Letters to the Editor

For the Feb. 12 issue.

Board’s contract offer

not reasonable
To the editor:
   Many community members have been asking, "Why would the teachers reject the latest proposal from the Board of Education? A 5.2 percent raise and an increase in prescription co-pay seems pretty good to me." I agree totally. A 5.2 percent raise is a reasonable offer, if that truly was the offer. However, when is 5.2 percent not 5.2 percent? Answer: When you are a teacher at Northern. Out of the proposed settlement, Northern’s teachers were asked to pay for the following:
   1. The cost of establishing a salary guide. Northern is the only district in the state of New Jersey without a salary guide. The Board and superintendent have stated publicly on many occasions that they agree that an established salary guide would help them to attract and retain quality teachers from other districts. Historically, this is something that the Board whole-heartedly agrees is a benefit for the entire district, yet the teachers need to pay the cost of this.
   2. Costs of longetivity.
Longevity is a benefit provided to most school district employees for remaining with the district for various periods of time. It is well established at Northern and most school districts throughout the state, and is used as an incentive to keep experienced employees from taking jobs elsewhere. Having longevity is a clear benefit to the district.
   The board’s proposal completely restructures longevity and the teachers are being asked to pay for any future costs of it. This is something we’ve never had to do before, and those monies will be taken out of that 5.2 percent to pay for it. Let me be totally clear — teachers are being asked to pay out of their own salaries to keep other teachers in the district. It’s like having money taken out of your paycheck each week in order to receive your year-end bonus.
   A little over 30 percent of the board’s offer in year one alone would be required to pay for these two items. Imagine, your boss says he is going to give you the industry-average raise, but you have to pay for 30 percent of it. In year two, 7 percent would be required, and in year three, another 10 percent. What’s worse is that the NBCRTA showed the Board of Education how both items listed above could be paid for out of the savings in salaries created by recently retired teachers, and would not cost the taxpayers one cent in additional taxes. Yet, the board didn’t care.
   Let’s review. The teachers at Northern are already grossly underpaid compared to the rest of the county, a fact the board and superintendent have acknowledged. Two items that are clear benefits to the district are supposed to come out of any raises the teachers receive, even though they wouldn’t cost the taxpayers a dime.
   It seems pretty clear that Northern is becoming a place where teachers pay to come to work. I can’t imagine why anybody would reject that offer. Please don’t hesitate to check our Website at www.NBCRTA.com to get the facts.

Academics deserve same

support as sports
To the editor:
   As a graduate of Florence Township Memorial High School, I was appalled and dismayed when I recently read of a controversy at the school’s suggestion that rings be given to the football team in order to acknowledge their state championship victory.
   Florence High has forever been a name associated with athletics, and while sports have been a priority, academics have been going downhill unnoticed by many. In a school where paper and chalk are scarce, let alone technology, I admire the teachers for doing what they can with limited resources.
   Many classrooms lack such simple accommodations as an adequate number of desks, and students sit on the floor or on window ledges. In my college preparatory biology class our teacher often explained to us labs in the required curriculum that we would be doing provided that we had the materials. In other classes, we shared textbooks that boasted signatures from the 1970s and outdated information, not to mention our primordial computer labs, a television and film class that had to raise its own money for a television, and a recent dramatic cut to the fine arts program. If it was not for the teachers and their perseverance in working with inadequate resources, nothing would be accomplished.
   Providing the funds for rings would be a great way to honor the football team for its commendable efforts, but it would be even better to start providing the teachers with the necessary materials to facilitate their jobs and the students with a sufficient environment and equipment to learn. Florence High, the ship is sinking while you rearrange the deck furniture. Put your money where your mouth is and do something that will benefit the school academically for a change.

Children’s play area

in need of repairs
To the editor:
   I noticed an article in your Feb. 5 edition regarding a Green Acres grant in the amount of $100,000 being awarded to Bordentown Township to "improve" existing conditions at the Northern Community Park on Groveville Road. I would like to suggest to Bordentown Township officials that upgrades for the tennis counts, picnic area, and pond dredging are commendable, however, I hope upgrading the children’s play area is included in these plans. There was a steering wheel on the slides that broke at least five years ago which was never replaced, a see-saw type apparatus that broke about three years ago and had an orange cone placed over the remains, and the burlap covering is coming up through the wood chips. Let’s include repairs to the children’s play area in these improvements so the park can be made more enjoyable for the small members of the township. Note: let’s hope the vandals who broke some of this equipment years ago have now grown up and learned to respect public property.

State should fund

public school salaries
To the editor:
   I read with interest Mr. (Rahn) Beeson’s recent letter to the editor. Mr. Beeson made an excellent point about property taxes and the school budgets in the NBC community. I believe about 80 percent of my property tax in Springfield goes to fund the schools. Salaries and benefits at NBC are approaching 70 percent of the total budget. When the state caps your school budget increases at 3 percent per year and salaries increase at 5 to 6 percent (for argument sake) and benefits increase at double digit percentages, something has to give.
   In the current environment, with frozen state aid, that something has been property taxes. Soon it will be the elimination of educational programs (as highlighted by Mr. Beeson and the editor of the Register-News – 2/5/04). But rather than complain about the current funding formula, I have a solution. Make public school employees state employees. They already are paid by the state pension fund after they retire. The state also pays their benefits after retirement. They are currently governed by PERC (Public Employee Relations Commission).
   Think how easy this will make the task of all school boards if they are not responsible for salaries and benefits. Everyone in the same county gets the same salary and benefits based on certifications and experience. Salaries are paid by the state based on state (or county) salary guides and everyone’s in the State Health Benefits Program. Think of the effect on school budgets if they only had to focus on the educational programs, the maintenance of the facilities and transportation. Greatly reduced property taxes would fund these new school budgets. Income taxes (including additional corporate and business income taxes) would fund public school employees’ salaries and benefits as they do for other state employees.
   Besides greatly reduced property taxes, I can see other advantages. Today, state-mandated programs (which the state doesn’t fund) require schools to hire administrators and teachers to support them. Now, the state will be funding those mandated programs. Now, maybe the number of school days per year can increase from 180 to maybe 220. Maybe we can now find ways to graduate students in three years instead of four (have you looked at the required courses that most students have to take during their senior year? Many educators feel the fourth year is a waste of time). Imagine the cost savings we’ll see if students move through the system quicker and move on to technical schools and colleges sooner? Perhaps we can also look at merit increases for teachers and the elimination of tenure. Maybe with a little pressure on the governor or the state department of education we could convince them to fund a study of this new school funding option? Actually, it’s not a new idea. I’ve been told that it’s done today in Virginia, Wisconsin, Hawaii, and some other states. What do you think?