STOUGHTON SCHOOL COMMITTEE: TIME TO REGROUP FOR GOOD OF THE TOWN, TEACHERS AND STUDENTS

As the Stoughton school department budget hits the floor of town meeting tonight, there is a motion by a retired teacher and member of the Finance Committee to move almost $900,000 to a reserve controlled by the FinCom. This comes after FinCom did a detailed examination of the teacher's contract that Dr. Ural was pushing for the School Committee to approve.

This is an unprecedented move.  The proposed contract that was defeated would have been a financial disaster for the town.  This gives us a good opportunity to take stock of what has been going on.  It is very important that the parents and voters of Stoughton truly understand that if anything like the proposed teachers contract gets through, it will be a very bad thing for the students and taxpayers.  This point comes through loud and clear in the FinCom analysis of the proposed contract: http://stoughton.patch.com/groups/opinion/p/fincom-analysis-of-school-budgets-and-unit-a-moas

THE BACKGROUND: 

More than 18 months ago, the School Committee, Superintendent of Schools, Board of Selectmen, Town Manager and a couple of others in key positions, began work to develop a joint approach to our respective budgets and the long term finances of the entire Town of Stoughton. The Finance Committee was also brought in as we examined our town’s long-range potential expenses and an overall approach to controlling costs without sacrificing needed services. 

The last 18 months have yielded very positive results through collaboration in budgeting, developing a 5 Year Capital plan, technology upgrades, and efficiencies through departmental collaboration.

The Board of Selectmen and School Committee developed a TOTAL Fiscal Year 2015 (FY15) budget for the town together, with major credit to the Town Manager, Mr. Michael Hartman, and Superintendent of Schools, Dr. Marguerite Rizzi. This would have been unheard of 3 or 4 years ago.

We need to focus on controlling the growth of labor expenses, which is the single biggest component of the town budget.  And the largest single expense in the town budget is for teacher salaries.   Cities and towns that have not dealt with these issues effectively are in trouble.  Some cities and towns are facing huge cutbacks, even bankruptcy. Close by, Norwood made the kind of agreement with its teachers union that the Stoughton Teachers Association(STA) wanted Stoughton to buy into and is now facing huge financial challenges and likely layoffs.

EXPLANATION OF THE STA/SCHOOL COMMITTEE NEGOTIATIONS:

Collective bargaining and budgeting for both school and municipal sides of government focused on staying within the 2 ½% tax cap + any new growth. We coordinated our contract negotiations with town finances. We approached raises for school employees with a sense of basic fairness, and a consistency, for all of the School’s six unions. I hope we all see the economic challenges facing Stoughton the same way in that, with finite resources and many fixed costs, the only way for some of our employees to receive large raises might be for other of our employees to lose their jobs. 

Although in our society teachers need to be more valued, according to the article in the Brockton Enterprise, Stoughton’s teachers are paid competitively: http://www.enterprisenews.com/article/20140531/News/140539282

The School Committee’s priorities for the current STA contract negotiations were:

· Substantially increase ALL salaries and THEN reduce step raises, from 5% to 3%;

· Raise starting salaries substantially to attract new teachers to the district;

· Create financial predictability and equity in step raises (which average 5%) and cost of living Adjustment raises (COLA);

· Use funds saved through changes in step raises to offer greater COLA raises in exchange for educational reforms and new programming, which are “paid for” in collective bargaining;

· Keep total increases within the 2 ½% property tax cap.

RECENT CONCERNS OF FINANCE COMMITTEE:

The Education subcommittee of the Finance Committee asked for meeting with the School Committee on June 2, 2014. http://71.184.118.35/Cablecast/Public/Show.aspx?Channel%20ID=1&ShowID=2912

They expressed concerns regarding their recommendation of the School Committee budget for FY15: reopening the budget at a May 29 meeting, refusal by a majority of the School Committee to sign warrants so bills can be paid, an alleged $160,000 “math error”, payment of steps, vote to freeze hires already budgeted, comments by Ms. Enokian that the budget “If you look at the budget there are things not needed.”  and the newly negotiated teacher contract.

What came out of that meeting were:

· Assurances that Dr. Ural, Ms. Enokian and Mr. Soares would now sign the warrants so school bills could be paid and avoid legal liability.

· Hiring freeze was not based on a legal opinion that if steps and interest are paid, the class action legal case is moot. To date only four teachers: the STA president, one member of the bargaining team and two others have agreed to the suit.

· Dr. Ural and Ms. Enokian agreed, “Of course, any contingencies left over in the school budget at the end of the fiscal year would be returned”, even though the return of contingency money was criticized by the candidates in the recent campaign and opposed by Dr. Ural on several occasions.

WHAT ARE THE PROBLEMS WITH THE STA CONTRACT THAT WAS JUST NEGOTIATED? 

The Stoughton Teachers Association is the largest union in town; salaries are about 80% of the school budget, representing a huge chunk of tax revenues.  Only 15% of 350 teachers live in Stoughton and a smaller portion pay property taxes. There is no incentive for the STA to reach an agreement that stays within the 2 ½% tax cap.

The Massachusetts Teacher Association (MTA) has a sophisticated, aggressive bargaining strategy followed by the STA including filing multiple Unfair Labor Practice (ULP) suits, arguing their case via the press, attacking the administration, avoiding “official” mediation, working to elect members of the School Committee who will represent their interests instead of the taxpayers interests.

The contract that Dr. Ural and Mr. Soares negotiated is an average 18% increase over 4 years (some 30%). The average worker in Mass gets a 2.9% annual raise. The annual Social Security increase is 1.5%.

Mrs. Patricia Colburn, Vice Chair of FinCom, presented a highly detailed explanation and offers the most comprehensive analysis of the burden to the taxpayers should the contract have been put in place. http://71.184.118.35/Cablecast/Public/Show.aspx?Channel%20ID=1&ShowID=2928

Dr. Ural’s has attempted to ratify a contract that the School Committee as a whole did not agree to ahead of time by trying to manipulate meetings where only his union-approved majority could attend, calling for votes to ratify the contract in violation of Open Meeting Law, hastily arranging meetings on unusual nights outside of school property and without consulting the Superintendent, recording secretary or even all members, and without arranging for video recording. 

RISKS TO A NEW HIGH SCHOOL AND THE STABILITY OF THE SCHOOL SYSTEM: 

Stoughton was able to move up to the top of the list (http://stoughton.patch.com/groups/schools/p/stoughton-approved-for-msba-eligibility-period-for-new-s...) for state funding because of our need but also because we came together as a town.  We haven't always worked collaboratively, and that’s been to our detriment.  Our school budget must also include money for continued maintenance of six buildings, new programming to move the District forward, additional staff, and unfunded government mandates. We also risk losing the support of taxpayers for the expenses to rebuild and invest in Stoughton. Many people in Stoughton are working hard to lift our town and we are at a crossroads: we will either move forward or slip backward compared to surrounding towns.  A new high school will be a catalyst for economic development in Stoughton, as it has been in other towns such as Milton.

In internet postings and comments, Dr. Ural has made no secret of his intent to drive the Superintendent out of the Stoughton School Department. My own personal opinion of Dr. Rizzi’s performance aside, this is a foolhardy tactic to take.  Anyone who had children in Stoughton Public Schools during the turmoil surrounding a former superintendent, as I did, or who has worked in a large organization knows full well the damage that this course can cause. Aside from criticizing Dr. Rizzi, the critics like Dr. Ural provide no real information on what the Superintendent should be doing, what they are using to measure her performance, or what they have tried to do constructively. The students and taxpayers are entitled to better treatment, and so is the Superintendent. 

Make no mistake about it; we will be disinvited from the MSBA for a new high school if the Superintendent of Schools is driven out of town without good cause.   The action to put a “hiring freeze” was really an illegal, personal and professional insult to the Superintendent, regardless of how it's being explained.  Refusing to sign authorizations to pay bills was also a silly, dangerous ploy no matter how that charade is now being explained. 

All these actions endanger the stability of the schools, threaten the expansion of programming meant to increase test scores, and sets back our recent progress in adding back lost positions by ensuring multiple layoffs that will take many years from which to recover and will set the town back decades.