Easttown Township Archives - Page 14 of 14

Easttown Township

Here is the Agenda for tonight’s TESD School Board Meeting. I warn you that it is 74 pages but it might be useful for your review before tonight’s meeting. Several residents have called or emailed to say that they will attend; I hope that many of you will take meeting notes to share on Community Matters. Continuing this important dialogue tomorrow will be important.

I put together some basic information for myself about the budget that I thought I would share. I am not quite sure about the difference in #2 and #3 approach, should the School Board decide tonight to apply for an Act 1 exception. Perhaps one of our resident experts could explain. If any of this information below is incorrect, also please let me know.

Fact Sheet for January 25 TESD Meeting:

Proposed Budget Revenues: $101.9 million
Proposed Budget Expenses: $111.5 million
Proposed Budget Deficit: $9.2 million

Major contributing factor to $9.2 million budget deficit: $5 million increase in employee fringe benefits (example, Blue Cross health care benefits increased by 28%)

Additional contributing factors to budget deficit: decrease in real estate transfer tax, decrease of interest income

Preliminary budget will be discussed and voted on at January 25 TESD Board Meeting; final budget and tax rate will be voted on at June TESD Board Meeting

At January 25 TESD Board Meeting, School Board must vote to take one of these 3 options:
(1) Pass a resolution certifying tax rate will be at or below Act 1 index of 2.9%
(2) Apply for exceptions to Act 1 index (would allow district to raise taxes above the 2.9% without voter referendum)
(3) Authorize the administration to start process to seek voter referendum in May to increase taxes above the 2.9% Act 1 index

TESD tax increase with Act 1 exception can be has great as 6.7%.

TESD Student now Parent Offers His Perspective

January 25, 2010

10 Comments

This is an interesting perspective from a TESD parent who was also once a student in the district. I don’t know that anyone has commented from this particular angle.

TE Dad speaks directly to the quality of teachers in the district. He makes a point of how the system will protect those teachers of seniority, and perhaps that may be viewed as the flaw by some. On one hand, younger teachers with their enthusiasm (but lack of experience) could be the ones that are best able to engage and excite the students whereas the older, more senior teacher may not be able to reach those same students. On the other hand, a seasoned teacher can offer experience and advice for students (as well as parents) that can be invaluable.

Maybe we can get confirmation from TEEA members on this one . . . how will teacher seniority affect the process? Will teacher seniority make any difference if there are program cuts? What about TE Dad’s suggestion of performance reviews for teachers? Comments anyone?

From TE Dad . . .

What a terrible email from Ms. Ciamacca . . . both of them. She isn’t helping ANYONE. It certainly doesn’t help the teacher’s position. Wow, potentially alienating the parents who are the teacher advocates . . . dumb plan. Maybe the 70 – 80% of TESD taxpayers who don’t have kids in the district will fight for higher taxes in order to save TESD teacher jobs? I hope her tone is much different tonight otherwise she will deepen the division she has already aggravated.

In my experience, as a TE student many years ago, and as a TE parent now, there are many, many, excellent teachers in the district. Some of these terrific teachers also lack meaningful seniority. In fact some teachers are truly a bargain with what they deliver to the kids daily and what they are paid relative to their more senior coworkers.

Conversely, there are teachers in the district now, some with significant seniority who are poor performers, some were poor performers from day 1. Not a lot of them, but not an insignificant number either. The other teachers know who these teachers are, most of the parents probably know them too, especially if they taught your children at any time… These are the teachers most protected and are the ones who most benefit from the misrepresentation of the union.

The union, by protecting poor performing teachers from performance review and reduction isn’t representing the interests of the many, many good teachers very well, and certainly isn’t representing the interests of a junior, high performing teacher AT ALL. Frankly, the union is more concerned with protecting the jobs of senior teachers than the quality of the educational program, and that is by design.

Which teachers out there reading this blog and worried about their jobs would not be willing to be subject to performance review if reductions become necessity?? The likely answer: the poor performers with seniority . . . they are hurting us all . . .

Senator Dinniman Proposes Taking the 'Politics' Out of All Pennsylvania School Boards

December 30, 2009

4 Comments

In catching up on some of the state news, I was pleasantly surprised to discover that Senator Andy Dinniman’s recent education bill 1086 bill was favorably approved by the Senate Education Committee. I have always believed that the selection of our School Board directors should be nonpartisan and was pleased to learn that Senator Dinniman is making strides to create this environment.

Senator Dinniman’s proposed bill would eliminate a party affiliation for school board candidates; their names would appear on the ballot without a designated party. The school board candidates would not participate in the spring Primary Election — the candidates names would only appear on the ballot for the November General Election. According to Senator Dinniman, Pennsylvania is one of only 3 states that still allows a partisan school board primary. Changing to a nonpartisan school board would focus the attention away from politics and instead direct the attention of school board leadership directly on education and their fiscal responsibilities. The bill proposes that instead of local political parties selecting and endorsing school board candidates for the spring primary, the candidates would be required to collect a certain number of signatures (the number of signatures required would be based on the population of the school district) and their name would appear on the November General Election ballot.

I completely support a nonpartisan school board approach for all school districts. This bill would remove the selection of school board candidates from the local political parties and give over the power to the voters themselves. You probably know that registered Independents in Pennsylvania are not allowed to vote in the spring primary. So as far as the School Board election is concerned, removing School Board candidates from the spring primary would allow Independents more of a say in the selection process.

Senator Dinniman’s proposed legislation was unanimously approved by the Senate Education committee (which is comprised of 7 Republicans and 4 Democrats) and now will go to the Senate floor for action. I am hopeful that Senator Dinniman’s Bill 1086 will receive unanimous support from the Senate – this would be a great way to kick off 2010!

Bad News for Easttown Township – Our Neighbors Receive a 12% Tax Increase

December 23, 2009

3 Comments

Our neighbors in Easttown Township are faced with a 2010 budget that includes a 12% real estate tax increase which includes a new $52 Local Service Tax (LST) for all those who work in the township. The budget deficit facing the township for 2010 was approximately $500K and the LST will provide approximately $135K revenue. Easttown Supervisor Ed Strogen was the sole dissenter on the 2010 budget and has doubts that the full estimated LST will actually be collected. Supervisor Strogen was also a strong supporter of instituting an Earned Income Tax (EIT) in the township; raising the point of how much revenue residents are currently paying to other municipalities (who do have an Earned Income Tax). A tax collection company suggested that imposing a 1% EIT in Easttown Township would have provided $1 Million revenue in 2010, and $3 Million the following years. Unfortunately, the support was not there for the institution this year of an EIT. However, passing their 2010 budget with a 12% tax increase to the taxpayers is going to be difficult for many of their residents. This increase will certainly be challenging to those retired individuals on fixed incomes.

In the aftermath of the 2010 budget passage, Supervisor Strogen contends that an EIT will need to be implemented in the next few years. Let’s remember that Tredyffrin residents are currently paying $3 Million to other municipalities (which have an EIT) and it was determined that the implementation of an EIT in Tredyffrin would result in revenues of approximately $8 Million. The difference between Easttown and Tredyffrin Townships on the subject of EIT, was that Easttown provided an open town hall forum for thorough discussion of the subject, whereas Tredyffrin did not.

Easttown’s primary budget problem stems from their loss of real estate transfer tax which accounts for approximately 18% of all its budgeted revenue. Like Tredyffrin, Easttown’s budget has suffered with the downturn in real estate transfers, increased cost of services and the severity of our economic times. Easttown and Tredyffrin Townships need to become more proactive in their long-range budget forecasting. In both of these municipalities, what has played out in this budget cycle has been a short-term Band-Aid approach. These townships should not wait until 2nd or 3rd quarter to begin to look at 2011, but rather they need to start in January with focused, out-of-the-box exploration of all possible revenue sources. Easttown and Tredyffrin Townships barely got by with the 2010 budget round and I think it’s going to be far more difficult to pull off an 11th hour ‘quick fix’ save for the 2011 budget!

Newer Posts →

Pattye Benson

Community Matters