Pattye Benson

Community Matters

Tredyffrin Township

Our State Senator Andy Dinniman Votes in Favor of Pennsylvania’s School Voucher Bill, Awaiting Response from State Rep Warren Kampf

March 3, 2011
Comments

We now know that State Sen. Andy Dinniman (D-Chester) supports the school voucher bill. As a member of the Senate Education Committee, this week Sen. Dinniman cast his vote in favor of the proposed legislation. I have been contacted concerning State Rep Warren Kampf’s opinion of the school voucher program and sent the following email this morning asking for a statement. I look forward to Rep. Kampf’s response and will post it when received.

Dear Rep. Kampf,

You recently introduced a bill that would reduce costs for school districts by exempting them from prevailing wage requirements for public works contracts. Your proposed ‘School Construction Cost Reduction Act’ indicates an understanding of the economic issues facing many of the state’s school districts. As Pennsylvania’s school districts struggle to balance their budgets, legislation that supports schools and taxpayers is appreciated.

There has been much discussion about the proposed school voucher bill S.B.1. which would help the state’s poorest children from the lowest-performing schools by providing options of attending public, private or parochial school. This week the Senate Education Committee voted 8-2 in favor of the bill and the proposed legislation will move forward in the process.

It is important for constituents to know where our elected officials stand on all important issues, including the school voucher program. State Senator Andy Dinniman (D-Chester) serves on the Senate Education Committee and voted in favor of the proposed school voucher legislation. As our State Representative, could you please offer your thoughts on the proposed ‘opportunity scholarship’ legislation? In your response, please address specific issues including the plan’s estimated price tag of $860 million, the constitutionality of the proposed legislation and the issue of funding parochial schools with taxpayer money.

Thank you and I look forward to your response.

King regards,

Pattye Benson
Community Matters
www.pattyebenson.org

Community Matters – in and around Tredyffrin

March 1, 2011
9 Comments

Community Matters . . . in and around Tredyffrin

In one of the biggest property deals since the start of the global financial crisis, the Australian company Centro Properties Groups has agreed to sell its 588 US shopping malls to private equity giant Blackstone Group for $9.4 billion.

The local connection – Centro owns Chesterbrook Shopping Center and Valley Fair Shopping Center! I assume the existing retail leases in these shopping centers will pass with the transfer of sale. Many folks are looking forward to McKenzies Brew House restaurant plans for the old Charlie Brown location at Valley Fair Shopping Center. Here’s hoping that Blackstone will breathe new life into Chesterbrook Shopping Center and find a tenant for the empty Genuardi’s grocery store. And let’s not forget that this corporate sale could mean significant transfer tax revenue to the school district and the township!

In case you missed this one . . . in order to make shelf room for new products, the Pennsylvania State liquor stores is having special discount sale, starting today. Approximately 400 items have been marked down to clearance prices until they are gone.

Last night was the Board of Supervisors Meeting. Notes of the evening included Mike Heaberg’s swearing in as new supervisor by Judge Jeremy Blackburn; recognition of the 300th anniversary of the historic Baptist Church in the Great Valley and certificates of appreciation for volunteer service to Grace Keffer, Bob Haver and Molly Duffy.

By Board of Supervisors appointment, a Sidewalk Subcommittee was formed in March 2010 to look at resident’s wants and needs of sidewalks in the community. The process included public meetings, resident sidewalk survey, observations and discussion and Sidewalks Subcommittee chair Tory Snyder presented the findings and recommendations last night at the Board of Supervisors Meeting. (Here is a link to the recommendations). Surprising some of us in the audience, supervisor Phil Donahue made a motion for the board to accept the Sidewalk Subcommittee recommendations and move it to the Planning Commission to create a draft ordinance. Michelle Kichline seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Hat’s off to the supervisors for this progressive, proactive show of support for the community! (As an aside, the Sidewalk Subcommittee Green Routes Network recommendation includes St. Davids Golf Club sidewalk in the plan.)

In addition to crafting a draft ordinance in regards to the Sidewalk Subcommittee recommendations, the Planning Commissioners is drafting an amendment to the Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance to give the Board of Supervisors final land development authority. Although there is a Public Hearing on land development authority scheduled for March 21, it was agreed there would be no final decision on that matter until after the sidewalk ordinance is resolved.

I was notified of a an updated ‘Best High School in Pennsylvania’ list and am pleased to report that Conestoga High School continues to receive high marks. Each year, “Newsweek” magazine ranks the nation’s top 1,600 high schools–that’s only six percent of all public high schools in the country. This ranking helps parents and educators set standards for themselves. In 2010, 33 high schools from Pennsylvania, including Conestoga High School, made the list. These schools received high marks from both “Newsweek” and “U.S. News & World Report.”

According to the eHow.com 2011 update, “Conestoga High School is ranked as the No. 502 high school in the nation by “Newsweek” and as No. 79 by “U.S. News & World Report.” It offers more Advanced Placement courses than any other high school, public or private, in Pennsylvania, and had 37 National Merit semifinalists in 2010. . . “ Congratulations Conestoga High School and Tredyffrin-Easttown School District!

Speaking of Conestoga High School . . . the curtains go up tonight on the student production of Phantom of the Opera. The show will run March 1 – 6, click here for ticket information. Phantom is one of my all-time favorite musicals – best wishes to the cast & break a leg!

That is it for now. I look forward to your thoughtful comments and please email me at tredyffrincommunitymatters@gmail.com if you have news or thoughts to share.

Teacher Furloughs for Economic Reasons . . . Could it happen in Pennsylvania?

February 28, 2011
5 Comments

The recent discussion of Union-Chadds Ford School District’s fact-finding report and their teachers union vote not to accept plus the potential of a teacher’s strike in the Perkiomen Valley School District continues to challenge me to understand the process and the ‘what if’s’.

In my last post, I asked some questions to which several of you kindly responded. However, one question lingers. With many of the school districts (not necessarily T/E) in an economic crisis, what happens if a school district simply does not have the money to meet the demands of a teachers union?

I understand that once a teacher’s contract ends, the teachers continue to work to the ‘old’ contract. However, perhaps 3 years ago when the last contract was written, the school district’s economic outlook was far different. If you set aside an increase in teacher salaries and/or benefits, what if a school district has no fund balance and cannot meet the current teacher contract requirements. What happens? How do these school districts maintain a status quo of the old teacher’s contract? Historically, I do not think that the current economic climate coupled with the pension crisis has existed during the last couple of decades (if ever) in Pennsylvania. Without a precedent, legally what can be done — what is the solution?

Pennsylvania state law permits staff reduction in a school district under very specific conditions – if a program is eliminated or if a school consolidates or school district reorganization requires it. Currently, the state law does not permit teacher furloughs for economic necessity reasons.

State Senator Mike Folmer (R-Lebanon County) is looking to change the state law on teacher furlough and give school boards the ability to reduce staff for ‘economic reasons’. For obvious reasons, teacher unions strongly oppose this idea whereas a number of economically challenged school districts support Folmer’s idea. This issue is rising to the forefront as school districts could face the possibility of severe cutbacks from state funding next year. Pennsylvania is facing a $4 billion budget deficit next year.

To meet the demands of the enormous budget gap, school districts across the Commonwealth are no doubt going to see a steep drop in state aid. What alternatives currently exist for school districts to fund their deficit? Assuming a school district does not have a fund balance (or at a minimum, a diminishing fund balance) their options are limited. They can raise property taxes, cut programs, or do a little bit of both. However, we know that state law compels school districts to limit property tax increases to a cap set by the state or seek voter approval for higher tax increases. Folmer hopes his legislation will allow more flexibility for the school districts; they could avoid program cuts by teacher furloughs based on economic necessity.

It is interesting to look at the arguments on both sides of the issue. The teachers unions argue that furloughing teachers could affect the integrity of the education program, lead to larger class sizes and put disadvantaged students at greater risk. There is a feeling among the teacher unions that the students would be shortchanged with the reduction in staff.

The argument from the other side (the school boards) is that this tool created by Folmer’s legislation could help the school districts avoid eliminating programs as a means of cutting expenses. Some school districts in Pennsylvania (fortunately not T/E) are in extreme financial situations. Economic hardship has backed some school districts in to a corner; how they are going to resolve their financial issues. For those school districts, maybe Folmer’s legislation to furlough teachers for economic reason is their only lifeline.

Problems are inherent in this kind of legislation . . . . How do school districts resolve the challenge of determining which teachers or administrators to furlough? How would school districts avoid the pitfall of arbitrary or subjective decisions in the furlough process?

Local Teacher Union Gives 48-Hour Strike Notice

February 25, 2011
4 Comments

We have been following the Unionville-Chadds Ford (U-CF) School District this week; their ongoing teacher contract negotiations and independent fact-finding report. (The teacher’s contract expired last June). The school board voted unanimously to accept the report and the school district union, Unionville-Chadds Ford Education Association voted not to accept. How long can the teachers continue to work without a contract? Until a new contract is signed, do the teachers work under the conditions of the old contract? If both sides are at a stalemate, I am curious what the next step is.

Teachers in Montgomery County’s Perkiomen Valley School District have likewise been working without a contract since last June. The school board and the teachers union in this Collegeville school district also received a fact-finding report from the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board last month. Like U-CF school board, the Perkiomen Valley School Board unanimously approved the fact-finding report; and like the U-CF teacher’s union, their union, Perkiomen Valley Education Association (PVEA) rejected the fact-finding report. The report recommended a three-year contract, with an average in $6.564 in raises over the three years and changes in the amount teachers are reimbursed for tuition.

Negotiations between school administrators and the teachers union reached an impasse. Late today, the teachers in the Perkiomen Valley School District gave notice that they intend to strike next week if no deal is reached this weekend. The PVEA issued a 48-hour strike notice, which means a strike could begin on Tuesday.

The teachers’ union and school administrators in Perkiomen Valley School District are meeting with a state mediator over the next few days in homes of reaching a “fair and reasonable” settlement. I visited the PVEA union website and it was interesting to note that the Perkiomen Valley School District has spent $55K to date on legal fees regarding the current teacher contract negotiations.

I am certain that the administration and teachers in the Unionville-Chadds Ford School District are closely monitoring the strike threat in Collegeville.

Is this a sign of our times or evidence of what is to come . . . ?

Nationwide Collective Bargaining Solidarity – Saturday, February 26

February 24, 2011
9 Comments

“Employers and employees alike have learned that in union there is strength, that a coordination of individual effort means an elimination of waste, a bettering of living conditions, and is in fact, the father of prosperity.”
— Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1929

For the past nine days, we have watched as teachers, students, nurses, state workers and others protested in Madison, Wisconsin. This week we understand that many of our own school district teachers showed their support for fellow teachers with the ‘wearing of red’. We now learn that this Saturday at noon, across the country, the protest and show of solidarity is going national. In cities from coast to coast, including every state capital, people will come together to stand in solidarity with the people of Wisconsin.

Union leaders in Wisconsin agreed to Gov. Walker’s proposal to increase contributions to their health and retirement plans to help close a projected $3.6 billion budget gap. The move would cut the take-home pay of many union workers by about 7 percent. However, union leaders nationwide are incensed about Walker’s additional proposal to strip public employees of the collective bargaining power – the lifeblood of a union.

I received an email announcement from political action organization, MoveOn.org about the ‘Rally to Save the American Dream’ offering details of Philadelphia’s planned solidarity rally at:

Love Park
Broad & JFK Streets
Philadelphia, PA 19101
Saturday, February 26
12 Noon

The invitation asked for us “. . . to stand in solidarity with the people of Wisconsin and for all the people of Pennsylvania to stand up as well. It is time we all speak out and demand an end to the attacks on worker’s rights and public services across the country. We demand investment, to create decent jobs for the millions of people who desperately want to work. And we demand that the rich and powerful pay their fair share. We are all Wisconsin. We are all Americans. Please join me at the rally and bring a friend!”

The announcement further suggested that if you believe in the middle class and the American Dream, you fight for collective bargaining rights. Declaring your support for the Wisconsin workers, attendees on Saturday are asked to show up wearing the Wisconsin Badger colors: red and white.

From Clarence Darrow in 1909, the words “With all their faults, trade unions have done more for humanity than any other organization of men that ever existed. They have done more for decency, for honesty, for education, for the betterment of the race, for the development of character in men.”

I think we can all agree — these are historic times in our country.

Will the Proposed SB1 School Voucher Program Further Erode Failing-School Communities?

February 23, 2011
5 Comments

The Following op-ed article by Larry Feinberg appeared in Monday’s issue of the Philadelphia Inquirer. http://www.philly.com/philly/opinion/20110221_Pa__s_unaccountable_voucher_bill.html

Lawrence A. Feinberg is a school board member in Haverford Township, the chairman of the Delaware County School Boards Legislative Council, and a co-chairman of the Keystone State Education Coalition.

In the past, Larry has contributed comments to Community Matters. As we know (and as Larry reminds us), in its present state, the SB1 school voucher bill does not require accountability from private or parochial schools. Our understanding is that Sen. Andy Dinniman is addressing that aspect of the bill and suggests that accountability needs to be included as an amendment. As I have previously stated, I am unclear how student testing and accountability will be possible in a private school setting.

In his opinion article, Larry speaks of the failing-school community . . .

“S.B. 1 would dismantle neighborhood schools by siphoning off motivated students and parents, leaving behind a truly concentrated population of failing students, including those who are less motivated, “hard to educate,” disabled, troubled, and able to speak little English. S.B. 1 offers absolutely nothing to help those students or improve their schools.”

Larry makes an important, and often over-looked point, that may be inherent in the proposed school voucher program. . . the erosion or the ‘dismantling’ of a failing-school community when families and students opt out of the local public school. Isn’t there a real possibility that a school voucher program could cause further deterioration in a failing-school community, even beyond the walls of the local public school?

PA’s Unaccountable School Voucher Bill
By Lawrence A. Feinberg
In support of Pennsylvania’s Senate Bill 1, which would provide taxpayer-funded vouchers to private schools, voucher evangelists have been citing a report by the Foundation for Educational Choice, “A Win-Win Solution: The Empirical Evidence on How Vouchers Affect Public Schools.” However, a review of the report by the National Education Policy Center finds no credible evidence that vouchers have improved student achievement.

Located at the University of Colorado at Boulder, the National Education Policy Center aims to provide high-quality information on education policy. Its review found that the “Win-Win” report, “based on a review of 17 studies, selectively reads the evidence in some of those studies, the majority of which were produced by voucher advocacy organizations.

“Moreover, the report can’t decide whether or not to acknowledge the impact of factors other than vouchers on public schools. It attempts to show that public school gains were caused by the presence of vouchers alone, but then argues that the lack of overall gains for districts with vouchers should be ignored because too many other factors are at play.” The review goes on to note that “existing research provides little reliable information about the competitive effects of vouchers, and this report does little to help answer the question.”

Voucher proponents tout the supposed benefits of competition, but the playing field is not even close to level. The state’s public schools operate under the bureaucratic weight of the Pennsylvania School Code’s thousand pages (also created by the legislature) and another thousand pages of No Child Left Behind requirements. They face a virtual army of special-education attorneys with another thousand pages of laws. They are subject to right-to-know and sunshine laws. And they must bear the costs of complying with all of them.

Religious and other private schools are relatively unaffected by any of this red tape, rendering the notion of fair competition ludicrous.

Public schools are required to accept and expected to educate every student who shows up, regardless of economic status, English proficiency, disabilities, or behavioral problems. It’s the law.

Here’s where “choice” really comes in: Private schools can choose to accept or reject any prospective student, and they can choose which students they retain or expel.

S.B. 1 demands accountability, but only from traditional public schools. While voucher proponents hold the accountability banner high, accusing high-poverty public schools of failing, there is no accountability whatsoever imposed under this bill’s voucher scheme. It would allow private schools to receive tax dollars without being accountable for students’ academic performance, requiring no standardized tests and making no scores available to the public.

Nor does the bill impose any accountability for how private schools spend tax dollars. There would be no transparency, public budgets, or right to know.

Meanwhile, S.B. 1 would dismantle neighborhood schools by siphoning off motivated students and parents, leaving behind a truly concentrated population of failing students, including those who are less motivated, “hard to educate,” disabled, troubled, and able to speak little English. S.B. 1 offers absolutely nothing to help those students or improve their schools.

Ultimately, S.B. 1 and its so-called opportunity scholarships would provide our state legislators with an opportunity to wash their hands of their responsibility to provide a thorough and efficient system of public education for all.

On President’s Day, Who is Your Pick for the Most Influential President?

February 21, 2011
Comments

In honor of President’s Day, which president do you think was the most influential? The American Presidency is the most honored and revered political office in the world. Great Generals, Attorneys and even Actors have had the honor of being referred as the Chief Executive of the United States of America.

Many lists have the same presidents on their rosters, and below is the list that Martin Kelly, a historian and teacher, put together for About.com Guide. The list of 10 most influential presidents generally has the same seven or eight but a few different presidents sneak in, depending on who is compiling the list. You will find Abraham Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt but sometimes John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton will make the list. These men, as well as the rest that make up the list of US presidents, have all left their imprint on this country.

To narrow it down and choose one president who left the biggest mark is nearly impossible. Do you choose Lincoln and the changes he implemented on an entire race, which sent shock waves in the economic and social worlds? On the other hand, would you choose FDR for his economic plans that we still have today . . . that we either applaud or mourn? Each president has influenced history in his own way.

I probably would be undecided in choosing the top five most influential presidents, but in my opinion, there is only one who set the most traditions and tried to create a model for all future presidents. I choose George Washington, the very first US president as the most influential. Washington kept the extremely frail nation from falling apart in spite of the issue of taxes and slavery. He understood that did not know everything and was willing to have men of different beliefs than his own help shape the decisions of the country.

I am curious; who do you think the top five most influential presidents are? On my list, I would add Abraham Lincoln, FDR, Thomas Jefferson, Harry Truman to George Washington, but the fifth influential president is hard . . . Reagan, Eisenhower, Kennedy? I do not know who I would add to my list of 5 most influential presidents . . . some would suggest Bill Clinton. Do you agree with Martin Kelly’s list below?

Top 10 Most Influential Presidents
By Martin Kelly
About.com Guide

Of the 43 men who have been president of the United States, there are some truly clear choices of who were the most important and influential presidents. There were also many who would never have made the list. My picks for the top ten influential presidents were based on their historical influence and their actions while in office. This was a tough list to create – especially once we move past the 7th president. If one more could be added it would be Ronald Reagan. He helped bring the Cold War to an end after years of struggle. He definitely gets an honorable mention for this list of influential presidents.

1. Abraham Lincoln
Abraham Lincoln saved the Union during the American Civil War. His leadership during the war was one of no compromise but at the same time understanding that he would eventually have to unite the states once the North won the war. His actions eventually led to the abolition of slavery across the United States.

2. Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Having won four terms as president, FDR was sure to have a huge impact on the United States. His leadership throughout World War II was key to our victory. Further, he worked tirelessly to end the Great Depression including the creation of numerous programs through his New Deal to help Americans get back on their feet.

3. George Washington
As the first president, Washington couldn’t help but set precedents that were followed by later presidents. His lack of a desire to be seen as a ‘monarch’ was an extremely important part of creating a citizen president. Also, the fact that he retired after two terms set a precedent only broken by Franklin Roosevelt. After Roosevelt’s death, the two-term limit was added as the 22nd amendment to the Constitution.

4. Thomas Jefferson
Through Thomas Jefferson’s Louisiana Purchase, the size of the United States doubled overnight. Jefferson was a strong states’ rightest who also realized the need for consolidating power in the federal government in certain instances.

5. Andrew Jackson
Jackson’s election showed the rise of the common man. He was the first president elected from humble beginnings. His popularity was huge. Further, he was a strong nationalist who often made controversial decisions such as the removal of Native Americans east of the Mississippi. He was president during the ‘Trail of Tears’. He also fought against the national bank.

6. Theodore Roosevelt
TR was an extremely influential president. Not only did he earn the title of ‘Trust Buster’ as president by fighting against corrupt businesses, but he also was deeply committed to conservation. He established numerous national parks to preserve the wildlife that was quickly being overtaken through industrialization.

7. Woodrow Wilson
Wilson piloted the ship that brought America onto the world stage. He made the first steps of leading us out of isolationism, violating Washington’s tenet of avoiding foreign entanglements. He led America during World War I. His fervent hope was for the US to join a League of Nations, the precursor to the United Nations.

8. Harry S Truman
Harry S Truman took over after the death of Franklin D. Roosevelt. He made one of the hardest decisions in American History by deciding to drop the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. He presided over the end of World War II and set precedents for leadership during the beginning of the Cold War.

9. James K. Polk
After Thomas Jefferson, James K. Polk increased the size of the United States more than any other president through the acquisition of California and New Mexico as a result of the Mexican-American War. He also claimed Oregon Territory after a treaty with England. He was a key figure in Manifest Destiny. He was also an extremely effective leader during the Mexican-American War. He is considered to be the best one-term president.

10. Dwight Eisenhower
During Eisenhower’s time in office, America experienced a great amount of economic prosperity. Eisenhower also provided crucial leadership during the Cold War.

Think End of Winter, Think Spring . . . and Help Save the Trees!

February 17, 2011
Comments

Save the trees! The Chester County Open Land Conservancy volunteers continue to wage their battle against the invasive vines that are strangling the trees in the Nature Preserves.

Chester County Open Land Conservancy could use some volunteers. This is a great opportunity to get some fresh air, work with some of your neighbors and make a lasting impact on the Nature Preserves. Saturday, February 19, starting at 9 AM is the re-scheduled Cedar Hollow Preserve ‘Vine Day’. Although the volunteers generally work 3-4 hours, any help that you can offer would be greatly appreciated!

Cedar Hollow Preserve is 67 acres of meadows, woods, rock formations, large sycamore, ruins, Cedar Hollow run, and extensive trail system located in the western Great Valley area of Tredyffrin Twp.

Volunteers are asked to meet in the parking lot at 9 AM. Any questions, contact Ray Clarke, 610-578-0358. All that’s needed are protective clothing, gloves and, if you have them, tools such as loppers, pruners and hand saws to supplement Open Land Conservancy’s supply.

Directions to Cedar Hollow Preserve from Paoli, take North Valley Road to Swedesford Road. Turn left on to Swedesford Road. Take Swedesford Road towards the Great Valley Corporate Center and turn right onto Church Road to the parking lot right, just past St. Peters Road.

Upcoming Open Land Conservancy Events:

Tracks & Trails
Date: Sunday, February 27, 1-3 PM
Location: Cedar Hollow (directions above)
Description: Learn about the behavior of our local wildlife. Explore the preserve – its trails, woods, fields, creeks and rock formations. All are welcome – especially kids! Wear warm clothes and boots for mud.
Questions: Call Jack Chidester, 610-644-5040 office; 610-405-2778 cell; 610-647-5380 conservancy or email: jchidester@chidesterortho.com

Cool Valley Preserve Vine Day
Date: Saturday, March 5, 9 AM
Location: Cool Valley Preserve
Description: 33.2 acres of meadows, woods, extensive trail system through fields and along Valley Creek.
Questions: Ray Clarke, 610-578-0358

Snow didn’t keep volunteers from their work at George Lorimer Preserve on Vine Day in January! Below is a photo of Tim Lander preparing to tackle this tree’s strangling vines and the photo on the right is the ‘after’ photo of the satisfaction of a job well done!

Political Notes . . . Brazunas Will Not Run in 2011; Chester County Republican Convention Tomorrow – District Attorney Race

February 14, 2011
3 Comments

A couple of noteworthy political items . . .

There has been speculation as to whether Eamon Brazunas would be throwing his hat in the campaign ring again for the Tredyffrin’s Board of Supervisors. Eamon emailed friends and supporters today with his decision not to run in the 2011 supervisor’s race. Here is an excerpt from the email:

“After careful consideration I have decided not to seek election to the Board of Supervisors this year. Therefore, I will not be running in the 2011 election cycle. While it has been a goal of mine to serve the residents in Tredyffrin on the Board, I will be taking this year to fully appreciate the first year of Stella’s life.

I will continue to work with my fellow colleagues in the fire service and with the Board of Supervisors in both Tredyffrin and Easttown to improve the Fire/EMS services in our community. We have made significant progress with communications publicly at Township meetings, established a communications network to link Fire/EMS/Police and other stakeholders and made strides towards a long-term funding solution. There is more work to be done and I will continue to contribute in this area, which I have devoted much time to over the past 13 years.”

In December, Eamon and his wife Ali became first-time parents to daughter Stella Nicola. I think we would all agree that this is a very special time in the Brazunas family and should be enjoyed! I appreciate that Eamon was a supervisor candidate in the past and that he recently participated as a candidate for the interim supervisor vacancy. The entire community appreciates his continued service as a Berwyn volunteer firefighter!

On another political note . . . tomorrow is the Chester County Republican Convention and I will be attending. A couple of years ago, I attended the convention to support Judy DiFilippo when she was running for the State House and was interested in the process.

If you recall, over the last several weeks, I have written about Chester County’s district attorney race. The race is very close for Republican candidates Pat Carmody, Tom Hogan and Steve Kelly. After the county straw polls, Carmody was ahead of Hogan, but only by two votes and Kelly was in third place. Based on my experience, the straw polls may (or may not) be an indicator of the voting at the convention.

To avoid a primary race between Republican candidates would require that one of these three candidates receive 60% of the votes cast at the convention. If committee members are unable to attend the convention, they need to give their proxy vote to someone to attend in their absence. Good news is that the weather tomorrow should not be a factor to keep anyone home. All the votes are important and could be the deciding factor in whose name will appear on the May primary ballot.

Although it was my understanding that the Republican Convention was open to the public, I did call ahead to double-check that Community Matters would be welcomed. I received a very friendly welcoming response to my inquiry from Maria at the Chester County Republican Headquarters; and I look forward to attending (and following the DA race!)

How Will T/E School District Close the $5.3 Million 2011-12 Budget Gap?

February 13, 2011
40 Comments

The Finance Committee meeting is Monday, February 14, 7:30 PM at the T/E Administration Office, West Valley Business Center, 940 West Valley Road, Suite 1700, Wayne. Click here for the meeting agenda and 2011-12 Budget Development Plan.

At the onset of this 2011-12 budget discussion, I want to give tremendous credit to the school board members who serve on the Finance Committee – Chair Kevin Mahoney, Debbie Bookstaber, Jim Bruce and Kevin Buraks. Their task is overwhelming and the 148-page 2011-12 budget document attests to their hard work, especially given the challenging economic situation of school districts. As a taxpayer, I am grateful and thank them for their diligence on our behalf.

Increased pension costs are the biggest hurdle in the coming years to school districts across the state. The challenge is how to balance the defined benefit plan of the teachers with the rising costs to maintain. How will school districts fund the pension plans, provide the same quality of education and not place the burden on the taxpayer . . . ?

Although I took time to review the budget documents provided for Monday’s meeting, I admit that my eyes glazed over on some of the details. If any of my assumptions are incorrect or if I have misinterpreted the information, here is hoping that someone will provide clarification.

As presented, the 2011-12 budget has projected revenue of $107M, which includes $1.2M revenue from Act 1 tax increase (1.4%) and $2.4M revenue from Act 1 exceptions (2.8%). Projected expenses are $112M, which leaves an imbalance of (-$5.3M). Without the $1.2M revenue from Act 1 tax increase and the $2.4M in revenue from Act 1 exceptions, the imbalance would be (-$8.9M) versus the (-$5.3M).

Although the 2011-12 budget gap is narrowed with the Act 1 tax increase and the Act 1 exception; there remains a deficit in the 2011-12 budget of (-$5.3M). If all strategies of Level 1 are instituted (as outlined on pg. 107 of the budget development plan), the deficit is reduced by $1M and the imbalance drops to (-$4.3). Under this plan, the remaining $4.3M of the budget deficit is to come from the district’s fund balance. The school district has a Moody’s AAA bond rating . . . is that rating jeopardized by using $4.3M in fund balance dollars for the 2011-12 budget? Understanding that the fund balance is taxpayers money; how much reserve is required to maintain the district’s bond rating?

All Level 1 strategies suggested under this budget development plan appear straightforward and practical ways to cut expenses. I did note two secretarial positions to be eliminated at a combined cost savings of $135K are included on the Level 1 list.

The more interesting and/or surprising strategy suggestions are included in Level 2 and Level 3. Level 3 requires attrition for implementation. It is interesting to note that the Level 2 strategies, should they all be implemented, would provide a cost savings to the district of $6.7M +. I would expect the dollar amount savings from Level 2 strategies would be substantially greater than $6.7M, probably closer to $10M, maybe more. Why? Because Level 2 includes the selling of TESD property including (1) the 16 acres on Jefferson Lane in Chesterbrook (earlier discussion on Community Matters questioned the feasibility of selling that property); (2) 738 First Ave, Berwyn; this is a 10 acre parcel where the ECS building sits. (As an aside, it was my understanding that the ESC building was contracted for demolition but it is still standing) and (3) 945 Conestoga Road, 0.33 acre of residential property next to Teamer Field.

In further review of Level 2 strategies, a few suggestions caught my attention; such as outsourcing of custodial services . . . could result in a savings of $950K. I believe that the custodians (along with the bus drivers, lunchroom staff and possibly some secretarial employees) are unionized which could make the change to outsourcing more difficult. However, with nearly a million dollar savings involved in custodial outsourcing, it could be worth further exploration.

On the Level 2 list, is a suggested $2M savings to the school district with the elimination of all non-mandated student transportation. The remaining transportation would be what is required by the state. Combining the outsourcing of custodial services and the elimination of the non-mandated bus transport, would provide almost $3M in savings.

Another Level 2 strategy that has an associated savings tag of $1.5M, (but a suggestion that probably is not practical and should be removed from consideration) is to require athletic and extra-curricular activities to become completely self-supporting. Families would be required to underwrite the cost of student participation or if unable financially, seek help from FLITE.

Contained in the Level 3 list are several staff reductions, many of which would affect the elementary grades. Here are those specific strategies and associated savings:

  • Eliminate Literacy Intervention Program $111,000
  • Eliminate Elementary Math Support Positions $350,000
  • Eliminate Four Elementary Reading Specialist Positions $300,000
  • Eliminate Elementary Strings Specialist Position $75,000
  • Eliminate Middle School Reading Specialists $300,000
  • Eliminate Middle School Math Support Positions $125,000
  • Reduce each High School Department by One Teacher $375,000
  • Eliminate Elementary Applied Tech Program $300,000

If my math is correct, the above listed eight cost-savings equate to approximately $2M. However, I have to believe that some of these staff reductions could directly influence the quality of TESD education. Remember, these are Level 3 strategies not Level 1. However, just the fact that they appear on any list, makes them a possibility.

The last Level 3 strategy listed is interesting and apparently was discussed at Friday’s Facilities Committee meeting – the redistricting of the elementary schools. According to district enrollment patterns predicted for the next 5 years, there is a need to consider redistricting. Devon Elementary is at 100% capacity and has become the largest elementary school. The savings is ‘to be determined’ because it is possible that redistricting could keep eliminate the need for additional space at Devon Elementary. However, this would impact those families living on the redistricted streets.

Ray Clarke attended the Facilities Committee meeting on Friday and offered the following notes from the meeting. It would seem that storage and maintenance facilities continues to be discussed but with no clear solution. I know that the ECS building was slated for demolition but would it be possible (at a far lesser cost) that the ECS building could be retrofitted as a storage facility – not for use by staff or students which could be affected by the building’s environmental issues – but for use as storage. It is obviously too simplistic a solution so there must be a reason that it is not possible.

Ray Clarke’s Notes from Facilities Committee meeting, 2/11/11

Some interesting and worthwhile discussions at the TESD Facilities Committee meeting on Friday, with many financial implications that are likely to be further explored on Monday’s Finance Committee. It’s good to report that the tone is very cost conscious – almost as if all the money that the Committee is spending is its own!

The first hour or more was consumed with a couple of items relating to use of the district sports facilities. (Perhaps these could/should have actually been on the published Agenda?). An adult soccer league would like to use Teamer Field; that would require a change in district policy and reversal of an understanding given to neighbors when the field was built. The revenue being discussed is material, and I believe that this warrants thorough consideration on Monday in the context of revenue strategies. A travel softball team has offered to redo the barely used and poor condition baseball field at the ESC site (one of four fields there) at their own expense. They have already done this for a field at Devon Elementary, and there seems to be no downside. The Committee was just about able to make a decision on this one! (Subject to a final check with the school athletics people). Larger issues that arose: a) the amounts the district charges seem to be low (another revenue strategy) and b) maybe as use gets more widespread the district will need to improve the scheduling system to ensure fairness and utilization.

The Committee revisited the issue of facilities for storage and maintenance, starting with the question: what do we actually need? The discussion was a little disjointed and difficult to follow, but it seems to boil down to: we need warm storage for snow clearing equipment (so it works on cold mornings!) that doesn’t involve sharing space with the carpentry shop, plus we need at the least to fix maintenance issues with the current building. The architect had come back with new plans for spending $2 million, taking about $0.75 million out of the first draft from a month ago. However, Dr Motel did not let the Committee even get to those plans. The majority of the Committee seems very conscious of the need to rigorously question all spending, although Betsy Fadem spoke for this project being part of the original plan for the non-educational facilities (but not the budget??). There is a good opportunity here to consider the full cost of in-house functions: for example, loading the carpentry shop with an incremental facilities cost changes the out-sourcing equation considerably. The administration is to come back at the next meeting with a full costing out of the options, from Do Nothing (but essential maintenance), through Add Temporary Space, Build New Facilities, to Restructure (some?) Operations. (It would be great if at least one of the Committee could have an on site review of the facilities and issues). Another topic relating to budget strategies at the Finance Committee.

Perhaps a good time to make the point that Bond Money is still Taxpayer Money. Bondholders are just not giving their money to the district because they like to see us have nice facilities! Although there may be no short run impact on the millage rate or the operating budget, and we can perhaps keep on borrowing, that money has to be repaid in the long run. The latest bond has to be spent on capital within a certain period, but there seems to be no problem with that! Again, relevant to Monday’s discussion.

Finally, interesting early data from just one week of kindergarten registration. Four of the five elementary schools are at an average of 75% of projected kindergarten enrollment, but Devon is already at 100% of the projection – and already enrolls over 100 students more than the average of the others (522 vs 420). The district as a whole has plenty of elementary capacity, but Devon is an exception. There is a facilities plan if an extra class is needed there next year, but the longer term may require other solutions.

Despite the Agenda, no discussion of the IT plan – the consultant had a sudden conflict.

Community Matters © 2025 Frontier Theme