Unions-Teachers In West Hartford Go On Attack To Save Their Jobs

"Paid for by the teachers of West Hartford". The producers of this union propaganda piece have been watching too many "Save The Children" commercials on late night TV.

For $12.50 a month you can save a child in West Hartford from doom and gloom. So West Hartford, pony up and "invest in public education". Forget the increases that you have already been subjected to and will likely be subjected to in coming years because "it's for the children". Plaster a picture of a kid and "Isn't $12.50 worth it" on the brochure for added emotional appeal.
They fell a bit short of putting some puppies and mom and apple pie on the piece as well.

What rot!

But let's get real. It isn't really about the children - it's about another increase in union salaries and benefits propelling this 2.87 percent, $3.5 million, increase in the the 2009-10 fiscal year school budget, and bringing education spending up to $126.9 million! Oh, but West Hartford, you still are not spending enough - you are not making a big enough investment in education and shame on you all! Unbelievable that they claim our school system to be too lean and that we aren't spending enough!

The children will not be getting this $12.50 a month or even $150 a year for the median household - union pockets instead will be lined with that extra money - Money most households in West Hartford cannot spare in these hard economic times. But what do they care, the union wants theirs no matter what. Screw the taxpayers and the kids too.

Face it, if the unions (not just the teachers) weren't asking for and getting yet another contractual raise (which includes more for not just salaries), we would not have to cut back on services anywhere in town!

Do you wonder what part of the union member's paycheck, which is ultimately our tax money, is used to pay union dues? Surely more than $12.50 a month! If it was really for the kids, perhaps they would give back to the community at least what they pay in union dues every month! But no deal - no concessions for this greedy bunch - they would rather see our taxes go up AGAIN, and in a recession to boot! In lieu of higher taxes, services have to be decreased to pay the increase in union salary and benefits at a time when most families are seeing job layoffs and the other results of a very bad economy. Everyone's paycheck is strained and these people want to squeeze even more out of families.

But bring in the cute kid's face and emotion along with some subliminal text of neighborhood, and global environment, and then add in some guilt. Slick advertising - do you wonder what this piece cost to print and mail? Wouldn't that cost to the union have better been spent in your kids classroom? Obviously they don't think so.


This brochure isn't even correct!
West Hartford taxes will be going up more than $12.50 a month!

They conveniently left off the fact that we have to make up for an already built in deficit due to less money from the State, along with less revenues and at the same time we have other bargaining units in town getting 3.5% increases.

But let's get to the other glaring fact here: the comparative numbers of budget increases across neighboring towns.

Avon - 3.0%
Berlin - 3.34%
Bloomfield - 4.04%
Canton - 3.4%
Farmington (where every union except the teachers made concessions) - 2.97%
New Britain - 6.63%
Newington - 3.72%

First of all - how many of those towns will go to referendum over budget increases? That is unknown. It's pretty likely though in this economic environment that those increases will be unacceptable to their taxpayers. Funny how the education cartel keeps saying that we can't compare ourselves to our neighboring towns - except when they think it is a good comparison.

Second can we look at 8th Grade 2008 CMT scores in comparison to West Hartford's since we are in a comparing mood? Probably not, because they will tell you it's not a fair comparison.

School excellence? People are choosing Farmington and Avon over West Hartford these days - their test scores are higher and their taxes are lower.

Our test scores are at not at the top and haven't been for awhile.
Maybe if the unions want more money, it should be tied to performance.
Now there's a thought.

In the meantime, we have to cut services to pay continually higher wages and benefits. Thank the unions for eroding the ability to pay for the services we all once could afford in West Hartford.

They don't really want to "save the children" - or "invest in education": They just want more for themselves so they can send out expensive mailings to the town...now isn't that worth your $12.50 a month?

Union Wages Versus West Hartford Services

Many people have pointed out to West Hartford Town Leaders and Management that the upward trending cost of salaries and benefit payouts makes this budget and future budgets unsustainable, especially as we head into very difficult economic times. According to various reports, the Taxpayers Association is seeking a zero tax increase in this very difficult economy and have sat down to meetings with the Mayor and Town Manager to discuss the issue.

Honestly, it is clear that no one wants to see a referendum this year, but that is still possible if tax bills increase with this budget given this very difficult economy.

The town is already running at a deficit. Revenues are drying up, and spending, especially on the Board of Education side, is increasing. The culprit is primarily wages and benefits. The Town whines that they can do little regarding existing contracts and that they have already frozen wages and instituted a hiring freeze on non-union positions. Non-union jobs have not had any cut in present wages though.

It is said that bargaining units (aka Unions) are being asked to come back to the table to discuss givebacks, as is happening in other towns across CT, but so far, no one has made any announcements or produced any results regarding that in West Hartford.

Remember this quote not too long ago?

"That wasn't going to happen," Louis Glanz, head of the firefighters union, said Friday. "We wouldn't reopen unless there was a dire financial situation — a bankruptcy or a takeover like Waterbury was facing. When we negotiate, we give up things and the town gives up things, and we hold each other to those terms."

It appears that they would rather wait for the town to go bankrupt than to help out.

But the head honchos of the bargaining units obviously don't care, because any pink slips that go out will not touch them; instead the first ones to go will be part-timers and clerical staff and last hired employees. They have a Last In First Out mentality and a contract to go with that. Makes you wonder why the new guys even bother joining the union in the first place. And so it goes that the guys at the top raking in the most, continue to soak up funding at the expense of the rest of the rank and file. That is perhaps why they continue to hand out promotions to top positions. We have more chiefs and assistants to chiefs (and their equivalent levels in other unions) then one could shake a taxpayers stick at. So for example, of course no self-respecting politician in this town would even suggest cutting back on fire or police, and even if they did, the real significant wage and benefit earners would not be touched. And so the result is reduction and elimination of Town services like leaf collection or library hours in deference to higher union wages and benefits, not to mention all the other provisions in their contracts.

Meanwhile, a movement to save all day kindergarten from the budget axe is in full swing and they have even resorted to Internet activism. We should expect to see hordes of parents at the budget hearings pleading for the Town Council and Board of Education to save full day kindergarten. Some argue that it is a necessary program, others claim it is nothing more than babysitting services for those moms and dads who work and need daycare. Personally, Talk of West Hartford has no opinion one way or another - it's just a shame that yet again a program could be axed to pay for rising salary and benefits. The Teachers union got their salary increases and that's all they cared about. You think they gave a whit about whether parents continued to get all day kindergarten or not? They figured we'd all pay for both; never mind the reality of what is happening in the American economy and the difficulty higher taxes will mean on all West Hartford families.

One Full Day Kindergarten Internet activist says this about the teachers contract:

"The problem with asking the unions for concessions as that anything like that automatically opens up the contract for 30 days. Then anyone in town can challenge the contract and force it to be re-negotiated, regardless of what the union and the BOE have agreed to. I am a teacher who wants to move to West Hartford so my 4 year old can attend kindergarten next year. I know plenty of teachers in any number of towns that would be willing to do some kind of giveback but not any that would support opening up their contract. " - Mindy Shilansky

and Mary Fleischli of West Hartford First is already looking for a referendum fight with this pronouncement on the Internet:

I'm glad to see so many people who care about education! I hope you all continue this enthusiasm and involvement throughout this and future budgets. Even if they keep all day kindergarten, other cuts will have to be made and it is important that we understand these cuts and their possible impact on education. There may be another budget referendum this year in June, even after many cuts in programs or increased class sizes to keep spending flat. If there is a referedum and you don't want any more cuts, I hope you vote for the budget.

Apparently Mary Fleischli of WHFIRST can support any increases in the budget. That's nice. There are many parents in town who can't.

Now at the same time parents are saying they don't want all day kindergarten cut, they are not saying what they do want cut. That creates a big dilemma for our elected officials, most of whom it seems want to keep all day kindergarten, especially in an election year.

So now the issue of saving all day kindergarten seems to lay squarely with the glum faces of those sitting at the Board of Education as they work through their budget.
Will they choose to cut staff salaries to save full day kindergarten?
Or will they choose to save their own administrative salaries and benefits over all day kindergarten?
Or will something else get the axe to pay for it?
That will remain to be seen.
What will get the axe? Maybe nothing.
Their track record so far has been to favor salaries and benefits over "the needs of the children"
Case in point: Dr. Sklarz gets a 3.5% raise in 2007 and programs were cut.

Parents, who are also dealing with layoffs, reductions in household spending, and frozen salaries in their own lives should be outraged at higher wages and benefits continually being given to staff at the expense of their children's education. And while some say the teachers are worth it and deserve more compensation, the question remains - how will we pay for it all? Especially with less money coming from the state - and especially with the state demanding that we do more to take in kids from other school districts at a financial loss to us!

On the town side it is likely that items like vacuum leaf collection (not bag collection) will disappear, pools may close, library hours will be cut, and other Town services and staff cuts will be made insuring less services to town residents. On the other hand, union wages and salaries will be saved.

One thing is for certain, there will be less money floating around and huge competition for scarce resources.Something has got to give and the overall sustainability of these budgets must be considered.

We heard the fire department head loud and clear in 2008 - no give backs unless the town is bankrupt. We may be a ways away from that reality - but at some point the town suffers greatly. We could be at that point of suffering real soon.

But hey - apparently that's what the bargaining units in town want - more money for them and less stuff for the folks that foot the bill.


Public Hearings on the FY 2010 Town Budget will be held on
Thursday, March 26th at 2 PM and
Thursday, April 2nd at 7 PM

Project Choice - Another Unfunded State Mandate

This report from the State Department of Education

Open Choice Participation by District
School Year 2008-09
	2008-09	Open Choice
Sheff Region Towns	Enrollment	Seats - 2008-09
Avon	3,559	49
Bloomfield	2,155	0
Canton	1,750	37
East Granby	898	26
East Hartford	7,222	0
East Windsor	1,427	38
Ellington	2,634	18
Farmington	4,189	93
Glastonbury	6,847	46
Granby	2,263	76
Hartford	21,649	1
Manchester	6,870	0
Newington	4,509	52
Rocky Hill	2,613	25
Simsbury	4,933	94
South Windsor	4,791	72
Suffield	2,535	25
Vernon	3,549	32
West Hartford	10,080	89
Wethersfield	3,811	31
Windsor	3,970	10
Windsor Locks	1,846	35
	Total	849
Non-Sheff Region Towns
Berlin	3,217	28
Bolton	861	22
Bristol	8,783	20
Cromwell	2,020	45
Enfield	6,288	75
Plainville	2,515	50
Reg. School District 10	2,836	6
Somers	1,717	24
Southington	6,826	10
	Total	280
	Total	1,129
All of the districts, except Hartford, Bloomfield, East Hartford, and Manchester received letters from the Commissioner asking for increased
participation levels for the 2009-10 school year.

West Hartford receives $2,500 reimbursement for each Project Choice student. CREC kicks in some extra money too. We are now being told by the State to take in almost double the amount of students - many in middle school and high school.

West Hartford and the surrounding towns are being used to solve Hartford's education problems and who pays for this? Not the State and not Hartford.

In a Hartford Courant article it was reported that:

the state wants more control over the open choice program [which would be controlled by the State Department of Education under Gov. Rell's new plans] to try to increase the number of students enrolled. Under the Sheff v. O'Neill desegregation agreement, the state has to meet benchmarks for how many Hartford minority students attend racially integrated schools. Officials want to increase the number of students enrolled in open choice from about 1,100 to 3,000 to help meet those benchmarks.

At tonight's meeting, Board of Education members Jack Darcy and Clare Kindall were not very happy about being told what to do by State Department of Education Commissioner McQuillan. They both expressed very strong feelings against the "request" from the SDOE.

We are already struggling with our budget and Hartford just wants to dump more kids into our system.

Harry Captain said he'd like to see kids come to us in the lower grades because the kids in the higher grades are too far behind our students by the time they are in Middle and High School (perhaps Harry, that is where they could use the most help though to prepare them for a meaningful graduation...but it's sort of like wanting to get the puppy instead of the older dog at the pound eh, Harry?) Bruce Putterman is just as happy to comply in order to "help solve" Hartford's problems, because he's just that kind of "regional sort of guy".

The fact of the matter is you can talk all day about how Project Choice, Open Choice, or whatever they call it these days, "adds to our school's diversity" blah, blah, blah, and how much our school system benefits from the injection of color into our schools, and Financial guru Chip Ward can spin all he wants about how we are not really losing money on this proposition, but the fact is we are bearing the brunt of Hartford's problems. Project Choice kids cost our system money and resources, especially if the kids require special education.

One very real fact is that we are "gently" being "dictated to" and it won't be long before we will be "mandated to".

The Board of Education indicated that "our Legislative delegation" should be directed to prevent further mandates regarding Sheff and Open Choice. Good luck with that. Education co-chair Fleischmann no doubt will be the first one to mandate more kids be shipped out of Hartford schools into our own. He is after all a Progressive first and foremost, and an advocate of regionalistic solutions to Hartford's problems. He will be the first one to claim that we are bound by the Sheff v. O'Neill lawsuit and so "his hands will be tied" by the court's rulings.

Of course TOWH's sympathy lays mostly with those unfortunate kids that have to travel by bus from Hartford to Canton or Ellington and back every school day. Perhaps we ought to make the "regionalists" do this every day and see how they like it. That's a lot to ask for kids whose own school district just doesn't give a damn enough to fix their own schools and provide a decent education, because quite frankly, the color of whom one sits next to in school is really not the issue here, nor should it be. Hartford's school suck, and with all the money thrown at them they still suck. Is anyone asking why?

Critics of Project Choice continue to be vilified as a bunch of racists. It's a convenient enough argument against them, but really has no truth to it at all. Frankly, it is more about money and resources. West Hartford Board of Education members were right to recognize and to say that we really ought to take care of our own kids first. That's not selfishness, that is why we fund our school system.

However, given the plan being cooked up by the State we probably have little choice coming our way, and heaven forbid that Hartford should be made to reform their own school system to be one that kids will thrive and excel in. We all know how much money is being thrown Hartford's way and they still are too incompetent to get their stuff together to fix it. Maybe the solution is to close their schools all together and just ship their kids off to the burbs while gobs of tax dollars remain behind to pay Hartford administrators and "specialists". Perhaps that's the regionalism solution they are seeking after all.

Open your wallets West Hartford and prepare for yet another mandate.

West Hartford Budget Begins With 5.6% Increase

Well, right now according to the Town Manager, we are looking at a 5.6% increase in taxes (about $400 increase on a median home). This is because the Board of Education spending is $3.45 million more than last year (2.9%) . Town departments, and Town spending came in below a 0% increase. Raises and salaries on the Town side have been frozen. Not so on the Education side of the house.

The Mayor said that he is suggesting and expecting the Board of Education to revise its numbers drastically to bring a zero percent increase in spending as well.

The biggest expense in town is salaries and benefits. The Town Manager said we can't cut pencils anymore - we need to get salaries and benefits frozen or reduced.

They are saying that they are in negotiations with the unions to see what they can do to help in these difficult budget times, and that if the cost of salaries and benefits cannot be renegotiated then there will definitely be layoffs.

So we start at 5.6% and we'll just have to play the budget limbo game and see how low we can go. Given this economy, and the struggles families are experiencing, let's hope we can accomplish a zero tax increase this year and get spending on wages and benefits under control.

Update To Standing Rules Changes

Last night the Town Council adopted the new changes to the Standing Rules with only two Council members voting NO (Visconti and Adler)
Watch it on WHCTV here (I saw it live on TV).

Other members of the Town Council justified their vote by saying that the rules change really didn't change anything other than require a set standard for decorum, re-arranged the meeting agenda and flow of the meeting, and allow for a clearer stated enumeration of reasons why Communications can be accepted or refused by the Town Council, as well as put in place an appeals process for refused Communications (i.e. the procedure whereby citizens can write a letter and request to be placed on the agenda to speak on a particular issue of importance to them which is not part of an issue having to do with a public hearing item).

Even so - an amendment to the resolution was put forth by Councilman Visconti (and seconded by Councilman Adler) which would have placed open public comment at the end of the meeting for issues not on a meeting's agenda was rejected.

So as it stands, the public's opportunity to speak at a Town Council meeting shakes out to be like this:

Public Comment - You can sign up to speak at any meeting, just prior to the meeting, to speak for 3 minutes on any topic that is on the Town Council agenda.

Communication - You can write a letter/email to the Town Council and request to be placed on the agenda to address a specific subject (but based on the guidelines for what is acceptable) and if the Council approves your Communication you will be given 5 minutes to speak - pretty much at the end of the meeting. Communication that is denied can be appealed and will be allowed only if you can get 4 Council members to agree to the appeal and place you on the agenda.

That's it.

The only other time you can publicly speak is at a public hearing - and that is only on that topic and only for 3 minutes. (unless you represent a group, then you get more time)

Volunteers Sought

Too bad this idea was attributed to a call put out by Barack Obama. In fact, Council member Joe Visconti (love him or hate him) has been advocating this idea for years. It has long been suggested that people step up and volunteer in Town Hall, in our schools, and anywhere else in town that town union contracts won't forbid.

This notice was circulated on the Town Listserv:

RESPONDING TO PRESIDENT OBAMA’S CALL TO SERVICE
Monday, March 23, 7 PM, Town Hall, Room 314

On a cold January day President Obama called our nation into action. In his address to our nation, the President highlighted the need for a new era of responsibility in which every American recognizes that we have a duty to ourselves, our nation and the world to serve, to lead and to be personally accountable for our actions and for the well being of our local communities and our nation. Thousands of Americans have answered the call to service but many are not sure how they can contribute. To this end, the Kiwanis Club of West Hartford is sponsoring a conversation that will include Mayor Scott Slifka, Senator Jonathan Harris and other elected officials who will outline the needs and opportunities for service in our schools, neighborhoods, non-profits and civic organizations.

The purpose of this event is to engage residents to become involved in service opportunities here in our local community. There are literally hundreds of opportunities to help our neighbors in need. Our hope is that we will come together to help build a stronger community. There are many existing organizations that need your help and many new opportunities that need the energy and focus of a few residents to get the job done. Please consider joining us on March 23rd at 7 pm at Town Hall in Room 314 for an engaging discussion and a call to service.

"We need your service, right now, at this moment - our moment - in history. I'm not going to tell you what your role should be; that's for you to discover. But I am going to ask you to play your part; ask you to stand up; ask you to put your foot firmly into the current of history. I am asking you to change history's course." President Barack Obama.

For more information about this event or to find out more about the Kiwanis Club of West Hartford, please contact Claudia Bowles at 860-313-0101 or KiwanisWH@comcast.net or visit http://www.westhartfordkiwanis.org.

Sounds good - but just a reminder that when the local gardeners (perhaps it was the garden club) asked to volunteer to take care of town planters they were told NO because it was against union contracts that hire people to water and tend the planters. That is too bad - maybe it's our own version of collateral damage of such provisions.

We could certainly benefit by having towns people step up and help us to save some money.
The question is will the unions let us?

West Hartford Superintendent And Board Of Education Exposed To Be Anti-Education

Yes, anti-education - sacrificing school programs and materials at the expense of higher salaries and wages.

Despite a 2.87 percent, $3.5 million, increase in the the 2009-10 fiscal year school budget, bringing spending up to $126.9 million, here are the list of reductions in the West Hartford School System budget as outlined in last night's Board of Education meeting as reported in the Courant today:

* About 23 full-time positions would be cut (it is claimed that few directly affect the classroom).

• Instituting a $25 annual fee for the roughly 2,000 middle and high school students who participate in intramural or extracurricular activities, such as chess club and mock trial.

• Trimming $754,000 from school and department supply budgets, which include funds for textbooks and printing newsletters.

• Laying off eight special education staff members and two teaching assistants to save $276,000. For another $629,000 in savings, three security guards, two maintenance workers, 20 part-time custodians and four central office staffers — including the coordinator of English for Speakers of Other Languages — would have their positions cut.

• A wage freeze for all non-union employees, including top administrators, for a $84,000 savings.

Our highly paid and compensated Education CEO, Dr. Sklarz, cannot seem to manage to a zero budget increase. Instead he has chosen to compensate for his department's even higher spending on salaries and benefits at the expense of the students by making them pay more for sports and programs and eliminating their textbooks and reducing supplies! Shall parents have to buy toilet paper and hand soap next?

Special education instructors and maintenance workers are being cut so that higher wages can be spent on union administration and teacher salary and benefits! Nice to see that Special Education teachers are valued as highly as maintenance staff in our school system.

If non-union employees wages were frozen then how come the teachers union wages and benefits are allowed to grow? Where is the equity in that? Why aren't any of Teacher's Union president, Dave Dippolino's minions being sacrificed at the expense of their new expensive contract? (Oops, we forget that we got such an amazing DEAL on this new teachers contract and we ought to be ever so thankful).

The Courant reports:

Salaries and benefits would total $107.5 million under the plan, which translates to a little more than $4 out of every $5 that the school system spends. School officials consider the 2.3 percent increase in salaries relatively low and attribute it to the new teachers' contract, non-classroom cuts and the proposed wage freeze.

If the spending increase is lowered to zero percent, Sklarz said, "core" programs such as full-day kindergarten and gifted and talented education could be cut. But Sklarz also said that under no scenario would he recommend increasing class sizes.

Dr. Sklarz has now set down the upcoming budget battle over tax increases in terms of saving full-day kindergarten and gifted and talented programs.

Yesiree, it IS business as usual.

Parents will yet again be used as pawns to fight for full-day kindergarten and programs in order to save higher salaries and wages for teachers and administrators at a time when most of those very parents are facing layoffs and reduction of wages in their own jobs while facing the prospect of paying yet higher taxes. Oh the irony.

Students, parents and taxpayers all lose in this scenario thanks to bargaining units who continue to demand more at a time when we can all little afford it.

Additionally, what services on the Town side will we have to eliminate to pay for these higher education costs?

The Courant reports:

The school board will discuss the budget, which does not factor in possible federal stimulus funds, during the next three weeks and will hold a public hearing March 26. The board is expected to adopt a plan April 7, then submit it to the town council for review.

West Hartford Town Council Seeks To Amend Standing Rules - Freedom To Speak May Be Affected

The Town Council of West Hartford has "Standing Rules" which govern how Town Council meetings are conducted.

Members of the Town Council are seeking to change the rules regarding public communications in response to members of the community who have been outspoken and have brought repeated complaints to the Council.

The changes include putting the Communications portion of the meeting at the end of the meeting (new Rule 5), and limiting the subject matter of communications (new Rule 7). They also wish to limit "repetitious" communications, because they obviously don't want to hear from the same people over and over again. Moreover, the Mayor (President of the Council) can at his/her discretion forbid certain communications and push it off until the next agenda (or indefinitely) - as long as there are 4 Council members who vote along with that! (new Rule 11).

So it looks as if the Town Council of West Hartford is initiating the limitation of Freedom of Speech at its Town Council meetings.

Take a look at the proposed changes to the rules: (bracketed items are as they are currently, and underlined items are the changes)

Publish at Scribd or explore others: Business 2008 sailing

Yes, we know that some members of the community can be tedious. We know that members of the Town Council probably are tired of hearing from the same people over and over again, and probably don't want to hear what some speakers have to say, but hey, isn't this America? Don't we have a right to speak our mind, right or wrong?

Can the Town Council members just meet with the folks they think are offensive and settle their difference in a different manner rather than limiting speech for everyone else with these new proposed Town Council Meeting rules?

In America, you may not like what people have to say - but the hallmark of our system is that we have the right to speak our mind (whether we abuse that right or not is also debatable) and any limitation to that right is simply un-American.

If anyone is interested in this attempt to limit freedom of speech from the public at Town Council meetings - especially as it relates to certain individuals in town - please watch for an upcoming public hearing on this issue and write to your elected officials about it.

We should not allow public comment at a Town Council meeting to be stifled or stymied because we find certain individuals to be annoying.