Teaneck Blog

Casting a wary eye on Teaneck politics and municipal affairs

Thursday, July 29, 2010

Wrong attitude

This week's Suburbanite reports on the Council's request that the Board of Education permit police vehicles to park in the lot at 1 Merrison Street, the former elementary school building that houses the BoE's administrative offices. While the headline of the story reads "BOE lot likely to become home of Teaneck police vehicles," the unenthusiastic response of BoE president Ardie Walser to the Council's request suggests that an affirmative response is far from assured. 

The Suburbanite quotes Walser detailing the difficulties facing the BoE as it copes with budget cuts resulting from the loss of state aid and voters' defeat of a proposed budget that would have raised property taxes to make up the shortfall. On the surface, this has little or nothing to do with whether or not the BoE would permit this use of its parking lot by municipal vehicles. There is, presumably, no financial cost associated with the plan. But Walser's protest that the BoE is so busy with dealing with its fiscal problems that it is not focused on the Council's request for parking spaces is actually quite revealing. The comments display the BoE's lingering resentment toward the Council over this spring's budget process and suggest an unwillingness to work together with the Council even on an issue that not otherwise controversial.

Walser goes on to try to justify the postponement or even the eventual rejection of the Council's request by setting an unreasonable standard, declaring that the plan would be considered "If the council can demonstrate how allowing police vehicles to park in the BOE parking lot will benefit the children of Teaneck." Why should such an innocuous plan request that diverts no resources from the school system but simply maximizes the utility of existing resources (all of which were paid for by Teaneck's taxpayers) carry the burden of proof? This is a sorry excuse for a shameful pettiness that benefits nobody. Teaneck should be better than this.

Tuesday, July 13, 2010

Dawn of a new day

As Governor Christie continues fulfilling his campaign promises to address the serious long-term fiscal problems plaguing the State of New Jersey, the task facing our local elected officials is changing significantly. After many years of being either unable or unwilling to control the growth of property taxes, developments in Trenton are now forcing the hand of Teaneck's Council and Board of Education members. New legislation passed yesterday limits property taxes to an average of 2% per annum, with limited exceptions.

This protection for overstretched taxpayers compels Teaneck to take a more hands-on approach to planning and budgeting. As discussed previously on this blog, the days of tallying up the total required to balance the budget and handing the bill over to the residents are over. Fiscal issues cannot be the subject of a handful of meetings and workshops in the weeks leading up to approval. With a hard cap far below the historical rate of tax increases all but etched in stone, we know exactly where we need to come in every year, and there should be no need for the annual deadline drama of protest and recrimination as somebody's cherished program or job is slated for sudden elimination. 

It bears repeating: with more constants and fewer unknowns in the annual budget equation, the Township Council and the Board of Education should be working all year round to identify areas where cost increases in the following year are likely to eat up a larger portion of the pie as well as the places where offsetting savings can be found. There is no excuse for anything but a more deliberate and better considered approach under the new circumstances, and thanks to Governor Christie's initiative, we will know exactly whom to blame if we do not get that.

Thursday, July 08, 2010

Super intentions


High drama on Merrison Street: Assistant Superintendent Barbara Pinsak has been named Interim Superintendent. Pinsak, of course, takes the position that was to have been occupied by Constance Clark-Snead, lured from Westbury, NY to fill the vacancy left after the illness and untimely death of John Czeterko.

This story has it all: big money, betrayal, litigation, and an angry public. Clark-Snead, who was to be paid $230,000 per year plus benefits to take the top job in the Teaneck school district, abruptly backed out of her agreement only days before she was slated to begin her new job amid ongoing controversy in her old one. Teaneck's Board of Education, still smarting from the significant reduction to its proposed budget, now faces the headache of restarting the superintendent search process as well as the embarrassment of being spurned by Ms. Clark-Snead. Meanwhile, former BoE candidate and current co-president of the PTO Council Patricia King-Butler is expressing her displeasure with the hiring process, and apparently with the school board leadership as well.

“Let’s just say that the process was not as transparent as it could be,” she told the Record. “I can’t sit back and continue to do nothing while the Teaneck school system goes down the drain.”

While Teaneck BoE President Ardie Walser was "disappointed" with Ms. Clark-Snead's resignation, it is not clear that Teaneck residents should share that sentiment. Perhaps even Walser himself should be pleased that Teaneck appears to have dodged a bullet here. The Board of Education has been given a do-over, and this time it might be able to identify a more reasonably priced administrator, or at least one who intends to abide by the terms of his or her employment agreement. Walser et al should relish the opportunity to demonstrate to the public that they are better judges of character than this episode makes them out to be.

Thursday, July 01, 2010

Not as bad as it may sound

This week's Suburbanite reports on the impending elimination of a number of extracurricular programs in the public school, specifically five "demographic" clubs that take up issues of interest to minority groups and their student supporters. Given the presumed leanings of the author, Howard Prosnitz, the article is likely part of an effort to highlight the practical consequences of the school budget defeat and induce feelings of regret for those who supported the Council's subsequent reduction of the budget total. However, the article is just as likely to provide encouragement for those who feel the district should be able to do more with less.

Truthfully, it is not the clubs themselves that face elimination, but the stipends to their faculty advisors that must be cut due to funding constraints. According to Assistant Superintendent Barbara Pinsak, in the school just completed, $326,000 was allocated to pay faculty advisors for student clubs. In the coming year, stipends for advisors to 42 of the high school’s 51 clubs and 20 of the middle schools’ 55 clubs have been eliminated.

The Suburbanite article goes on to detail the role of the one of the clubs affected by the spending cuts, Spectrum Club, making the case that the Teaneck High School community will be worse off next year without it. But is Teaneck High School losing the Spectrum Club, or is faculty advisor Amy Moran simply losing her stipend? The answer is the latter. As Councilwoman Barbara Ley Toffler notes at the end of the article, a volunteer advisor could be brought in from the outside to keep the club going at no cost to taxpayers. Presumably, the Spectrum Club would be permitted to continue to publicize events on school grounds and to use classroom space for its meetings.
Cries to the contrary notwithstanding, this is not a case of Teaneck balancing its school budget on the backs of the students. The reduction in stipends for faculty advisors is another instance of (involuntary) shared sacrifice by teachers that need not detract from the educational experience. There is, no doubt, more to come.