Constitution. The suit attacks Connecticut for its “failing public schools” and long waiting lists for access to charter and magnet schools. Read More: CT Mirror 8/24/16
A group of high-profile attorneys have put Connecticut at the center of a decades-old debate over whether the federal government is responsible for ensuring that children in the U.S. are provided a quality education. In a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court Tuesday, attorneys for seven minority students from Hartford and Bridgeport asked the court to recognize education as a new right in the U.S. Constitution. The suit attacks Connecticut for its “failing public schools” and long waiting lists for access to charter and magnet schools. Read More: CT Mirror 8/24/16
Fairfield Public Schools Superintendent Search Survey
We are posting this to ensure every resident in Fairfield has an opportunity to be heard. Click here to take a quick, two question survey.
We are posting this to ensure every resident in Fairfield has an opportunity to be heard. Click here to take a quick, two question survey.
Residents Get their Say on Next Superintendent of Schools
With a series of public forums and an online survey, the Board of Education has been listening to town residents on what attributes they want the town’s next superintendent of schools to have.Superintendent David Title, who announced in January that he plans to retire, will leave the job at the end of July. Consultants hired by the school board to help with the superintendent search from the firm of Hazard, Young, Attea & Associates this week gathered input from open forums with residents, as well as meeting with town officials. Read More: Fairfield Citizen 5/4/16
With a series of public forums and an online survey, the Board of Education has been listening to town residents on what attributes they want the town’s next superintendent of schools to have.Superintendent David Title, who announced in January that he plans to retire, will leave the job at the end of July. Consultants hired by the school board to help with the superintendent search from the firm of Hazard, Young, Attea & Associates this week gathered input from open forums with residents, as well as meeting with town officials. Read More: Fairfield Citizen 5/4/16
GREAT NEWS: $3.5 MILLION IN SCHOOL COST SAVINGS . . . OOPS, NO, SORRY . . . BAD NEWS: TAXPAYERS ASKED TO PAY $4.2 MILLION MORE FOR OUR SCHOOLS DESPITE THOSE SAVINGS AND A 1% DECLINE IN ENROLLMENT
Superintendent of Schools David Title recently released his recommended school budget for next year.
Thanks to a new healthcare plan (the Connecticut Partnership Plan 2.0), next year’s BOE budget will benefit by $3.5 million. Unfortunately, Dr. Title proposes that we spend all those savings and more with a $4.2 million, or 2.6%, increase in next year’s budget to $165.4 million (vs. $161.2 million this year), even though he projects that enrollment will continue to decline – down 1% from 10,058 to 9,960, and down 3% from the FY 2012 peak of 10,287.
It should be quite alarming to taxpayers that without the $3.5 million in savings on healthcare costs, Dr. Title would presumably be asking for a $7.7 million, or 4.8%, increase in spending at a time when enrollment continues to decline. This is particularly alarming at a time when Fairfield taxpayers continue to struggle with a difficult general economic environment in which incomes are growing slowly if at all (e.g., no COLA increase in Social Security benefits for seniors this year), a weak stock market, the impending departure of the Town’s largest taxpayer, and an impending 2% increase in the mill rate simply to offset the recent 2% decline in Fairfield home values (and thus in the Town’s tax base) after the 2015 revaluation. Since the BOE budget represents 55% of our total spending, a 4.8% increase would mean that even if there were no increase in spending on the Town side (police, fire, roads, debt service, etc.), the mill rate would have to rise 2.6% (55% of 4.8%). Combined with the 2% increase required to offset the decline in our tax base, all other things equal, the mill rate would have to rise almost 5% to 25.95 from 24.79. Also, keep in mind that the following year (2017-18), BOE healthcare costs are expected to resume their 5%-10% annual increases. Click here to read full document.
Superintendent of Schools David Title recently released his recommended school budget for next year.
Thanks to a new healthcare plan (the Connecticut Partnership Plan 2.0), next year’s BOE budget will benefit by $3.5 million. Unfortunately, Dr. Title proposes that we spend all those savings and more with a $4.2 million, or 2.6%, increase in next year’s budget to $165.4 million (vs. $161.2 million this year), even though he projects that enrollment will continue to decline – down 1% from 10,058 to 9,960, and down 3% from the FY 2012 peak of 10,287.
It should be quite alarming to taxpayers that without the $3.5 million in savings on healthcare costs, Dr. Title would presumably be asking for a $7.7 million, or 4.8%, increase in spending at a time when enrollment continues to decline. This is particularly alarming at a time when Fairfield taxpayers continue to struggle with a difficult general economic environment in which incomes are growing slowly if at all (e.g., no COLA increase in Social Security benefits for seniors this year), a weak stock market, the impending departure of the Town’s largest taxpayer, and an impending 2% increase in the mill rate simply to offset the recent 2% decline in Fairfield home values (and thus in the Town’s tax base) after the 2015 revaluation. Since the BOE budget represents 55% of our total spending, a 4.8% increase would mean that even if there were no increase in spending on the Town side (police, fire, roads, debt service, etc.), the mill rate would have to rise 2.6% (55% of 4.8%). Combined with the 2% increase required to offset the decline in our tax base, all other things equal, the mill rate would have to rise almost 5% to 25.95 from 24.79. Also, keep in mind that the following year (2017-18), BOE healthcare costs are expected to resume their 5%-10% annual increases. Click here to read full document.
Comparing science scores at Connecticut schools over time
A resource for those interested in seeing trends in achievement as measured by test scores. Read More: 9/1/15
A resource for those interested in seeing trends in achievement as measured by test scores. Read More: 9/1/15
Lower Scores on the Common Core
Fewer than 40 percent of students statewide got a passing grade in math on a new, tough test linked to the Common Core curriculum standards results released Friday show. Read More
Fewer than 40 percent of students statewide got a passing grade in math on a new, tough test linked to the Common Core curriculum standards results released Friday show. Read More
How did your school do on the new SBAC test?
See how your school and school district performed on the new English and math assessment tests aligned with Common Core state standards. The side-by-side pairs of columns allow you to compare your school or district with others or with statewide averages. Read More 8.28.15 CT Mirror
See how your school and school district performed on the new English and math assessment tests aligned with Common Core state standards. The side-by-side pairs of columns allow you to compare your school or district with others or with statewide averages. Read More 8.28.15 CT Mirror
Fairfield's School Enrollment Decline Since 2011 in Perspective
Enrollment decline in Connecticut schools is among the fastest in the Nation. Read More: 6/15/15 WNPR
Enrollment decline in Connecticut schools is among the fastest in the Nation. Read More: 6/15/15 WNPR
Topic of debate: Is Fairfield school improvement plan on the ‘level?’
The Board of Education’s District Improvement Plan came under scrutiny Wednesday, with parents saying the plan should have been prioritized and include more dates by which goals would be met. But the idea of reintroducing “leveling” — where students in a class are grouped according to ability — prompted a lot of discussion though it wasn’t part of the 40-page plan. Read More 6/11/15 Fairfield Citizen
The Board of Education’s District Improvement Plan came under scrutiny Wednesday, with parents saying the plan should have been prioritized and include more dates by which goals would be met. But the idea of reintroducing “leveling” — where students in a class are grouped according to ability — prompted a lot of discussion though it wasn’t part of the 40-page plan. Read More 6/11/15 Fairfield Citizen
2015 Niche Rankings for CT Public Schools
Best Public Elementary Schools ranks 40,403 elementary schools based on key student statistics and 4.6 million opinions from 280,000 students and parents. A high ranking indicates that the school is an exceptional academic institution with a diverse set of high-achieving students and faculty, and the students are very happy with their experiences. Click here to view rankings
Best Public Elementary Schools ranks 40,403 elementary schools based on key student statistics and 4.6 million opinions from 280,000 students and parents. A high ranking indicates that the school is an exceptional academic institution with a diverse set of high-achieving students and faculty, and the students are very happy with their experiences. Click here to view rankings
PER PUPIL EXPENDITURES IN FAIRFIELD SCHOOLS:
A RACE TO THE BOTTOM?
WE DON’T THINK SO.
Are we spending enough on our schools?
Superintendent of Schools David Title and BOE Chairman Phil Dwyer think we are not.
Indeed, they recently told the Board of Selectmen and the Board of Finance that Fairfield is in "A Race to the Bottom" in school spending because Fairfield's rank in terms of the amount of money we spend per pupil (Per Pupil Expenditure, or “PPE”) has fallen 45 places over the last ten years from #24 to #69.
Their evidence?
Here is the relevant chart they presented in support of their proposed budget for next year. Fairfield’s PPE rank is indicated for each year in the blue horizontal line at the bottom.
Superintendent of Schools David Title and BOE Chairman Phil Dwyer think we are not.
Indeed, they recently told the Board of Selectmen and the Board of Finance that Fairfield is in "A Race to the Bottom" in school spending because Fairfield's rank in terms of the amount of money we spend per pupil (Per Pupil Expenditure, or “PPE”) has fallen 45 places over the last ten years from #24 to #69.
Their evidence?
Here is the relevant chart they presented in support of their proposed budget for next year. Fairfield’s PPE rank is indicated for each year in the blue horizontal line at the bottom.
Both Dr. Title and Chairman Dwyer referred to this decline in rank as a “Race to the Bottom,” implying that Fairfield should be worried about this trend. Referring to Fairfield’s decline in PPE rank, Dr. Title’s exact words were: “If we keep this up we will win the race to the bottom.” Chairman Dwyer’s comments were: “Where are we heading in Dr. Title’s so-called Race to the Bottom, if in five years we are below the average of the state?” Read More
Dreaded 'R' word: School officials mull redistricting for cost savings
The often-controversial issue of redistricting arose at Tuesday's Board of Education meeting as board members reviewed proposed revisions to a Long Range Facilities Plan that calls for the renovation and expansion of Holland Hill and Mill Hill schools. Read More Fairfield Citizen 2/27/15
The often-controversial issue of redistricting arose at Tuesday's Board of Education meeting as board members reviewed proposed revisions to a Long Range Facilities Plan that calls for the renovation and expansion of Holland Hill and Mill Hill schools. Read More Fairfield Citizen 2/27/15
Some initial questions about the 3.3% proposed increase in 2016 BOE budget
When the new three-year labor contract for the Teachers’ Union was before the Representative Town Meeting for approval on November 24 2014, Representative Lipp asked what would happen to the BOE budget for fiscal 2016 if the proposed contract were approved. BOE Chairman Dwyer assured the RTM that the BOE budget would rise in line with the 1.7% expected increase in teacher salaries and healthcare expenses, and the RTM approved the teachers’ contract.
Watch the one-minute FairTV Clip below of Mr. Dwyer’s comments. Fifty seconds into the clip, Mr. Dwyer clearly says "we think it's [the 2016 budget] going to go up about 1.7%."
Click here to see entire meeting on the FairTV website. The clip below begins at minute 16.
Less than two months later, on January 13, 2015, Superintendent of Schools David Title requested a 3.3% increase in BOE spending for fiscal 2016, and the BOE subsequently approved that proposal.
This raises a number of important questions:
The answer cannot be enrollment, because according to Dr. Title, enrollment is expected to be essentially flat (10,117 versus 10,160). As seen in the graph below, enrollment actually peaked four years ago and is forecast to continue trending down. If rising enrollment puts upward pressure on the budget, the ebbing of enrollment should ease budget pressure.
If approved, the proposed 3.3% increase would represent the highest growth in BOE spending in seven years.
This raises a number of important questions:
- Why is the proposed budget up 3.3% after Mr. Dwyer assured the RTM that it would be up only 1.7%? (Surprisingly, this was not addressed when the BOE reviewed Dr Title's proposed budget)
- Would the RTM have approved the new Teachers’ contract if Mr. Dwyer had said that the budget would be up 3.3%?
- If, according to Mr. Dwyer, teacher costs represent 75%-80% of total spending and are up 1.7%, what explains the implied 8.8% increase in the other 20%-25% of total spending next year?
The answer cannot be enrollment, because according to Dr. Title, enrollment is expected to be essentially flat (10,117 versus 10,160). As seen in the graph below, enrollment actually peaked four years ago and is forecast to continue trending down. If rising enrollment puts upward pressure on the budget, the ebbing of enrollment should ease budget pressure.
If approved, the proposed 3.3% increase would represent the highest growth in BOE spending in seven years.
Background on the RTM’s Recent Rejection of a BOE Labor Contract
At its meeting on December 15, 2014, the RTM rejected a proposed three-year contract for Fairfield School Administrators, which includes headmasters and housemasters, principals and assistant principals, guidance and curriculum administrators, and athletic directors.
Since the Great Recession:
At its meeting on December 15, 2014, the RTM rejected a proposed three-year contract for Fairfield School Administrators, which includes headmasters and housemasters, principals and assistant principals, guidance and curriculum administrators, and athletic directors.
Since the Great Recession:
- the Average Salary for Fairfield's School Administrators is up 12% (2014/15 vs. 2008/09);
- Median Income per Household in CT is down 2% (2008-2013) – yes, nominal median income per household in CT is down 2% over the past five years. Adjusted for inflation, real median income per household in CT in down 10%.
Under the rejected contract, Administrators’ salaries would have increased another 6.5% over the next three years to an average of $159,423, for a total gain of 20% from 2008/09 to 2017/18.
This analysis does not include the cost of benefits, which has increased faster than salaries (primarily due to inflation in healthcare costs). Assuming 6.5% annual inflation in healthcare insurance costs (net of savings from higher cost-sharing), then total compensation for the Administrators is already up 15% since 2008/09 (vs. 12% for salaries alone), and would have risen another 10% (including the Obamacare Cadillac Tax) over the next three years for a total gain of 26% by 2017/18 (vs. 20% for salaries alone).
This analysis does not include the cost of benefits, which has increased faster than salaries (primarily due to inflation in healthcare costs). Assuming 6.5% annual inflation in healthcare insurance costs (net of savings from higher cost-sharing), then total compensation for the Administrators is already up 15% since 2008/09 (vs. 12% for salaries alone), and would have risen another 10% (including the Obamacare Cadillac Tax) over the next three years for a total gain of 26% by 2017/18 (vs. 20% for salaries alone).
If we do not acknowledge the new economic reality we face and restrain the growth in our spending and taxes, then it is only a matter of time before our fine school system and everything else we love about Fairfield will be at risk. It is simply not possible to restrain our overall spending without restraining the cost of our schools, the cost of which represents around 63% of our total spending. And, since labor costs represent 80% of the BOE budget, we cannot restrain the cost of our schools if we continue to grant significant increases in compensation to our already highly paid school administrators.
BOE Votes to Curtail Transparency of FPS and Limit Public Comment
At a Board of Education meeting on Tuesday that did not end until 2 am, and in defiance of opposition from 17-18 members of the public who spoke against the proposals, a narrow 5-4 majority (Dwyer, Convertito, Gerber, Patten and Maxon-Kennelley), voted: (a) to restrict its own members' access to information from the school administration by requiring any requests to be approved by a majority of the Board; and (b) to restrict the public's right to speak at its meetings on any subject about our schools unless it is on the Board's agenda. The meeting adjourned before the Board could vote on another proposal to require a 2/3 majority to approve any future changes to its bylaws, which would make it more difficult to rescind the new restrictions, which of course would not have been approved if a 2/3 majority had been required last night.
The rationale for the first restriction is absurd, namely that it requires, according to Superintendent David Title, half of one administrator's time to respond to information requests from both the Board and the public. Thus, even if all of the Board's requests for information were eliminated, it would save only about $25,000 per year (one quarter of the cost of a $100,000 administrator), which is an utterly trivial fraction (0.00016) of our $156 million school budget. Moreover, any member of the public can still request the same information under the Freedom of Information Act that a Board member is denied the right to request. Absurd.
Meanwhile, eliminating the right of the public to raise any issue germane to our school system at BOE meetings because certain members of the Board feel that inappropriate comments are sometimes made, and that the Board has an obligation to protect its own members and school system employees from personal criticism, is simply appalling to anyone who believes in democracy. Appalling.
Yes, democracy is inherently messy, but it is also essential.
The public will soon have an opportunity to express its opinion of those who voted in favor of these new rules when, except for Mr. Patten, their four-year terms on the BOE expire at the end this year.
At a Board of Education meeting on Tuesday that did not end until 2 am, and in defiance of opposition from 17-18 members of the public who spoke against the proposals, a narrow 5-4 majority (Dwyer, Convertito, Gerber, Patten and Maxon-Kennelley), voted: (a) to restrict its own members' access to information from the school administration by requiring any requests to be approved by a majority of the Board; and (b) to restrict the public's right to speak at its meetings on any subject about our schools unless it is on the Board's agenda. The meeting adjourned before the Board could vote on another proposal to require a 2/3 majority to approve any future changes to its bylaws, which would make it more difficult to rescind the new restrictions, which of course would not have been approved if a 2/3 majority had been required last night.
The rationale for the first restriction is absurd, namely that it requires, according to Superintendent David Title, half of one administrator's time to respond to information requests from both the Board and the public. Thus, even if all of the Board's requests for information were eliminated, it would save only about $25,000 per year (one quarter of the cost of a $100,000 administrator), which is an utterly trivial fraction (0.00016) of our $156 million school budget. Moreover, any member of the public can still request the same information under the Freedom of Information Act that a Board member is denied the right to request. Absurd.
Meanwhile, eliminating the right of the public to raise any issue germane to our school system at BOE meetings because certain members of the Board feel that inappropriate comments are sometimes made, and that the Board has an obligation to protect its own members and school system employees from personal criticism, is simply appalling to anyone who believes in democracy. Appalling.
Yes, democracy is inherently messy, but it is also essential.
The public will soon have an opportunity to express its opinion of those who voted in favor of these new rules when, except for Mr. Patten, their four-year terms on the BOE expire at the end this year.
"BOARD OF EDUCATION" OR "POLITBURO OF EDUCATION"?
Across the country, boards of education are addressing such critical issues as how to raise student performance, how to control costs, and how to close the achievement gap.
What is Fairfield's Board of Education doing?
Certain members of Fairfield's BOE (Mr Dwyer(Chair, D), Mr Convertito(R) and Mr Patton(D)) are proposing to amend its By-Laws by adopting rules that would limit its members' access to information, data and public comments. We believe this would mean less transparency and less public influence. We believe the new rules would be a step backward.
Twelve new rules will be considered at the special meeting on Tuesday, January 13th. Although the first seven have been promulgated for at least a decade by the Connecticut Association of Boards of Education and have been adopted by some BOEs (we don’t know how many), this does not mean that they are good and necessary rules.
None of the proposed rules appears to be in the best interests of the Town of Fairfield and its schools.
It is ironic that these proposals come after a majority of the BOE rejected proposed rule changes at its meeting on November 25th that were designed to increase the Board's focus: on its objectives, goals and action plans for our schools; on its accountability for measuring and reporting progress towards those objectives and goals; on its responsibility for the school budget and for the priorities set in the budget through its allocation of resources; and on its five-year strategic plan for our schools.
Here are all the proposed rules that will be considered Tuesday night, along with our reactions to them.
1. Board members should request information and data gathered by District staff that helps the Board members make better-informed decisions about policies affecting student achievement district-wide.
2. Board members should request data as a Board, not as an individual, unless the information is readily available and will not redirect staff time.
3. Board members should use data to represent all of the Board members' constituents honestly and equally and refuse to surrender the Board members' responsibilities to special interest or partisan political groups. responsibilities to special interest or partisan political groups.
4. Board members should avoid using the Board position, and the information data supplies [sic] as a result of Board membership for personal gain.
5. Board members should recognize that decisions can be made only by a majority vote at a Board meeting after everyone on the Board has had adequate time to review all the data and information.
6. Board members should respect the confidentiality of privileged information.
7. Board members should abide by majority decisions of the Board, while retaining the right to seek changes through ethical and constructive channels.
8. The public will no longer have the right to comment on agenda items that the Board has discussed - the public will only be allowed to comment on so-called "discussion items" before the Board discusses them, and all such public comments on discussion items will be allowed only at the beginning of each meeting. Only on voting items will public comments be allowed at the time an item is on the meeting agenda.
9. Each public speaker will get only three minutes to comment unless the Board Chair decides to extend their time.
10. No inappropriate or disrespectful conduct shall be permitted at any BOE meeting. Persistence in such conduct shall be grounds for summary termination, by the Chair, of that person's privilege of address.
11. The agenda of Board meetings will no longer include an item for public comment and petitions regarding ANY TOPIC OR ISSUE GERMANE TO THE OPERATION OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. This right is being stricken from the By-Laws. Public comment will only be allowed on items on the agenda for the meeting.
12. The By-Laws in the future may be amended in the future not by a majority vote of the Board, but only by a super-majority (two-thirds) affirmative vote.
Across the country, boards of education are addressing such critical issues as how to raise student performance, how to control costs, and how to close the achievement gap.
What is Fairfield's Board of Education doing?
Certain members of Fairfield's BOE (Mr Dwyer(Chair, D), Mr Convertito(R) and Mr Patton(D)) are proposing to amend its By-Laws by adopting rules that would limit its members' access to information, data and public comments. We believe this would mean less transparency and less public influence. We believe the new rules would be a step backward.
Twelve new rules will be considered at the special meeting on Tuesday, January 13th. Although the first seven have been promulgated for at least a decade by the Connecticut Association of Boards of Education and have been adopted by some BOEs (we don’t know how many), this does not mean that they are good and necessary rules.
None of the proposed rules appears to be in the best interests of the Town of Fairfield and its schools.
It is ironic that these proposals come after a majority of the BOE rejected proposed rule changes at its meeting on November 25th that were designed to increase the Board's focus: on its objectives, goals and action plans for our schools; on its accountability for measuring and reporting progress towards those objectives and goals; on its responsibility for the school budget and for the priorities set in the budget through its allocation of resources; and on its five-year strategic plan for our schools.
Here are all the proposed rules that will be considered Tuesday night, along with our reactions to them.
1. Board members should request information and data gathered by District staff that helps the Board members make better-informed decisions about policies affecting student achievement district-wide.
- Sounds good, but Board members would then not be allowed to request information and data that helps them make better-informed decisions about anything else for which the BOE is responsible, like student achievement in a particular school, or the cost of the various curricular and extracurricular programs offered, or the efficiency of school operations, or the performance of school administrators?
2. Board members should request data as a Board, not as an individual, unless the information is readily available and will not redirect staff time.
- Really? Since any request will necessarily redirect staff time, no member of the BOE will be able to ask for any data unless a majority of the BOE members join in that request? By inference, the majority can then prevent any single member or any minority group of board members from obtaining data that might demonstrate that the policies of the majority are not working.
3. Board members should use data to represent all of the Board members' constituents honestly and equally and refuse to surrender the Board members' responsibilities to special interest or partisan political groups. responsibilities to special interest or partisan political groups.
- This begs the question of what lies behind the belief that such a rule is necessary. What real or imagined abuses has motivated someone to propose this? A BOE is composed of people who are elected to four-year terms in what we call a representative democracy; the BOE is also subject to oversight by the State Department of Education. If any citizen feels that any BOE member has not represented their interests well and has instead engaged in "special interest or partisan politics," he or she can file a complaint with the S.D.O.E. and/or vote for someone else.
4. Board members should avoid using the Board position, and the information data supplies [sic] as a result of Board membership for personal gain.
- This one has also has us wondering what lies behind the belief that such a rule is necessary. As far as we know, every public official in Fairfield is subject to the Standards of Conduct found in Article XI of the Town Charter.
5. Board members should recognize that decisions can be made only by a majority vote at a Board meeting after everyone on the Board has had adequate time to review all the data and information.
- Since the majority of any Board can always vote to postpone action, this is another obvious, common-sense but unnecessary rule. As far as we know, no other governing body in Fairfield has ever proposed such a rule.
6. Board members should respect the confidentiality of privileged information.
- Yet another obvious, common-sense but unnecessary rule. Have there been breaches of confidentiality by members of the BOE that the citizens of Fairfield should know about? Other than personnel matters and labor negotiations, all other information about our public schools and our Town is supposed to be in the public domain.
7. Board members should abide by majority decisions of the Board, while retaining the right to seek changes through ethical and constructive channels.
- Once again, is there something going on at the BOE that the citizens of Fairfield should know about that has led someone to believe that such a rule is necessary?
8. The public will no longer have the right to comment on agenda items that the Board has discussed - the public will only be allowed to comment on so-called "discussion items" before the Board discusses them, and all such public comments on discussion items will be allowed only at the beginning of each meeting. Only on voting items will public comments be allowed at the time an item is on the meeting agenda.
- The preamble to the section for this proposed new rule says that the Chairman shall solicit comments from the public in order to encourage public participation during Board meetings. It is not clear why someone feels it will encourage public comment on discussion items to prohibit comments after the Board has discussed them. In other words, the public will not have an opportunity to react to the opinions expressed by members of the Board after its discussion. Does this sound like a fair, helpful, open and transparent process?
9. Each public speaker will get only three minutes to comment unless the Board Chair decides to extend their time.
- Some BOEs in CT have apparently adopted a similar rule, and all governance bodies in Fairfield sometimes impose time limits on public speakers (often two minutes and sometimes one minute) when there are so many that it would simply be impracticable to allow everyone more time. In fact, the agenda for every BOE meeting currently states that each speaker is “limited to two minutes.” However, as far we know, no other governance body in Fairfield has ever proposed a formal rule like this. If there is no time constraint, why should the Chair have the right to cut off a member of the public?
10. No inappropriate or disrespectful conduct shall be permitted at any BOE meeting. Persistence in such conduct shall be grounds for summary termination, by the Chair, of that person's privilege of address.
- Once again, it is curious that someone thinks it is necessary to have a rule that states the obvious. The agenda for every BOE meeting currently states that “decorum will be enforced.” As far as we know, all other governance bodies in Fairfield manage public comments at their meetings without the need for a formal rule. It is also curious that whoever first drafted this rule, which has been adopted by at least some other CT BOEs, decided that it is a privilege rather than a right for the public to comment at a public meeting of the people they elected to represent them.
11. The agenda of Board meetings will no longer include an item for public comment and petitions regarding ANY TOPIC OR ISSUE GERMANE TO THE OPERATION OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. This right is being stricken from the By-Laws. Public comment will only be allowed on items on the agenda for the meeting.
- To be perfectly clear, the public currently has a right to comment at BOE meetings on any topic or issue that is germane to the operation of our school district. The new rule would restrict comments to items that are on the agenda. This would represent quite an extraordinary change in the right of any citizen of Fairfield to raise in a public meeting any issue he or she feels is important to our school system. This sounds like something out of the Soviet Union, not the Town of Fairfield.
12. The By-Laws in the future may be amended in the future not by a majority vote of the Board, but only by a super-majority (two-thirds) affirmative vote.
- This too is quite extraordinary. Why should the BOE be different than any other governance body in our Town?
RTM Rejects New Contract for School Administrators
The RTM voted 21-20 against a new three-year contract regarding wage increases and insurance premiums for school administrators Monday night. Read more: Fairfield Citizen 12/16/14
The RTM voted 21-20 against a new three-year contract regarding wage increases and insurance premiums for school administrators Monday night. Read more: Fairfield Citizen 12/16/14
Click link below to read the full document entitled "A Teachable Moment"
| a_teachable_moment.pdf |
