No doubt you also think the Ryan budget would be an ideal road map for this country. Sad.

It's better than the Reid "Budget" (no budget proposal for over 1,000 days and counting) and it received more votes than the Obama Budget, which in the past two years has garnered ZERO support from Democrats in the House AND Senate. Now that is SAD.

Jake, spot on mate. We hear every excuse there is about why this town has to spend so much money on the schools, but never an answer on why it can be done cheaper elsewhere with better results.

The Abbott ruling is constantly raised,but it is a false flag as the cost, as we see from any search of the net is about USD $500 per student for non-Abbott districts. So by any measure Madison still spends quite a bit on schools.

http://www.nj.gov/education/news/2011/0520csg.htm
------------------
The sad truth is that we have quite a few folks in Madison who simply want to tax the rest of us.
----
Imagine, Madison School Board is so incompetent that they vote to keep in place a contract that will keep schools dirty, and then ask parents to come and clean.

Another example of why America is headed towards becoming another Greece - Weak-kneed elected officials who can't say no to even the most miniscule resistance. One or even two hundred people out of 16,000 is barely one percent. Some "Majority".

Come on, what you'd really like is a return to slavery. Admit it. Or if you can't bring yourself to be that honest, how about providing a budget on how a worker can live and support a family on $25K a year (especially in NJ), which is what outsourced custodians would have been paid? I know you can't do it, but I also know you don't care as long as YOU are solvent, mas-tah.

um SW..., I'll give u the benefit of the doubt and assume the comment about Slavery was misdirected and meant for some other post. Otherwise I'd suggest u keep ur compulsion to post such inane comments in check. Apology accepted

If you're so convinced of what you say, why are you afraid to use your real name? No one is talking about overpaying. Just FAIRLY paying. And as usual arguments such as yours fall back on hysterical exaggeration. $40,000 MORE? Where'd THAT come from? But, just as with the teachers, you take aim at those who can afford pay cuts the least. You want to go after the town's municipal payroll, fine...there's a lot of excess there (excess that NO member of Council addressed). You want to say DPW workers shouldn't be paid high-five or low-six figure salaries AND get to run a business on the side, fine, there's plenty of room for "rational" discussion there. But don't get all self-righteous about aiming your fire at those who earn so little they can barely get by.

I'd have to disagree on a couple points:

I expect the elected governing bodies to make decisions based on what they stand for and believe is right. Not to capitulate everytime an irate small minority (yes, 200 is a minority) come rushing into some public meeting and make demands. I expect elected officals to understand that:

1) There is a certain group of individuals who will always be more vocal
2) There will always be some who are most offended by your decisions and therefore will become active vocal participants.

Political suicide? I don't know I guess we'll find out. But I would have still considered voting for some of the 4 council members had they either stood their ground or provided credible rational as to why they changed their decision. Now I don't know who would vote for them.

Regarding the respect for Every member, honestly I do not recall such respect for the 4 council members. If you demonstrated it throughout, OK, then you were one of the few

Skip, I agree in the point that the BOE made the decision on 'what they believe is right'. They did so also after listening to those who chose to communicate their opinions and listening to the constituents is also a part of government as well. They haven't always adopted what the people have been vocal about, ie Gary Lane tenure. So I don't think they roll over and play dead for public approval.

As far as the political suicide regarding the council, I seem to recollect a 'Recall Movement' heating up had they have not reversed their decision.

And when I refer to respect, I don't mean we can't disagree w the elected officials, I mean we do so in a polite manner. They are human beings and as such, are not perfect. They do however give of themselves to help the community. For that reason alone, you will not see me direct 'nasty' remarks their way. Yet, I have spoken out both privately and publicly when I think there is 'errors in judgement', in my opinion, just not using derogatory remarks.

I don't believe we have ALL the information in many cases, and sometimes our lack of knowledge can cause people to jump to conclusions. Yes, we are all entitled to our opinions and whether we post them publicly w our names or just w an alias, we should do so w RESPECT.

Well except for that the number of people who came out and protested the issue was actually very small, not even one hundred people. So the "silent majority" of almost 16,000 other Madisonians must have been in support of the outsourcing or they would have shown up. So our elected officials should not cave to the few, just because they scream the loudest. Also the outsourcing would have been a good idea, we need more workers to get the work done. Sorry if some people lose their jobs but the Madison Board of Education's goal is not to keep people employed it is to take care of the students, and the facilities for these students must be improved.

I don't have a real strong opinion either way on this. If my kid was still in school it might be otherwise. However the comment by Madison Dodger is a perfect example of a tactic often used by anonymous posters which is ridiculous. He/she implies that because "not even 100" people turned out in support of the current custodians, that means that the other 15,900+ were in favor of outsourcing. This type of logic is used often here as can be seen elsewhere in the posts on this and other Patch articles. They tried it on the Codey fiasco also. How'd that work out for you guys?

Well, I've referred to it a couple times in this thread and I believe u & I have exchanged posts on this prior & I think ur missing my point. And that is there are those who will be more apt to appear at these meetings and are more vocal but that does not mean they represent the majority of residents. Essentially the 2 points in my response above. And as per my initial post on this topic, I believe it does influence governing bodies. I just don't think it should or at least should be weighed in context of their small representation of the total population and the impact of the decison on the community as a whole.

But that said in this case the one person here who would know whether the Board was influenced by it has stated the Boards decision was made based on their own thorough analysis and not swayed by the mob (I mean the vocal constituents). I don't know if I believe that but thats for each of us to decide.

Since u've stated u don't really have a strong opinion on this topic, it would appear ur just here to gloat. We'll if thats how u get ur kicks, Enjoy.

Slip - It's not that I'm missing your point. I didn't address it or even think about it in writing my previous post. As I said, my only intention was to show the ridiculous reasoning embodied in MDoger's post. He says that since only 100 people protest something then that means that the other 15,900 are all on the other side. The same "logic" was used by several posters on the articles related to the Codey sneak attack and subsequent undoing. Sorry but I'm incapable of letting statements like that pass.
So unless you are adopting Dodger's line of thinking (which I don't think you are) then I agree with most of what you said above. Especially the part that elected officials should vote for what they think is right. If somebody doesn't like the outcome of that then vote them out at the next opportunity.
As for gloating - about what? Although there is plenty to be happy about in local politics right now from my point of view, it's not about this topic. I'm sure it will come up soon elsewhere.

OK LB... well unfortunantely then it appears we have nothing to debate.

A friend pointed out that when you scanned through the pictures that NJ.com posted from the meeting, especially the shots of the crowd, all you see are public sector workers and their family members. Where are all the average Madison taxpayers? Are we supposed to assume that they sat out the meeting because they were in opposition to the outsourcing?

My guess is that the dozens of people who showed up were the sum total of the people opposing outsourcing, not just the tip of the iceberg.

http://photos.nj.com/summit-photos/2012/05/madison_board_of_ed_meeting_ma_19.html

Aramark bottom-feeds for its workers, so they can get by with paying poverty-level wages. Of course they're going to say they can get workers for less, but at what price conscience? At what price security? At what price turnover? All that's missing is an overpaid executive with a whip. (Or maybe they have that covered too.)

There is no comparison with Greece. From structural differences, to ridiculously low tax collection, to eurozone policies, to linked currency precluding monetary devaluation, to excessive and greedy banking investment in securitized debt instruments and irresponsible use of collateralized default swaps without skin in the game, to the same realty boom that the USA experienced, to the fact that Greece never should have been admitted to the European Union because its financials stank, ... Well, you get the picture. The answer to our fiscal woes is not simple, and your concerns are legitimate. The way to solve the problems is so find common interests and work together to address them.

Tracy Wells

You lose the respect of the very people who elected you, Mrs. Ellis, every time you insult us in your posts.

Whether you are or not in real life, you come across as haughty and disdainful in your comments posted here.

Something to consider, but I'm just an ignorant armchair quarterback.

I don't know you whatsoever, Mrs. Ellis. You must have me confused with someone else.

I have attended BoE meetings, but that's irrelevant.

As an educator, you should be able to discern between me pointing out a perception versus a judgement of character. Which is why I made the disclaimer about how you may be in real life.

But, please, don't let me stop you from playing the victim. It will help me form my opinion about your actual character.

One final time...if you focused on where the true excesses are -- i.e., the municipal payroll with 50 salaries over $100K -- you'd be a lot more credible.

To follow up on btdt's point:

Yes, LE is correct. The vast majority of us do not have anywhere near the understanding that she does of school funding or the impact of the Abbott districts on it. But maybe our ignorance makes it easier to make general dumbed-down observations that are overlooked by those who have such knowledge

When the Abbott decision was made, they didn't target Madison as the sole funding provider for those districts. It impacts all those in the upper income DG such as Watchung Hills, Ridge, Livingston, Summit, Mendham, Mt Lakes, etc. Have you seen those schools? Most of them are palaces compared to MHS. Same for other schools mentioned in lower income groups then Madison (MK, Rox, Ran). I know thats a bigger issue then the current topic but since u mentioned it, the point is from a lay person's perspective it's hard to understand why Abbott appears to have such a detrimental impact on Madison relative to the other towns.

With this in mind it is frustrating when there are opportunities to better utilize available funds to maintain our schools and there is the appearance that we choose not to due to the protests of those who are not in agreement. And this isn't just about custodial services. We all know that service is not going to fix Madison's funding issues. But if other schools are successfully utilizing outsourcing and they continue to excel in the classrooms, then why not Madison? Maybe the Madison way is not the best way.

Codey may be the ONE six-figure municipal employee who, by any standards, deserves to be paid what he is. And if the idea was to take advantage of Burnet and have him do the top job for his current assistant's salary (ironically below $100K), then that is pretty despicable. If you're sanguine about the municipal payroll -- especially the DPW salaries -- then you can't logically complain about what the school custodians get paid. Simple point.

Not sure why the borough's budget has anything to do with the board's. Mr. Wells keeps bringing up the municipality's issues and his favorite hobbyhorse - outsourcing the public works staff; but that shouldn't stop the board from moving ahead on any staff changes. It's a total red herring and just another excuse to maintain the status quo.

You've been banging on the Republicans on council for NOT taking your recommendation to outsource the public works employees. At least be honest about that.

As for "pockets," I want government to stop taking money from BOTH pockets. You seem to be happy with the BOE picking your left pocket while demanding that the municipality stop grabbing money from the right, and calling it Even.

And why do you Hate the municipal workers? From what I heard, many of them came out to support your cause. In fact, my sources tell me that if you subtracted all the public sector, unionized workers and their family members from the audience, you wouldn't have had enough people to field a pickup football game.

There's no way the DPW employees will approve a contract that lowers their pay, so I guess you are advocating that the BOE increase their custodians' compensation to match the borough's employees.

Also wondering how employee compensation, which consumes 60 - 80% of any governmental body's budget, could not be a budget issue?

As far as your "massive" support, how many people were in attendance? And of that number, how many worked for the borough or board, or were related to someone who does? Would just like an accurate count of people who are not benefiting from the custodial outsourcing getting shot down.

As for Obama's spending, the not very conservative Washington Post gave Obama's spokesperson, Jay Carney, three Pinocchios for saying that "the rate of spending — federal spending — increase is lower under President Obama than all of his predecessors since Dwight Eisenhower, including all of his Republican predecessors."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-facts-about-the-growth-of-spending-under-obama/2012/05/24/gJQAIJh6nU_blog.html

The article goes on to debunk the Liberal talking points about what a restrained spender that Obama is, and concludes, "In the post-war era, federal spending as a percentage of the U.S. economy has hovered around 20 percent, give or take a couple of percentage points. Under Obama, it has hit highs not seen since the end of World War II — completely the opposite of the point asserted by Carney."

I always thought it the Legislative Branch that appropriated the monies for spending. Didn't know that responsibility shifted to the Executive Branch when Obama took office. Silly me. Sarcasm aside, the rate of growth of federal spending in lower under Obama than under most other presidents.

Let's start with the fact that Obama inherited the worst economic mess in modern history. Nutting is correct that there must logically be a time lag once ANY official takes office before he can either be credited or blamed for spending practices. As for the stimulus, if finances are bad there are two choices: do nothing and be as conservative as possible or take assertive action to try to jump start it. To me the latter is by far the wiser. Finally, Obama inherited -- and had to pay for -- on his ledger, until he could get us out -- two wars (one of which was totally based on a lie by his predecessor). Real question, though, is WHAT are the Republicans offering that is any different from the policies that failed under Bush. They want to pretend Bush never existed...not since Nixon has a former President been so exiled by his own party...yet the majority of Romney's "team" are former Bush advisors. Haven't we seen the chaos brought about by de-regulation, the lives ruined? Yet the GOP sticks to the these policies despite their proven failure. It's a party that's moved so far right that it's unrecognizable from what it once was, that I spent most of life being a member of.

According to the budget we are up about 400 students or a 20% increase since 1999. http://www.madisonpublicschools.org/5141041514719207/lib/5141041514719207/User_Friendly_Budget_-_2012-13_FINAL.pdf.

As for your question, I am not sure other than to say that younger families are moving into town bc our school system is a major draw! It is the reason we decided to move here back in 1999. Also, if you ask any CAS parent, you will find that the low income housing has many children in each unit. Finally Drew also has many children in family housing. So perhaps people move here, educate their children and then when they have grown, the family decides to move to a 'cheaper' part of the country.

BTW, just for information purposes, if a person can prove they reside in town, the children are entitled to a free public education, even if they are not here legally.

So what do you suppose we do? Should we outsource all of our public employees? The DPW is down 8 to 10 guys, the cops are down about the same, not sure how many teachers we are down and the only group that is at full staffing is the firemen. We can hire landscapers to cut the grass, neighborhood watch to patrol the streets and pass an ordinance that all kids must be home schooled. There, problem solved.

Here we go again...another rant that teachers are overpaid. Please offer an example of ONE who is piling up riches or living an extravagant lifestyle.

SW, not sure if your comment is directed towards me or not but I do not believe that ANY of our public employees are overpaid including the teachers. I know you constantly harp on the "50 employees making over $100,000" so I did some research. In 2011 18 borough employees had base salaries over $100,000 according to data universe (app.com) and in 2010 there was 19. I then found an article (2010 pay) that broke down their pay to include OT and all the other stuff.
http://madison.patch.com/articles/overtime-other-pay-swells-municipal-paychecks#pdf-4795699

This is where I believe you get the large number of employees over $100,000 but it includes a lot of overtime and for the cops outside job pay. Does that mean that being short staffed is creating a lot of the overtime? After speaking with several of the employees throughout the town my understanding is that the town would rather pay the large amounts of OT then hire people so that explains some of the larger salaries.

I do have a question, which maybe you can answer SW since you seem to be one of the more knowledgeable posters on this site. If we are down so many employees over the course of the last few years, where are the savings? By not replacing them we must have saved at least (conservatively) one million dollars. The cops alone are probably a million and then add the 8 to 10 DPW guys and its got to be more like 1.5 or 1.75 million dollars. We are also down numerous employees in Borough Hall so it has to be closer to 2 million. Where did those savings go? Also, I understand that during negotiations, the Police offered to switch health plans which was then agreed to buy all the other employees for an approximate savings of 1.8 million over three years. Thats a lot of savings if you ask me.

The total compensation (salary + health care benefits + pension) have been going up by such a rapid pace that even with losing headcount through attrition, the per head cost of the public sector workforce is still rising at 3 - 5% per year.

If you look at the last few budgets, the borough's overall operating budget has remained static -

2009 - $25.18M
2012 - $25.15M

BTDT, even in the private sector, nobody advocates for pay cuts. Do you know of an industry where employees have sacrificed their salaries for their co-workers? I can't think of any. Btw, I do believe that there were concessions on the part of the union regarding overtime pay, but that was just something I heard in passing and never verified it. Also in the private sector, people are paid according to their years of experience, education, etc. What Aramark would've paid our staff would've been equivalent to someone who just got their 1st job out of HS, if that. The primary problem faced in the public sector is the rising cost of benefits, much moreso than the salary itself.

Jerry, entertaining to say the least. I'm sure your buddy Steve was inferring to the dollars coming out of the pockets of Madison taxpayers.

Everyone knows that unions have Power. But I believe that they are also well aware of the situation we are currently in regarding school funding and aren't planning on destroying the (Madison) taxpayers in order to "win". The BOE has always complemented the negotiations committee for their willingness to work w them.

Is the situation perfect, certainly not. But I suppose it could be a lot worse.

Are there unfair demands made by SOME unions? Sometimes. (In Madison, the police and DPW refusing to go along with the pay freeze a few years ago that was accepted by both teachers and firemen is the only one that might be considered such.) Are municipalities and corporations loyal to employees and provide them with security? Not any longer. Will they run roughshod over people in order to save a nickel? Sad to say, usually. There is no question in my mind that if it were NOT for a union, the Meaney-Lozier Board of Ed of a decade ago would have fired every teacher in Madison, regardless of ability, who made over a certain amount, and replaced them with newbies they could get on the cheap. May improve the bottom line short-term, but in the long run such a system would have disastrous consequences. In short, unions are necessary ONLY because management -- moreso today than ever -- cannot be trusted.

So I agree, the citizens of Madison should not be paying more taxes!  They should receive what they deserve from Trenton. If you are anti-union, how do you feel about subsidizing poor education standards?

As I've said repeatedly, less than HALF the average DPW salary and benefits. If YOU advocate cuts, Jerry, why are you looking at the FAR LESS impactful group? And presenting $46K as some sort of inflated number on which to live is just being ridiculous. As I've asked before, where do you draw the line? $25K? 15K? Slavery? Pick a number a put together a household budget.

Jerry, no one's lobbying for an INCREASE in the salaries of the custodians or ANY Madison employee group that I know of. Certainly not me. But you get what you pay for, and Aramark shamelessly hires the dregs who are desperate enough to accept poverty-level wages. Only one step away from the plantation.

So why aren't you up in arms on what their counterparts in the municipality are making, which is more than double? Speaking of double, seems like a double standard.

Perhaps because they work a 12 month year?

You know, like us folk.

Following Mr. Wells down the Rabbit Hole of "Fairness" is a fool's errand. Ditto for debating his demand that the borough take action on its salary structure BEFORE the BOE does anything to focus more of its $$ on educating students.

They're working well enough that the Recall is going to be a spectacular failure.

And the unemployment figures look better than the nation as a whole - http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=z1ebjpgk2654c1_&met_y=unemployment_rate&idim=state:ST550000&fdim_y=seasonality:S&dl=en&hl=en&q=unemployment+in+wisconsin#!ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=unemployment_rate&fdim_y=seasonality:S&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=country&idim=state:ST550000&ifdim=country&tstart=1214539200000&tend=1335499200000&hl=en_US&dl=en&ind=false

It was actually 1972, Jer, and, as editor, I endorsed Nixon, not glowingly but as the slightly less undesirable choice. Not a popular thing to do on a major college campus, but given that same choice today, I'd still make the same decision. In those days the radicals were on the left. Today they're on the right, with income inequality at an all-time high. Once -- just once -- I want to hear a leader of today's right advocate mutual sacrifice rather than ONLY seek to drive low wage earners into the ground while creating even more breaks for the high wage earners. Without that mutuality, it's impossible to believe they're remotely sincere in anything they propose.

As for the often skewed perceptions, Thomas Friedman says it best in his column in today's Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/27/opinion/sunday/friedman-president-obama-should-seize-the-high-ground.html?_r=1&hp

"Mutual Sacrifice," what does that mean? To Liberals, it's just another excuse to raise taxes. We've seen it time after time in NJ. We're already up to Millionaires Tax Number 3 or 4. For some reason, no matter how many times we raise the tax rate, politicians seem to find a way to spend it all and more, and then come back demanding that "the rich" "pay their fair share," or "mutual sacrifice." As Yogi would say, "It's Déjà vu all over again."

Why should anyone pay more in taxes when our elected officials refuse to take even the most simple actions that would save us all money?

On the Obama Front, you'll be happy to know that even the Liberally Leaning PolitiFact team found it laughable when Cory Booker tried to claim that discretionary spending under Obama was the lowest it had been in decades. In fact, it's higher than it's been in 20 years!

http://www.politifact.com/new-jersey/statements/2012/may/28/cory-booker/cory-booker-claims-obama-has-overseen-nations-lowe/

Friends, Romans (West Madisonians) and other Madisonians. Please do not get all worked up about liberal versus conservative, democrat versus republican - because the fact is that both love to spend money - just on different things. Some like guns, some like butter. Both of our major political parties love buying both - using someone else's borrowed dime. Even the Governor is going back to the well to pay for tax cuts we cannot afford despite his campaign promises not to. So unless he is a Liberal, that means conservatives love to spend money they don't have either. So both wings - get over yourselves.

One last thing. Unless you all are brain dead, it is quite obvious that Obama is going to win quite easily this November. So for those of you that cannot stand him, please stop whining about it. Liberals survived Bush intact after 8 years, Conservatives will still be around after 8 years of Obama. He is doing a pretty good job despite conservative efforts to wreck the economy even more than they did when they were in charge.

Peace be upon you all. Aladdin J.

Lisa, can you please clarify this. The contract that spans 2010-2013, but they didn't have a contract until Tuesday. I thought they agreed 2 years ago to a wage freeze (they were the 1st group to do so). So they have been working without a contract for the last 2 years? Also, are you saying that they received a 'true' wage freeze (not the effective wage freeze that the teachers agreed to)? So in other words, their net pay has declined over time, due to the required healthcare contributions?

Finally, one question that the board did not address last week was will they be able to hire more custodians (even on a PT basis) to cover the gaps (including but not limited to the changeover to block scheduling in the fall)? I know there are many people who are interested in hearing more about the plan to 'fill in the gaps'.

Wow, the BOE is going to need to hire MORE custodians? Didn't the outsourcing proposal give them at least ten additional workers? Wouldn't that have "filled in the gaps" without any additional cost?? Once these new workers are on board, will it be like the Hotel California, "they can never leave"?

Anon, at the last meeting, a MJS custodian retirement, effective next month, was approved. So, if for nothing else, I assume they will need to replace him. And as far as I know, there is still a need for extra hands to set-up and take-down the auxillary gym as a lunchroom at MHS is September. I suppose there is always the option of eating on the floor, as is done in Chatham, but I don't believe that was the direction we were headed.

That sounds like paying more for less. I thought Mr. Wells swore that the non-outsourcing solution was just as costly as outsourcing. Was he lying to us?