Reaction to a judicial ruling that favors cafeteria workers

Reactions to this story about a judicial ruling that went against the Board of Education yesterday:
Mike Petosa, president of the Greater Bristol Labor Council: "It's time for the Board of Education to stop this madness and to put their people back to work the way it used to be. "... Go back to the status quo.Let them do the job they were initially hired to do." He said the judge's decision shows once again "the dedication and hard work" the union has demonstrated in trying protect 53 cafeteria workers whose jobs would be lost if the school cafeterias are privatized. He said the unions in Bristol "will always fight" to protect the rights of working people that are under assault across the country from Republicans "who want to bust the unions and knock down the middle class." "We're going to fight it in this city. This city is about taking of its people."
Mary Fortier, Democratic city councilor:

"I am certainly happy with Judge Schuman's ruling but it is a shame that the cafeteria workers have to continue to be ping pong balls in this mess."

Calvin Brown, Democratic city councilor:

School board members "Fitzgerald, Amara, Dolan, Morgan, and Dube have continued to morbidly abuse these 53 cafeteria workers for well over a year now. The Commissioners lost the Labor Ruling, now they've lost their misguided request for a stay on that ruling, and they'll lose again if they continue to fight this vindictive legal battle in the courts. It's time for the Board of Education to admit they illegally bargained in bad faith and stop wasting taxpayer time and money."

Karen Vibert, Democratic Board of Education member:

"On the record, all responses to media are supposed to go through the BOE chair; however, the BOE chair, contrary to Robert's Rules, did not allow me to speak at the last meeting, basically cutting me off and ending the meeting because I disagreed with him, so I will speak here.

"I have been a supporter of the cafeteria workers because last year the BOE negotiating committee and the Union reached a tentative agreement and the Union gave back more at the table in terms of wages and benefits than I ever imagined they would.  It was more than fair.  It was unfortunate that the full Board then voted against the agreement and the issue then went into the costly world of egos and legal battles.  These legal battles may take months, if not years, before final decisions are rendered.  The Republican majority voting to sign a contract with the Whitson company put the Board into more legal and financial jeopardy.  To quote the judge's order, 'The Plaintiff; -- the Board of Education -- 'must accept the consequences of its own choice.'"

Chris Wilson, Democratic Board of Education member and former chairman:

"First of all please be aware my response is my own and not that of the Bristol BOE, However the minority position has not been articulated because it has been in opposition to the majority.

"I believe the Tentative agreement negotiated between  Bargaining unit 2267 and the Bristol BOE was fair. Both sides gave concessions to reach a settlement.

"Unfortunately, the Republican Majority (none of which had been involved in negotiations as a BOE member) decided not to support the agreement.  The arbitration ruling allowed that the BOE could privatize. But one still is compelled to negotiate in 'good faith.' The Labor Relations Board determined that had not happened and their remedy was to put in place the Tentative Agreement.

"At this point,  the majority, has decided to appeal and requested a stay of the Labor Relations ruling. Now that stay request has been dissolved.

"It is clear the board acted prematurely in executing a contract with Whitson’s prior to all of the legal remedies being exhausted. This case is now in the hands of the courts to determine if MR. Amara did not negotiate in 'Good Faith.'

"Since , that ruling,  and any appeal thereof could go either way, I believe it is time to put this matter to rest and not spend any more money on this matter.  From the beginning, this case has been  framed by the majority as saving considerable amounts of money.  It is clear any savings will be eaten up in legal fees.

"I see no reason to spend bad money after good. The cafeteria workers have been put through the mill,  it is time for it to stop. If,  through the tentative agreement the shortfall cannot be reduced then the administration will need to reengineer how it delivers food service. Labor can and should be a part of that discussion.

"It is time for all parties to begin working together instead of in opposition to each other. Enough is enough!"

Ellen Zoppo-Sassu, Democratic city councilor:

"I believe the cost savings that implementing the Tentative Agreement would have achieved last winter would have far outweighed whatever alleged savings and beyond  that is now being spent by the Republican leadership on legal fees to justify their shaky position. The fact that, after yet another setback, they are still trying to insist they are right, is sad and is a distraction from what they should be doing as elected leaders. Three wrongs don't make a right."

Jill Fitzgerald, Republican Board of Education member:

"No comments on the ruling. Need to hear from legal counsel."

Copyright 2014 All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

GOP stakes an awful lot on privatizing school cafeterias

All sorts of madness at the Board of Education tonight. See this story for the overview. I'm told the school board not only decided to appeal an unfavorable labor ruling and move ahead with its contract with Whitsons, but also agreed to dump the law firm of Shipman & Goodwin, a Hartford institution that has represented the district for decades. It will be interesting to learn why that happened. One thing is for sure now: the city's Republican Party is on the hook for the privatization decision that tossed 53 lunch ladies off the payroll. The GOP majority refused to back down even after the labor board's ruling and the Republican majority of the City Council this week declined the chance to go on record in opposition to their Board of Education colleagues. It seems certain to remain a hot political issue right through the 2015 municipal election. The Republicans have made a big bet on privatization. If they're wrong, they're likely to pay a price at the polls.
Copyright 2014 All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Amara outlines reasons for privatizing school cafeterias

Here's a paper from Board of Education Chairman Larry Amara outlining the reasons why the Board of Education opted to outsource the school cafeterias:

CAFETERIA OUTSOURCING

Intro:  I want to take an opportunity to clarify information regarding cafeteria outsourcing.    

                 These are the facts.

                       

• Outsourcing was discussed as early as 2009 during contract negotiations with Local 2267.
• Over the years we have tried to balance the cafeteria budget.
• Since 2010-2011 we have reduced 12.4 staff through layoff and attrition to reduce the deficit.
• We have raised lunch prices to a point where we are one of the highest in the State.
• We continue to lose money with the cafeteria operation.

o   Year 2008-2009          ($207,183)

Year 2009-2010          ($92,121)

Year 2010-2011          ($140,487)

Year 2011-2012          ($100,000)

Year 2012-2013          ($327,000)

            5 year TOTAL              ($866,791)

            Estimated loss for 2013-2014 over 200K

• In January 2013, we issued a Request for Proposals (RFP).
• The purpose of the RFP was to determine if outsourcing would provide a cost effective alternative/cost savings and if so how much.
• In February 2013, the Local 2267 union president was noticed of the Boards desire to commence contract negotiations and specifically notified that the Board was considering outsourcing the cafeteria services and was willing to negotiate over the issue.
• In the months that followed, two additional letters from the Board were sent requesting to begin negotiations and discuss outsourcing.  Local 2267 was not willing to begin negotiations until May.
• The Board shared its goals for negotiations with Local 2267, specific to cafeteria services – cost neutral and not balancing the cafeteria loss every year on the shoulders of the entire union membership.
• During the time it took to get Local 2267 to the table, the Board interviewed 5 vendors and on April 18, 2013 the Board authorized the Superintendent to negotiate and execute a tentative contract with Whitsons subject to State review and approval.
• The purpose of negotiating a tentative contract with Whitsons was to have a clear understanding of everything involved along with potential savings.  This was necessary information for both parties during negotiations.
• The Whitson proposal would eliminate the six-figure cafeteria deficit.  Whitsons guarantees the Bristol Schools, in year one, $224,500 to cover the school system’s related cost associated with the cafeteria program.  Whitsons makes this guarantee by putting its’ management and administrative fee at risk.
• Whitsons will also invest $220,000 in infrastructure improvements to the school cafeterias.
• During negotiations it was agreed to address the issue of outsourcing outside of the full contract.  The union requested we deal with the cafeteria workers first.
• We tried to negotiate with Local 2267 over this issue and when both sides could not agree we jointly asked for binding interest arbitration and required by law.
• The parties also agreed to engage in mediation while interest arbitration was pending.
• Sometime later, Local 2267 changed its mind and asked the court to block arbitration.  The judge responded to their arguments and rejected all their claims, including the claim that the ground rules required every member of the negotiating team to vote in favor of any agreement reached.

• During the three day arbitration hearing, both sides had ample time to submit evidence, call witnesses under oath, and argue their case.
• The arbitration panel ruled that outsourcing was justified by our financial situation, and was in the best interest of the public.
• The Board’s Last Best Offer in arbitration included:

o   Allowing the Board of Education to outsource when it deems it to be in the best interest of Bristol Schools.

o   Severance payment of $1000 to each affected bargaining unit employee who is offered a reasonable, comparable position with the food service provider.

o   Severance payment of $3000 to each affected bargaining unit employee who is not offered such a position, provided he or she made a good faith effort to secure one.

• During the course of the three day arbitration hearing the following facts were presented through an examination of the RFP, the tentative contract with Whitsons, sworn testimony and documentation.
• In accordance with the Code of Federal Regulations and the Connecticut State Department of Education, Bristol Schools must:

o   Retain control of the quality and extent of its food service.

o   Retain control of all the prices to be charged for meals.  We determine the price of a student lunch.

o   Assure that all State and local regulations are being met.

o   Establish and maintain an advisory board composed of parents, teachers, and students to assist in menu planning.

o   Retain control and overall financial responsibility for the operation.

o   Retain unlimited access to all areas used by the vendor for the purpose of inspection and audits.

o   Insure that all USDA donated foods, rebates, refunds, trade allowances and discounts accrue only to the benefit of the District.

o   Retain signature authority to approve reimbursement claims monthly.

• The contract with Whitsons is for one year and subject to four additional one-year renewals upon consent of both parties.

• Whitsons has testified that it is to their advantage and will make every effort to hire all current employees.
• During the summer transition, employees will be eligible for unemployment benefits.  The  benefit ranges from $1000 to $2400 with the average benefit being  $1500 for the summer months.
• Whitsons has testified that it fully expects and is willing to work with AFSCME or any other union the workforce chooses as their representative.
• Whitsons is charged with following BOE policy.  It is not the policy of the BOE to have a youngster go unfed.
• Whitsons has testified that their goal and average use of local vendors is 52%.  We currently are at 25%.
• The contract calls for Whitsons to amortize their $220,000 equipment investment over five years.  If the BOE were to change vendors during this time the successor company would be required to pay the unamortized portion of the investment.  There would be no cost to the BOE.
• Whitsons administrative/management fee is paid through the cost of meals.  There is no cost to the BOE.
• If the BOE were to change vendors, all employees then working for Whitsons could be rehired by the new vendor with the exception of management/professional employees such as Vice President, District Manager, Food Service Director, Supervisor, Chief, Nutritionist or Dietician.
• All breads must be delivered fresh daily.
• Whitsons will offer a hot breakfast program in our schools.  A program we were never able to provide our children due to labor costs.
• Whitsons has the capacity to offer a dinner service.  Something we would like to consider with our higher poverty schools.
• With economies of scale Whitsons provides:

o   A purchasing team able to secure quality at the most competitive price.

o   A team of full time dieticians.

o   A full time food service manager and full time chef.

o   An expansive A La Carte menu.

o   A full time marketing team to promote student participation with programs and presentations.

o   A variety of selections and menu promotions. 

• Whitsons personnel policies:

o   Promote from within.

o   Offer staff incentive programs.

o   Provide financial support for staff with emergency needs or education cost.

o   Offer career development.

• Whitsons provides $1500 yearly for student scholarships
• Whitsons provides a custom designed webpage for the District featuring menus, nutrition and allergen information, access to free and reduced lunch applications and online pay options.

Closing

• Just to be clear, Whitsons is willing to offer jobs to our cafeteria workers, and is willing to
• recognize and bargain with the union as they have done successfully in other communities. 

• Local 2267 has commenced three separate legal proceedings in its effort to block outsourcing.  To date, none of them has been successful.  We believe none of them has any merit, and we cannot wait indefinitely for their outcome.

• Therefore we intend to focus on the business we know best, namely education, and let the contractor focus on the business they know best, food service.

Copyright 2014 All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Brown is 'saddened and disturbed' by privatization move

Statement released by city Councilor Calvin Brown about the Board of Education's decision last night to privatize school cafeterias:

I'm saddened and disturbed by the decision made by the Republicans on the Board of Education last night to privatize our school cafeteria workers. It shows a lack of respect for people's jobs and livelihood; neglect for our students and, really, our community at large; it shows an overall ineptitude for leadership to allow a private corporation to come into our schools and interact with our children on a regular basis.

Whitson's - the out-of-state company the BOE has chosen to contract with - has several law suits pending against them. They have not committed to hiring the current cafeteria workers who will be displaced. We still do not know if the company performs background checks on the employees they do hire - and therefore we will not know who is feeding lunch to our students. Again, I am saddened and disturbed by this.

The Republicans on the BOE have shown they do not understand what it really takes to care for our kids. If they did, they would see these grave concerns as the threat to community and safety that they really are. Instead, the Republicans on the Board of Education see only dollar signs.

Alas, I do believe that their inability to bargain in good faith, their inability to think critically, and their inability to lead responsibly will come back to haunt them: in court, at future meetings, and come the next election cycle.

I only pray that in the meantime our kids don't have to pay the price for the Board of Education's ineptitude.

Copyright 2014 All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

'Positive outcome' possible on school budget, Fitzgerald says

Board of Education member Jill Fitzgerald, who heads its finance committee, sent this statement along after last night's budget hearing on the school spending plan:
"We had not asked for deep cuts prior to this presentation. We felt it was important for Dr. Solek and staff to make their presentation to the BOF based on what they believe they need to run the Bristol school system.  We have witnessed monumental improvements with the level of detail in the financial reporting and communication since we were first elected to serve on this Board.  This is a huge step in developing trust and confidence between the city and the BOE.  There were great questions asked and we saw a high level of engagement and understanding on the part of the BOF.  We feel confident that the process will produce a positive outcome."
Copyright 2014 All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Mayor to schools: Don't expect more

Mayor Ken Cockayne said the Board of Education's bid to get millions in extra funding in the coming fiscal year should be canned. "I'm going to flat fund them," the mayor said Wednesday night. The schools are seeking a 5 percent budget hike to $109.4 million in the next fiscal year along with a $2.7 million cafeteria budget and support for a $2.7 million bid to switch to full-day kindergarten. Cockayne said he's having none of it. He said the schools should get by on the $104.3 million allocation they got last year. "They just need to manage their money better, just like the city does," Cockayne said. The mayor's position, which has at least some support on the Board of Finance and City Council, is likely to produce sharp opposition from those who see education as a critical need for the city to attract young families. School officials are slated to present their budget plan to the finance board at a hearing at 6 p.m. Thursday in the council chambers on th first floor of City Hall.
Copyright 2014 All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Streifer writes book urging creativity in education

Former Bristol School Superintendent Phil Streifer, always a thoughtful guy, has co-written a book calling for more creativity and innovation in education -- and less regulation. I'm sold, and I haven't even read it. Check it out on Amazon.com
Copyright 2014 All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Dolan: 'Same-old-same-old' thwarted voters' will

Republican Board of Education member Genard Dolan sent along the statement he read during last week's Board of Education meeting as well as a comment about today's story on the school board's split and its impact on the mayoral race.
Here is his response to the story today: Candidate Wilson was technically correct regarding the partisanship of the board in 2011. Wilson loaded the most important committees with his holdover cronies from the old Democratic board from Supt. Streifer's day.  Therefore the will of the voters was subjugated to the same-old-same-old of the previous board.  Since then there has been no partisan activity of the board.  Most if not all of the decisions of the board have been unanimous. 
The board split over the cafeteria issue simply because of the economics of the losses to food service.
This was an issue that was not going to go away. There were some savings to the city with the new contract, but not significant enough to stop the bleeding. It amounted to kicking the can down the road.  
We felt that this was as good a time as ever to resolve the issue.  
My comment that Wilson should have resigned when he decided to run for mayor was based uponhis tenure as Chairman of the Board of Ed making him a target for his opponent.  That caused everyone with an opinion of the board mostly based upon partisanship to rant.  
I have not voiced any criticism of Wilson's actions on the board or his credentials to be mayor.  I have, as have all of the other Republican members of the board intentionally refrained from publicly getting involved in the race for mayor.  Several of us have supported privately our preferences.  I for one,and I'm not authorized to speak
for the other Republicans on the board,feel that the BOE should stay above the fray.  Our mission is to advocate for the process of educating our children.  Two years from now we will have to answer to the voters for our actions.
Some will approve and some will not.
And here's the statement he read last week: The members did not know at that time the loss was so great.  The minority has felt it necessary to politicize their positions on the BOE in the blogs, and because of the misinformation by uninformed people, there is much confusion in the minds of the of voters.  Therefore I wish to clarify the position of the majority members of the BOE. I wish to address the negative vote by the full board regarding the proposed contract with Local 2267. The suggestion was made by one of the minority members of the board to investigate privatizing the food service because of the continuing losses being sustained every year.  At that time the estimated loss was $285 K.  By year end that loss became $330K. The members did not know at that time the loss was so great.   The cumulative loss over the years was over $1,000,000.  The only issue before us was “Do we have the right to privatize our food service?”  The old contract was expiring, but held a clause prohibiting the BOE from privatizing.   A committee was formed to study the matter.  The committee sampled lunches in several schools in nearby districts serviced by several vendors.  One vendor stood out and was selected from five applicants.  Their lunches served were tasty and nutritious, and the students seemed to enjoy the food.   The ensuing negotiation resulted in a surprising disclosure that this vendor would not only eliminate our losses, but would pay us $225 K to boot.   As it turned out that was a potential swing of $555 K.  It should be noted that the net savings would be slightly less because we still would have some minimal expense.  Plus where we thought because of our 40% free and reduced lunch students were causing our losses, it turned out that the district sampled had about 80% free and reduced lunch students.  So at this point it was a no brainer.  
Copyright 2013 All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Cockayne: Some on Board of Ed not truthful

Here is an email exchange obtained recently through a Freedom of Information request to city councilors and the mayor:
Former school board member Orlando Calfe, Jr to city Councilor Ken Cockayne on April 17:

As a resident of Bristol in your district, a voting taxpayer and a former school board member, I want you to vote in favor of the budget request presented by the BOE.  That is, I want your approval for the fully funded budget to the level of the $105 million request made by the Board of Education.

And Cockayne's response the next day, which he shared with the other Republican council members:

Thank you for your email.  Unfortunately I will not be supporting the full budget.  I believe the BOE must do a much better job managing the money.  I believe the BOE is very top heavy with Administration and the money does not make it to the teachers and students.  I also have a problem with the Minimum Balance Requirement.   Any increase we give the BOE will now be the new minimum for the following year. 

 

I also don't believe some on the BOE are being truthful with the parents.  For example....I was at the Feb 14th meeting for a bit before I had to go to City hall for a meeting of my own.  During that meeting, the BOE when through a presentation explaining why they were cutting band and choirs...( my son who is in 6th grade is in both).  The presentation when on to explain that it was not about the money but that the curriculum was changing, doing away with flex and making each period a bit longer.  However,  a few weeks later after pressure from the parents, the BOE now said if the city gave them the money they would put back the music and choirs.  When I asked point blank to a BOE member why they would tell the parent this since I was at the Feb 14th meeting, they could not answer the question.  So I ask......are they changing the curriculum or is it about money? 

 

Yet another example....The BOE has told the lacrosse parents if the city gives them the money... I believe its about 50k... they will put in Lacrosse.  So again, I asked a BOE member (veteran member) if I make a motion to increase whatever the number is for BOE by the amount lacrosse needs will they put in Lacrosse as was stated at the BOE meeting to the parents.  I was told in no uncertain terms NO!  Again, when I asked why then are they telling parents one thing at the BOE meeting and have intention of following through.  The answer I received was this is not the place to talk about it! 

 

The BOE has also said publicly they cannot take another flat budget....how quickly they forgot about the extra 2.5 million dollars the city was forced to give them last year. 

 

Hopefully you can see why I will not fund the BOE in full.  In my opinion some on the BOE can not be trusted to do as they has said they would do.  The BOE needs to do as many households have had to do and thats tighten the belt and start managing the buget.  The city can no longer be a open checkbook. 

This is nothing I take lightly.  I have a son who is currently in 6th grade at Chippens.  I'm also engaged to a teacher..not Bristol...so I see first hand what the teachers are dealing with. 

Please feel free to call with any questions. 

Copyright 2012. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Dolan defends Board of Ed on lacrosse funding

For this story, I asked Board of Education members for their thoughts. I got this one, from Genard Dolan, after deadline. It still warrants interest, so here it is, in its entirety:

I thought that it was a very interesting exchange.  In fact the Board of Ed did include lacrosse in its budget for 2012-2013 even knowing that our entire budget would likely be cut. The mayor's comments regarding his side of the budget implied that he placed a higher priority on city services than the education of our children.  If anyone believes that football, baseball, soccer or lacrosse doesn't contribute to the educational experience of a scholastic career, they are grossly misinformed.  I don't believe that the mayor truly listened to the lacrosse advocates.
One concern that I have is that we will not be competitive with our surrounding towns. Bristol is a sports minded community.  We are, after all,  the home to ESPN.
I believe that the appearance of the lacrosse people were there to make the community aware of their desire to make lacrosse a varsity sport to be on a parity with our neighbors and to promote a good standard of sportsmanship, morality and citizenship. They were drawing attention to their plight.
The last thing that I want is to create a controversy between the City Council and other departments
within the municipal structure and the Board of Education.  We all have our place in the community
and are necessary to create a cohesive and attractive place to raise our families.   So let's not undercut the value of education to the market value of a community.  A good reminder of that is not many of the employees of ESPN live in Bristol.  Ask the mayor why.
I speak for myself not the Board of Education.

Copyright 2012. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Educators Not On The Same Page

Related to today's story, the city's Board of Education appears to have its own rift.

Note from Board of Education member Genard Dolan on Friday morning:

Steve, you write that the members of the BOE are in conflict with the City Council.  Do not confuse the public by equating the Supt. with the BOE Commissioners.  The Supt. is speaking for himself on behalf of the Administration not the elected BOE.  The BOE members have been unaware of the discourse described in your article.  Unfortunately it gives your readers the misinformation of the Supt. speaking for the Board of Education.  You should correct this misinformation with a retraction or a corrected version of events.   Chris Wilson's quote regarding the cost per student seems unrelated to the conflict between Supt. Streifer and the Council.  In fairness to the Commissioners, you should explain the difference between the elected Board members and the Central office of the Supt.

Note from Board of Education Chairman Chris Wilson on Thursday afternoon:

Education reform is swirling all around the country, in CT and in Bristol.  All of this talk of reform causes anxiety and uncertainty for all those involved in education-students, parents, BOE members, staff and the community at large.  I am not sure about a rift.  We are all trying to do our best.  We may becoming at it from a different perspective.  137 cities and towns spend more $ than Bristol per student.  It seems that the city council wants to erode that position further.  I and some other board members support what we have accomplished over the past 8 plus years.  We do not want the quality which has been built here decimated.  WE have attracted a quality teacher staff and administrative staff which has delivered excellent results.  Since we have been level funded by the city for 3 years the fiscal constraints are significant.

We as BOE members have had to tackle difficult issues-closing schools, redistricting, program changes or eliminations.  All of these are challenging tasks without the fiscal constraints but the fiscal constraints make it more daunting.   

I am committed to public education.  I am committed to all students having the opportunity to attend college or some other post graduate experience in order that those 8500 students who pass through our doors have that opportunity.  Sometimes as we modify programs and reallocate resources to accomplish that goal the status quo is challenged.

As far as Ken’s point about the old guard.  3 incumbents ran for BOE and were elected so I am not sure what change he refers.  I think our rating within the state is pretty good and I am proud of that.  When one looks at quality schools systems throughout the state those that have a single minded focus are the successful ones.  Those where the leaders are not single minded are unsuccessful.  I am hopeful we will have the single minded and non partisan relationship which existed prior the this past election.

Copyright 2012. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Council, school board rift is growing

The rift between the City Council and Board of Education is growing.

The five Republicans recently asked for detailed monthly school spending reports and were turned down cold.

School Superintendent Philip Streifer wrote Wednesday that “it is the policy of the school administration to provide the public only those documents requested by or created for the Board of Education, therefore, we will not be providing you the detailed request” sought in an email sent to the Board of Education by city Councilor Henri Martin.

“I don’t know why the resistance,” Martin said Thursday. “I just want to know some information.”

For city Councilor Ken Cockayne, the superintendent’s response only serves to widen “the disconnect” between councilors and school board members.

“I can’t help wondering what the Board of Ed is hiding,” Cockayne said Thursday.

Chris Wilson, the chairman of the school board, said that 137 cities and towns in Connecticut “spend more dollars than Bristol per student.  It seems that the City Council wants to erode that position further.”

The sole Democratic councilor, Kevin Fuller, said he is worried the GOP’s effort will create “a bigger divide between the Board of Ed and the Council, and who does that hurt in the long run? The students of Bristol.”

Streifer said Thursday he will gladly turn over any of the financial reports prepared for the Board of Education but it won’t create ones that don’t exist simply because city councilors want more detailed data.

Streifer said he hopes that problems don’t develop between City Hall and the school administration.

“There is an established process under the city charter to review and fund budgets,” Streifer said, pointing out that the Board of Finance reviews budgets and “then makes a recommendation to the City Council and they jointly vote on budget appropriations.”

“I would hope that everyone would respect and honor that process which has worked well in the past,” Streifer said.

Martin said the schools spend 61 percent of the city’s budget, a total of $102.6 million this year, and he would not be doing his job if he didn’t try to understand where all that money goes.

Fuller said, “The council in the past has looked at the BOE budget but we cannot control it. The only vote the council has is to approve or deny the total amount of the budget,” and cannot deal with particular line items.

“We understand that we don't have the power to line item the BOE budget and determine where money should or shouldn't go,” said city Councilor Derek Czenczelewski

“However, that doesn't mean the city shouldn't be able to see where the money is going on a monthly basis. We are looking for transparency, plain and simple,” he said. |”Unfortunately, some administrators and officials believe that the BOE doesn't need to report to the taxpayers in any way.”

Cockayne said that voters showed last year they don’t want officials to tread along the same old path.

“The citizens of Bristol are fed up with the Board of Education,” Cockayne said, and they very much want change.

Though Republicans took control of the school board for the first time ever in November, Cockayne said they failed to shake up its leadership.

“The old guard is still in charge,” Cockayne said, and its members don’t believe there’s a need to do things differently.

“The Board of Education needs to open its eyes,” Cockayne said.

Fuller said he is curious what the Republicans are looking for.

In his email to Streifer, Martin sought detailed monthly reports on these accounts:  central administration, principals and assistants, supervisors, psychologists, other instructional, improvement for instruction, instructional services, other professional services, rentals and leases, and staff transportation.

“Give me additional information,” Martin said. “Let’s break it down.”

Streifer said the reports Martin asked for “are much more detailed than what we have on hand or which the Board of Education has asked for, thus we will not create them for him. “

Martin said he did not understand the resistance to providing councilors with the information.

Cockayne said in a Thursday email to Streifer that he “can't believe the BOE doesn't have a detailed expenditure report run every month.  This is something at even a basic business would do.”

“How then do you do accounting on $100 million?” Cockayne said. “You must have more internal detailed reports than you give out to the public.”

Copyright 2012. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Streifer: School cuts will have "a dramatic and negative impact"

Press Release – Bristol (CT) Superintendent of Schools
Philip A. Streifer, Ph.D.
May 27, 2011
This budget year is a difficult one for everyone in city/school governance and we recognize the need to make tough choices. The current fiscal pressures are not of our making, but of the national/global economic downturn and the State’s failure to meet its constitutional responsibility to properly fund public education. Until that issue is fully resolved, local officials must deal with the fallout.
While the Board of Education is constitutionally responsible for deciding what is actually funded and what is cut, the Board can only operate within the scope of funds provided by the State and City. The bottom line is that when funding is cut – programs must be reduced or eliminated. The scope of the cuts required by the Bristol Board of Finance is significant – requiring a reduction of $5,002,000 for 2011-2012. As a result of reducing the Board of Education’s base budget from $102.5M in 2010-2011 to $100M in 2011-2012, the School Budget begins 2012-2013 needing to eliminate an additional $2.5M at the minimum. Let me restate: The proposed budget takes the school current base of $102.5M and reduces it for 2012-2013 down to $100M. Reductions of this scope over the next two years will have a dramatic and negative impact on programs and students, and sets back the progress Bristol has made over the past several years in becoming the most successful urban district in Connecticut.
Members of the Board of Finance have made suggestions as to where they felt the Board of Education could reduce its budget. These proposed reductions do not add up to the $5M cut (falling a full $2M short) and they rely largely on salary/benefit givebacks which require negotiation and are not assured. In another example, it was cited that the Board of Education budget includes $200,000 for School Board members to attend a conference on the west coast. Bristol Board of Education members do not attend conferences out of state and when they do attend a rare conference locally, it is to learn about new Connecticut laws and policies needed to fulfill their responsibilities. A training program that some of our staff attends (which is on the west coast) is for a very successful program designed to help students not normally thinking about college to do so. It is called AVID – Advancement Via Individual Determination – and participation is required at this training session to provide a certified program. We paid for this from two sources, Title I Federal Dollars and current surplus dollars – the local cost of which is 10% of the $200,000 figure cited. Focusing public attention on Board of Education members for this issue, which is both inaccurate and which is a part of the Board of Education’s mission statement, is undeserved and unfair.
The major issues facing Bristol focus on whether they want their schools to remain the most successful urban district in Connecticut where all students receive a quality education. Taking $7,500,000 out of  the school’s current budget over the next two years (which amounts to a 7.3% reduction) dramatically reduces our ability to provide students with the educational programs needed to prepare them for success in college or other post secondary education.



Copyright 2011. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Letter: Resident calls for saving West Woods Academy

To Mayor Art Ward, the Board of Finance, the School Board, and School Administrators:
The motto of West Woods Academy is "Everyone is the architect of his or her own fortune". If West Woods Academy is closed and the alternative education program is eliminated, there will be many unfortunate students for years to come.
The closure of West Woods would be a huge mistake affecting the entire Bristol community. I have two phrases to put to the board - 1) "Leave well enough alone" and 2) "If it isn't broke, don't fix it". In other words leave West Woods Academy alone; the Academy doesn't need to be fixed or terminated.
In 1980 Bristol educators saw the need for an alternative program for students who were failing or becoming frustrated with the large high school setting or even dropping out of high school. The idea of a small, personalized and structured program for struggling and unmotivated students has worked. In the Academy's 25 years, 56% have gone onto post secondary education, 11% to technical careers and 4% to the military. Two students have gone onto receive their MBA's and two received doctorates. This would not have happened in the traditional high school setting for these students.
I have my own personal reason to see West Woods continue now and in the future. I have a son at West Woods and it has been the best substance for his education. He is doing better, enjoys his classes, classmates and teachers and grasps his "real life" learning experiences.
If Mayor Art Ward and the Board of Finance, School Board and Administrators close the alternative education program, the 50 or so students at West Woods would either have to go back to Eastern or Central high school where they couldn't cope or would drop out of school. In my opinion the administration has no right to deny a student an education ever! The failure of these students would be completely on the conscience of Mayor Art Ward, the Board of Finance and School Administrators.
One final thought: a West Wood current student who was a chronic truant sums up his experiences; "In the past two and a half years since I came to West Woods Academy I find school fun and I actually want to be here every day. The teachers here are really nice and help me out a lot more. I came here because the regular high school wasn't working for me and I never wanted to be there. This will be my second year of perfect attendance and I look forward to school every day. They make me feel welcome. I improved so much I made up all my credits. This is the school for me."
I strongly urge Mayor Art Ward, Board of Finance and School Administrators to realize the value and worth of West Woods Academy and the alternative education program to its students, faculty and the City of Bristol. Keeping West Woods open will be beneficial to the students, their families and the entire Bristol community now and in the future.
Feel free to contact me on this very important issue. Thank you for your consideration.
Michael Markowich

Copyright 2011. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

DeVaux's resignation "for personal reasons," no police involved

Press release from the Board of Education:

In an April 13, 2009 report on the resignation of Steven DeVaux as Assistant Superintendent for Business in the Bristol Public Schools, the Bristol Press suggested that he had been escorted out of the Board of Education building by the police. In fact, Mr. DeVaux resigned voluntarily for personal reasons; there was no police escort, nor any suggestion of wrongdoing or impropriety that would have called for such action. Neither were there any concerns expressed by the Superintendent relating to his management style or his professional qualifications. 

Streifer told me today that a police officer was in the building at the time that DeVaux was packing up and that perhaps some employees mistakenly thought he was escorted out. That matches what I learned today from a couple of the people who had told me that police were present. As it turns out, they never saw DeVaux escorted out. They assumed it. I didn't check on that detail, which was a mistake on my part. I'm sorry, Steve.

Streifer also told me, after I asked, that DeVaux will be paid through June 30, though he is no longer working for the school system.

"We try to help people out a little bit," the superintendent said. "That's the decision we made."

He said he couldn't say more without invading DeVaux's privacy.

*******
Copyright 2009. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

DeVaux resigns unexpectedly, reasons unclear

The assistant school superintendent for business, Steven DeVaux, resigned unexpectedly last week.
Hired less than a year ago to replace long-time business manager William Smyth, DeVaux departed quietly, with police officers apparently escorting him out of the Board of Education building. [Please follow link for correction of this portion of the sentence.]
Tom O'Brien, a school board member, confirmed Monday that DeVaux had stepped down and that Smyth would be filling in for awhile.
Though O'Brien refused to talk about "a personnel matter," others said that DeVaux apparently resigned under pressure after complaints arose about his management style and his inability to use the district's computer system effectively to create necessary financial reports.
Neither DeVaux nor school Superintendent Philip Streifer could be reached Monday.
Smyth said that that Streifer asked him last week if he would be willing to fill in on an interim basis until a successor for DeVaux can be found.
Smyth started working in the familiar job on Wednesday, the day after DeVaux’s departure.
Smyth said there's nothing wrong in the office, just "a lot of activity" churning out the reports that flow through.
"I just have to keep them running," Smyth said.
Mayor Art Ward said that Streifer told him that DeVaux resigned "due to personal reasons" and didn't expound further.
The mayor said he figured there was "something of a personal nature" involved so he didn't probe the issue.
Ward said that he's happy to work with Smyth in the meantime.
"He was right on top of everything," the mayor said, which may not always have been true for DeVaux. But Smyth had the advantage of longevity and the insight it allows.
Smyth "was probably a lot more comfortable given his experience" in dealing with all sorts of education issues, Ward said.
The mayor said that he doesn't think that DeVaux's departure will slow the process of acquiring property for new schools, an issue that DeVaux was heavily involved in.
He said that Streifer also knew what was going on and Smyth can step in quickly, too.
DeVaux started in the job in July, leaving a position as the director of finance and management services for Monroe’s public schools.
DeVaux has also has served as Derby’s school business manager and put in a number of years on the Brookfield Board of Education as well.
*******
Copyright 2009. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Impact unclear of city wariness toward funding school request

It isn’t clear whether the city’s likely refusal to fund half the Board of Education’s requested budget increase will force school officials to cut programs or staff.
The city’s Board of Finance is eyeing a budget proposal that would slice almost $2 million from the $104 million spending plan sought by educators.
School leaders have said that anything less than the nearly $4 million in additional funding they needed for a “go forward” budget that simply maintained the status quo would lead to layoffs and program reductions.
But it may turn out better than officials initially expected.
Tom O’Brien, the school board member who heads its budget subcommittee, said it is too early to say what the impact of the sliced request will be.
O’Brien said that health care costs for employees – a big ticket item in the personnel heavy school system – may be less than initially feared. That could make a major difference.
In addition, O’Brien said Monday, the millions in federal stimulus money earmarked for education may help cushion the budget blow.
School Superintendent Philip Streifer has said that the red tape attached to the federal cash appeared to make it unusable to fill most of the holes in the budget. In many cases, the federal money could only be used for new services, he said.
But O’Brien said that it isn’t yet clear what the final rules for its use will be. With luck, it may help cushion the blow from City Hall’s reluctance to shell out more, he said.
City Comptroller Glenn Klocko said that city government can’t come up with enough money year after year to fill the gaps left by frozen state aid.
He said the school budget has a structural problem in that it rises 4 or 5 percent every year, a level that would require millions of additional dollars annually.
Klocko said the schools are seeking money at a faster rate than revenues are going up, opening up a problem that is unsolvable at the local level.
“We cannot sustain that expenditure growth compared to the revenue growth,” Klocko said.
The only options are to hold back the spending growth somehow or to find new sources of revenue.
“It’s not about the children,” Klocko said. “It’s about the revenue.”
“It’s finally coming to a head,” the comptroller added.

*******
Copyright 2009. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

A top school administrator abruptly resigns

The assistant school superintendent for business, Steven DeVaux, resigned unexpectedly last week.

Tom O'Brien, a Board of Education member, confirmed this morning that DeVaux had stepped down and that his predecessor, William Smyth, would be filling in for awhile.

Though O'Brien refused to talk about "a personnel matter," others said that DeVaux apparently resigned under pressure after complaints arose about his management style and his inability to use the district's computer system effectively to create necessary financial reports.

DeVaux was escorted out of the Board of Education by police officers following his resignation last week, I'm told, which is not the norm around here.

DeVaux took the job last summer so he's not especially well known in town. He apparently is being paid through at least the rest of the school year.

Here's what the Board of Education sent out last summer when DeVaux was hired:

Mr. Steven DeVaux has been hired as the Assistant to the Superintendent for Business for the Bristol Public Schools effective July 1, 2008. Mr. DeVaux is replacing Mr. William Smyth who is retiring from the position. Mr. DeVaux is an experienced school business official as well as having an extensive background in business and finance in the private sector. Mr. DeVaux’s current position is the Director of Finance and Management Services for the Monroe Public Schools in Monroe, CT. Prior to that position he was the Business Manager for the Derby Public Schools. Mr. DeVaux also served on the Brookfield Board of Education for a number of years completing his term as the Board chair.

I'll have more details as I find out more.

Update at 10:30 a.m. --

Scotty Smyth is on the job.

He told me that Superintendent Philip Streifer asked him last week if he would be willing to fill in on an interim basis until a successor for DeVaux can be found.

Smyth started on Wednesday morning.

He said there's nothing particularly wrong in the office that he's so familiar with, just "a lot of activity" churning out the reports that flow through.

"I just have to keep them running," Smyth said.

Update at 10:40 a.m. --

Mayor Art Ward said that Streifer told him that DeVaux resigned "due to personal reasons" and didn't expound further.

The mayor said he figured there was "someting of a personal nature" involved so he didn't probe the issue.

Ward said that he's happy to work with Smyth in the meantime.

"He was right on top of everything," the mayor said, which may not always have been true for Devaux. But Smyth had the advantage of longevity and the insight it allows.

Smyth "was probably a lot more comfortable given his experience" in dealing with all sorts of education issues, Ward said.

The mayor said that he doesn't think that DeVaux's departure will slow the process of acquiring property for new schools, an issue that DeVaux was heavily involved in. He said that Streifer also knew what was going on and Smyth can step in quickly, too.

*******
Copyright 2009. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

City schools to Hartford: No more!

Insisting that “enough is enough with unfunded mandates,” school administrators are flatly refusing to go along with a request from the state’s commissioner of education to create 85 more slots for Hartford children to attend Bristol schools.

“We have simply reached the breaking point,” Superintendent Philip Streifer wrote in a March 10 letter to the commissioner, Mark McQuillan.

The move doesn’t necessarily mean that more inner city students won’t be placed in Bristol schools because the city has no authority to refuse to follow state law. But at this point, the commissioner’s request is not an order.

Cheryl Thibeault, a city Board of Finance member, commended Streifer and the Board of Education for “taking an aggressive stand” to try to fend off more expenses.

Streifer said the city receives $3,000 in funding for each student it accepts from Hartford, but has to shell out an average of $11,000 a year to educate each of them.

That means adding 85 more students would cost city taxpayers $600,000 extra each year at a time when the schools are scrambling to avoid layoffs and maintain existing programs.

The state is looking to increase the number of students who can participate in the Hartford regional program from 1,100 to 3,000 as part of a desegregation effort required by court decisions. Bristol currently has

Statistics from state education reports indicate Bristol has 46 Project Choice students, 36 of them minority students. It also sends some students to magnet schools in other towns so the flow of students goes both ways.

Board of Education members said they don’t want to expand the program because it costs too much.

“We simply can no longer afford to fund additional state mandates without adequate financial support,” Streifer said in his letter. He called it “paramount that the state fully funds” the program if it wants to increase the number of students served.

Bristol’s education leaders said they support efforts to integrate schools more, but argue that the state is responsible for the overall situation and should pay the tab for correcting it.

Streifer said that 30 percent of the city’s $101 million school budget is already devoted to mandated programs.

With state aid stagnant at best, there’s no way to take on additional educational responsibilities and ask struggling city property taxpayers to fork over the money for them, officials said.

The legislature is considering a bid to hand over responsibility for the Open Choice program directly to the state, rather than running it through the Capital Region Education Council, a move that might create a situation where Bristol could no longer say no.

*******
Copyright 2009. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com