isn't this perfect?
why don't we just email them out bank account numbers and PINs and they can just take whatever they want from us?

In this age of ubiquitous technology, why can't we just post the line items in Excel online, and let the taxpayers vote on each item they want to spend THEIR dollars on, while Excel keeps a running total of their selections?. When the total reaches the cap (or sooner!!!), you're done.
The reason we needed 'representatives' in the past was because we COULDN'T get this info to the voters effectively, so we relied on them to 'represent' us.

They haven't in a long, long time...

Only people with kids in school should be allowed to vote, because every year, the old folks turn out in droves to vote the budget down, just to make sure it gets pared down a little further and if it doesn't, then at least they tried. They have absolutely NO reason to approve any budget.

re: "Only people with kids in school should be allowed to vote". Great idea as long as they are the ones that pay all the school taxes.

EVERYONE in a town cares about the schools, they directly effect home values. People vote down budgets because they are out of control.

Let's be real 5 years after paying millions (which we are still paying) we want to close a school.
we paid A TON for everyday math, and training teachers,paying subs etc.. and it's not working.
there are just some things that need to be cut.

we should have line item vote for certain things... with ALL the numbers reviled. we may feel differently about things when we know what they cost.

we have some of the highest school taxes in the state and one of the worst k-8 systems... how sad is that. YES EVERYONE should vote.

We should also be alowed to vote on municipal budgets as formulated by the township committee.

A 2% increase cap is not acceptable. The objective should be to reduce the budget by cutting the excess while maintaining educational goals and standards.

The only way to lower property taxes is for the state to distribute the money from the state income tax evenly to all school districts as State Senator Mike Doherty has proposed. Let the state fully fund the public schools and your property taxes would go down dramatically.

An up or down vote on a budget is not the best way to get public input. I have yet to see a notice of a public meeting for input on a proposed school budget. *That* would be public input. Then people can put pressure on individual school board members, just like they do town council members.

Hi Elissa ~ The "public hearing" of the budget is March 29th. This date was mentioned at last Thursday's BoE meeting. I'm sure there will be a "formal " announcement soon. The budget is being discussed at every BoE meeting now. If you have concerns or want to voice your opinion, come to any one of the meetings. There is a public session held at every meeting for you to do just that. It is not necessary to wait until March 29th. Meeting dates and places can be found on the district website or posted on the doors of all the schools.

Hey Natalie ~ Is there any way to combine all the articles on one subject? There are at least 3 articles on FOD and a couple on the budget issue. It's very hard to gather information and follow discussions when you have to, first, find and then flip back and forth between articles. Thanks, Monica

So when the budget gets voted down, what happens next?
Do we get to vote on it when it's recast?

NO!

So what's the point? Just to send the BoE a message? They haven't gotten it yet, why should we think they ever will? We should get to vote on the modified budget until an acceptible one gets passed. No raises or increases in the meantime.

The measure to move elections to November will eliminate the right to challenge the school budget at the ballot box. Furthermore, the school budget can rise (~10% over 4 years) without any vote by taxpayers. With a declining school population, there is an argument to consolidate the school system; an argument that can be safely ignored by the BOE if the vote is eliminated. This is not to say that the BOE would do so nor is it necessarily in our best interests. A superior, thriving school system gives our children a great start in life, attracts new families to our community and protects property values. The BOE has begun a study of the implications of falling enrollment but there is no commitment to bring the options to the community for a vote
The point is that we have a system of checks and balances on school funding and levels of property tax at present and we are at risk of losing it.

The minutes of the last BOE meeting conspicuously omit the public statements of opposition to this change, including that from Tracy Tobin, a township committee member. You can make of this what you will but the Washington BOE will vote on this measure at the meeting, Tuesday, February 7th, 7pm at LVMS. If you want to keep your vote and retain the right to challenge your property taxes, be there and speak up.

If you cannot attend, email the BOE chairman, Maichael Rec (boe@wtschools.org) with a strong statement opposing the elimination of the township vote on the school budget

Hi Everyone ~ Just a thought... When commenting on this article, can you please state what school district you're from? That way we won't be giving out what could be incorrect information to each other re: dates of meetings, etc.
Thanks, Monica (Parsippany)

There was absolutely zero reason to change the way things were always done in Parsippany. Everybody should have the right to vote on how there school money is spent. That's the way it's always been done. Not to mention the cap isn't really a 2 percent cap considering all the loopholes. The taxpayers should have the right to vote down the budget if they feel that taxpayers money is WASTED. Parsippany gives WASTING taxpayer money a new name. If the board decides to give out raises raises and more raises then the taxpayers should have the right to vote dwon the budget. Why anybody who lives in Parsippany would support the change after the whole Seitz thing shocks me.

Hi Monica! I certainly see your point. There is also another thing to consider, however: On the web, long articles all too often do not get many readers. People get intimidated and move on, thereby missing important information. Given that our job is to keep as many people informed as possible, we made a conscious decision to deliver concise pieces that focus on particular facets of issues when possible. Statistics show that more people read the stories and become informed with shorter articles. We try to link to related stories within each article to make continuity a little easier for people. I hope that explains it, and please feel free to email, call or grab me when you see me to talk anytime if you want to discuss this further. Or just grab me to talk anyway; it's always good to chat with you.

Great idea to have people append their towns to their names. That, I think, would be a good idea for all the multi-Patch posts. It's helpful to know from whence people come... and gives insight perhaps into their personal perspectives for better understanding when talking about issues. Thank you for sharing that idea.

N. (Parsippany)

Sad that most all of the comments disregard the need to do what's best for the schools and students. The issue isn't whether the public has a "right" to vote since it doesn't do so for municipal budgets, and that's not about to change. The concern here is twofold. First, moving the vote to November invites the inevitable politicalization of the vote, as candidates ally themselves with local party interests, even if not designated as such on the ballot itself. Second, and more important, here in Madison our state aid has been cut by an aggregate $2½ million over the last two years, forcing elimination of vital programs and teachers. And in 2010 we had Christie blasting the teachers, as if THEY are the reason the state has financial problems. Move the vote to November and what happens if state aid is cut further? A 2% cap (tight as it is already) will be insufficient, and a 2nd question will be have to be posed to voters in order for a school district to meet costs and maintain educational standards. And that 2nd question for additional funds would have far less chance of getting voter approval in November than in April. Come downs to if you trust Christie and his Trenton cohorts, and their motives. I don't. But he's manipulated it so the November option will likely be implemented in the next few years regardless of what individual boards do, so basically teachers and students will be more at his mercy. No point in expediting that process though.

Steve the Teachers Union was a big part of the problem. There are loopholes. The economy is bad. I totally understand why Christie cut state aid to everyone.The real problem is the abbott decision. Not to mention you change the time of the election to municipal elections the board of education election becomes a popularity contest.

Why can't tax payers vote on the municipal budget in Chatham? Everything in the Chathams should be up for a vote, not just school taxes. How about things in the municipal budget like the Senior Center, fancy historical plaques like the one in front of the Noe Pond Club, everything! Let's have taxpayer reform in Chatham and let us vote on everything budget related.

If our Washington Township school spending would track along with our enrollment drop at least SOMEWHAT, I'd be fine with no vote. But we are in a situation where, if you believe our demographer, our school population could drop by a third in an 11 or 12 year period. If we are in a transition where we are educating 2000 kids instead of 3000 kids, sliding in with a 1.9 percent raise every year with no public vote is unacceptable.

The BOE has some hard changes to make in the next few years. I think the time is wrong to remove the public's vote, but if a few years of cuts bring the enrollment to spending ratio back to a reasonable range, I wouldn't have a problem with a November vote.

From NJEA's point of view, there are two reasons to have April vote:
- Participation is low, so relative weight of school-friendly voters is higher because the union informs parents through school channels (and at school's expense).
- If the budget is voted down and the people take an axe to it, the union holds a trump card of sabotaging the exam season and the graduation.

These two, plus the savings of not having to organize the polls twice, should be a sufficient reason to get rid of April voting.

Wait a minute... 60 to 70% (or better) of MY taxes go to the school budget and the BOE will be giving the sole word on spending MY tax dollars on their budget... Sorry, I want a say in the budget and how MY money gets spent.

Having the election in April is a double edged sword since the seniors are the people most likely to vote and they usually vote against the budget. If the budget is voted down, the town council makes cuts. The teachers union has no say in the exam or graduation schedule. Those are administrative decisions.

Max is right. Here in Parsippany the board does some pretty wierd things. Only in Parsippany do we vote on things before they are approved. Only in Parsippany does the board of education money sue the taxypayers. Only in Parsippany does the board president lie about what the superintendent is making. Also like I said. It's not a 2 percent cap. There are loopholes. I might be in favor of this if my money was spent WISELY. But it's not. Instead of spending money on programs, hiring new teachers. We use it to hire secretaries and give out raises. We also use it to sue people. That is absolutely crazy.

Max. When was the last time teachers went on strike to protest a budget being voted down?

Max, of all you said the only point I really think deserves response and scrutiny is the tenure question...and no one has yet to come up with a alternative proposal that protects the top teachers and allows for replacement of the inferior ones without political and financial influence entering into it. You obvious think teachers are vastly overpaid. Do you think the same of police and DPW workers who usually make far more? I repeat, of ALL the veteran teachers I know, not a single one is living anything other than a modest lifestyle.

Steve I think a definition would help. consider a salary, health care benefits and a retirement package total. If there ard all totaled up what would you say that amount would be for. modest lifestyle? Thanks

Absolutely in most cases. But give me a dollar amount for salary and retirement package that YOU think would be fair.

Since you made statement I might agree with you about your term modest. Tell me I might think more!

Problem, Max, is that free markets can be corrupted, especially in this era as we learned the hard way in the global economic meltdown. And what you risk is a real dumbing down of education, not to mention political interference. There have to be SOME controls in place for it to be viable. Also, maybe you can tell me, why do police in the suburbs on average earn DOUBLE what NYC police do, when the latter assume far more risk? And to answer Jeff's throwback question, I consider anything in the $100K range and under to be "modest" these days.

I happen to agree with 100,000 or less for this area. But many senior teachers make that in salary alone. Health care runs between 15k and 20 k per teacher. If a teacher receives 2/3 pay in retirement that means about 30,000 a year should be saved in order to get 66 k a year in retirement based life expectancy All just rough guessed on my part. Somd of if comes from being a former BOE member.

Steve do you see why some of us think the overall numbers can be eye opening? A teacher making 60 k a year has a package close to 100k. I am not sure what the proper pay is I do think it has gotten to high with all the additional add on's. I am not talking in a vacuum 3 of my brothers and sisters are teachers a 4 th was and my daughter teaches .

I'd love to see your living budget, Max. Unless you expect them to barely scrape by all their lives and deprive themselves of frills like movies, trips, eating out occasionally, and the like. Which would be a real effective way to attract people with good minds to the teaching profession, don't you think?

Steve I was responding to your veteran teachers comment
A number of. veteran teachers in Long Valley make, in salary, over 100 k a year. I know it is true in other towns also I do think a package of 150k a year for certain teachers is too much.Obviously you do not. I know I will be scolded for saying they only work 185 days but I do think that is z factor. Do yoju think I've we went to 12 month a year schools teachers would Wang too be paid more? I think the teachers now are dealing with a system that they all lucked out with. I am sure it will not stay the same

Great, Brady. All we'd have to do is get a law passed that REQUIRES people to get married young, another that requires both to be teachers (or something equally remunerative), and another one that takes their kids from them if BOTH parents don't keep working, How could anyone argue with that?

Max, how about a relatively modest $3k/month rental in Madison? LOWEST we found here when we moved last year was $2,300/mo., and it wasn't meant to house 2 kids. Of course, teachers don't HAVE to live in nice, safe towns...they could always slum it and simply commute from afar for the privilege of teaching the snotty-nosed kids of those who DESERVE to live in a decent place. Let's make it even a MORE attractive career proposition for them, why not!

My kids' gym teachers in West Morris are both dumb as rocks, and both make over $100K for ”teaching” gym for 9 months of the year. No-cost benefits included.
How can ANYONE even TRY to justify that?
Collective bargaining at it's best!

As a point of reference for this discussion $ 68,342 is the average salary for a household in New Jersey (the Census Bureau defined household income as the income of the householder and any person 15 years or older who lives in the household, regardless of whether they're related) in 2010. So quite a few people are getting by on 60,000. I think this all comes back to a income of $100,000 is modest. The additional benefits are still very generous.

Max, you obviously have a deep-seated resentment of teachers, and would like them to earn as little as possible. And going by Jeff's numbers, you clearly want that number to be BELOW the average...or less than they make now. I never said they needed to live in the same town, just a nice and safe town. Finally, as for living in a bubble universe, I truly wish I DID...because then I wouldn't be struggling to make ends meet on what is roughly the "average" income for a household in NJ. Which is why we're hoping to leave this state soon for someplace that makes more economic sense.

LV Taxpayer, no one has said that the system doesn't need some fixing...but if these problems are systemic in Wash. Twp. then I suggest you have a crisis in leadership there. Here in Madison my experience over 13 years has been just the opposite...committed teachers who usually go the extra mile. And the one teacher my younger son had huge problems with was cited by another parent as one of the best her kids had...so it's important to acknowledge that one's own subjectivity is not definitive. The answer is not an assault on teacher earnings, which only drives potentially outstanding ones into other professions, but a cooperative exploration of alternatives to the automatic life-tenure system that has enough safeguards and merit-based rewards that the NJEA wouldn't be selling its good teachers down the river of political vulnerability.

I think if you want to make a general, generic, macro statement, a lot of teachers are under-paid and over-compensated. The benefits part that was a tag on in the 70s contracts became a monster. And starting salaries for top notch teachers in, say, high school special ed physics, or doing anything in a Camden or Newark, are silly-low, not enough to keep someone who is working to make a sole living as opposed to a second income DINK.

And, really, you can't ignore the days/hours/time worked factor. The NJEA likes to complain that some teachers have to work a second job in the summer to make ends meet. The punchline is -- they can.

lets keep in mind these teachers have to work 181 days give or take ...

in long valley, they check homework en mass, when the kids are “receiving video instruction” (AKA, watching movies). They go weeks sometimes without handing back homework.

Might be in reference to how many days they have to work minus sick and personal days

I still think with 10 sick days and 3 personal days they only need to attend 173 days to keep job and do want contract requires. Just one way to look at it

Sorry just read contract 10 sick days and 6 personal days so teachers for this contract years had to be in school 170 days to be not in breech of contract I could not find ths 186 days but I am sure it is in there

Wonder what that really means? If BOE sets calendar ag 180 days teachers usually work 2 extra "in service " days. I do agree most teachers do not use all sick and personal they either bank them for a future sickeness or save to redeem when retired Depending on the calendar they can work quite a few days less then the requirement and still not jeopardize pay or job. Just the truth.

I have a copy of the previous (not the latest) collective bargain agreement for Montville. It says 173 days, black on white. If a law demands more instruction days, the rest likely comes from substitute teachers.

I've yet to see anyone in this discussion talk specifically about what's in the budget and that's the problem. Most of us don't know enough about where our money is going so it's easy to spin in ignorance about "overpaid teachers" and "school budgets that are 70% of our taxes." If you claim it's too much money you need to have more specific proof than parking lots that are empty at 3:00pm. The teachers I know work hard. They work late into the night and have to squeeze in all the other time they'd like to spend with their families, just like the rest of us do.

I agree that we do need to vote on school budgets, but I wish we, as a community, knew a lot more about how that budget was built. However that would mean really understanding how the school systems work, day to day. I'll tell you why we don't have better schools, we don't care enough to be involved a lot more. It's enough for us to complain about the cost and claim that "the market will sort it out" because we don't want to take responsibility for our biggest and most important expenditure.

Unfortunately, it's difficult to take anyone seriously who claims that the budget should be cut, when they can't be any more specific than "teachers don't work hard enough and they make too much money." That's a pretty much "Fact free" argument.

I do believe most teachers work hard there is a legitimate a question about work hours and days. Look at this little tid bit in teachers contract, (Whenever a teacher is assigned to cover a class for a period of time that will require the teacher to develop lesson plans, provide instruction, develop assessment tools, and/or grade
tests, the teacher shall be paid, in addition to 1/140th for each lost preparation period, a daily stipend of $39) I think the best way to cut budget in many towns is to have less teachers. Class sizes in Long Valley have gotten to 15 in some cases at the 4 different schools. I would also put the teachers jobs out for 9 month salaries and full year benefits and retirement and see how many takers. Might be nice to if I am wrong. I think many teachers would take a starting salary of about 42 K and full benefits and retirement for 9 months work. Maybe not. That would save about 10% in many budgets.

Here is some of the information that Did you really just say that posted. Some interesting provisions.
Teacher Work Year
1. Teachers employed under a ten-month contract shall not be required to work in excess of 186 days.
a. Three of these days shall be used for teacher in-service programs. The programs shall meet the state requirements for continuing education hours.
b. The in-service programs shall be 7 hours in duration beginning at 8:00 A.M. and
concluding by 3:00 P.M. There shall be one hour designated for lunch.
c. Two of these days shall be used for parent-teacher conferences.
d. One of these days shall be the opening day for teachers.
e. 180 days shall be student days. The last three days shall be the minimum length required by the state.
f. Teachers new to the system may be required to attend one additional day of orientation.
Helping teachers shall work a 192-day schedule and carry a full teaching assignment. They shall be paid an annual stipend of $7629 per year.

I think you might be cutting costs without understanding the work. More than a third of the work of teaching doesn't happen in the classroom, it's preparation. Apparently that clause attempts to make up for the over time the "Fill-in" teacher will incur by covering for someone else. Certainly making the classes bigger makes the schools less likely to be effective, there are hundreds of studies on class size that clearly indicate smaller is better. 12 to 15 students in a class is what most school systems dream about. I hope we all want the most effective schools possible, which is why making them cheaper is a false goal. What we really want is the best schools we can reasonably afford. Did you know that Long Valley has one of the best school systems in NJ? Careful before you mess with that.

Mr Gray having sat on a school board I have not seen "100 of studies" that have shown what you say to be true. Can you post the links to 3 or 4 that you seem to know of?

I'll go you one better, google "smaller class size research" and you can judge for yourself. By the way, it's good to hear from someone with some actual experience for a change.

I was only half serious. I have read many on both sides.My opinion is that class size is totally a function of the teacher and what type of students. I know it is a tired story but when I was in school we had class sizes of 25 to 30 and we scored better then students on test today. Where were all the studies then?? We all really know what the answer is, caring parents and discipline in he classroom. If these two things are meet class size is not that important. When we had class sizes of 27,28 in Long Valle, about 2001 and 2002, our grades did not suffer, I actually believe they are not as good today as they were 10 years ago when we were "crowded"