Middletown Schools In Investigation Mode

In a somewhat snarky recap of Wednesday nights Middletown Board of Education reorganization meeting, Dustin Racioppi of the redbankgreen.com, writes about how the school board has some more investigating to do before it can give answers to the public about services that will be effected once the Township Committee is finished with the review of the recently defeated school budget and make further cuts to it.

I think that until Superintendent Bilbao and the rest of the school board know exactly how much will be cut from the budget, it wouldn't have been prudent to announce whether or not more teachers would be laid off, schools closed or after school programs eliminated. Many things are still up in the air and until a final number is issued by the Township Committee anything announced would be speculation:

The Middletown Board of Education could staff a detective bureau with all the investigating it’s doing and has ahead.

Investigating was the buzzword from the district Superintendent Karen Bilbao Wednesday night when pushed for details on where and how cuts would be made to the district’s $140.3 million budget, which was rejected by voters last week.

As in, will more teachers have to be laid off? She’s investigating.

Or, will there be redistricting, or school closings, as Bilbao has hinted at before?

“Closing a school or more than one school is one of the areas we said needed to be investigated,” Bilbao said.

“We are investigating a lot of things at this point.”

Read more >>> Here

NJ Senators, Congressmen Call on Administration to Reverse Decision to Drill Along East Coast

In letter to President Obama, Menendez, Lautenberg, Pallone and Holt cite Gulf oil spill as most recent evidence of risk to shorelines

WASHINGTON – Today, New Jersey’s two U.S. Senators and two of the state’s Members of Congress called on the Obama administration to reverse its announced plans to open up the East Coast of the United States to oil drilling. In a letter to President Obama, Senators Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Frank Lautenberg and Reps. Frank Pallone (NJ-6) and Rush Holt (NJ-12) said the current oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is only the latest example of the real risk drilling poses to coastal communities and the economies they support. Under the administration’s plan, drilling along the coast of Virginia could occur within 100 miles of the Jersey Shore and, eventually, drilling along the coast of Delaware could occur within 10 miles of New Jersey.

“In the wake of the tragic accident, loss of life, and pollution in the Gulf of Mexico from the Deepwater Horizon oil rig, we are even more steadfastly opposed to any offshore drilling that could imperil the environment or economy of coastal New Jersey,” wrote the Members of Congress. “While we appreciate the White House’s announcement that no additional offshore drilling will be authorized until a full investigation of the accident is complete, we urge you to go further and reverse your decision on proposed new offshore oil and gas drilling for the outer continental shelf.

“The spill, and the conduct of companies like BP, raises serious concerns about expanding drilling to areas like the Atlantic seaboard. This catastrophe demonstrates exactly why no new drilling should proceed in any U.S. waters, and certainly not in the Atlantic. This incident exposes the many deficiencies in worker safety, blow out avoidance technology, and oil spill clean-up plans for operations in the outer continental shelf. We simply are not prepared to make our pristine Jersey shoreline the next test case for the oil companies’ experiment in how to maximize profits and minimize regulations.”

Read the PDF of the letter to President Obama >>> Here

It's Arbour Day

It's Arbour Day - go plant a tree today and help save the environment but first enjoy the show.



For a little history behind Arbour Day click>>>Here

Middletown Township Still 'Crunching The Numbers' As Budget Gap Widens

Excellent article written by Ryan Fennell of the TRT, the kid reports it straight with no spin and consistantly reports on important aspects of the Township Committee meetings without having to resort to press releases issued after the meetings are over.

By Ryan Fennell
The Two River Times

MIDDLETOWN - While no specifics have been released regarding the 2010 budget, the Middletown Township Committee intimated on Monday night that layoffs were imminent in order to bridge the estimated $4 million shortfall in revenue.

The Middletown Township Committee entered this year facing an approximate $4 million shortfall, which Committeeman Sean Byrnes now estimates to be closer to $6 million, in revenue for the 2010 budget. Since that time the Committee has hired a new CFO and consistently pledged to the township's residents that it was "looking at everything."

"We are now almost three weeks into April and we know as a Committee that we have a significant shortfall in revenue this year," Byrnes said. "The news is only getting worse and as of right now I don't think we've really executed on any plans. Our ability to see any kind of savings is hampered by the fact that time is passing."

Mayor Gerard Scharfenberger said that he has been in contact with Governor Chris Christie's chief of staff and has been assured that legislation is being crafted that would ease the situation for the township.

"He assured me that the 'mayor's toolbox', so to speak, that will allow us to absorb some of these cuts is still in the process of being formulated. We're hoping this will provide some relief and extensive policy out of Trenton that will allow us to get back on track." Middletown resident Jim Grenafege was not satisfied with the explanation and challenged the committee to offer concrete solutions or information regarding the budget. "Its just week after week there is nothing concrete happening," Grenafege said.

He asked that the committee provide numbers associated with proposals that have been offered by the committee that could potential cut the budget.

"We have a relatively new CFO and he's still crunching the numbers," Scharfenberger said. "We can't quantify anything that's been proposed when I don't have the numbers to quantify it against. These are sound proposals. There's no sense speculating."

Grenafege charged that the committee was speculating with the proposals. "They're speculation with no numbers associated with it. It's disingenuous to make these proposals without saying and here's what we expect to save."

Township Administrator Anthony Mercantante said that there are concrete things happening regarding the budget. "We've discussed a lot of options for saving money. A lot of them are painful. A lot of them are painful to individual people. It wouldn't be fair to speculate publicly about some of the things happening." Resident Jeff Blumengold asked why the committee hasn't at least started cutting the "low hanging fruit."

Scharfenberger noted that Middletown operates on a workforce of approximately 340 employees which costs the township $872 per person, a low figure for a municipality it's size.

"There's not a lot of low hanging fruit," Scharfenberger said.

Scharfenberger also pointed out that the Township experienced 15 retirements since January and could see as many as 20 by year's end. Scharfenberger said that these retirements have affected the budget and eliminated areas to cut.

"We had no idea that was going to happen," Scharfenberger said of the retirements. However, the Committee had expected and even encouraged its employees to retire in May 2009.

On May 18, 2009 the Committee unanimously adopted an ordinance entitled "Early Retirement Incentive for Eligible Township Employees."

The ordinance encourages employees eligible to retire under the Public Employee Retirement System (PERS) with the offer of health benefits upon retirement after 15 years of service with the township, lowered from 20 years of service.

According to the ordinance any employee who is eligible to retire who has 15 years of service shall have the entire cost of health benefits assumed by the Township of Middletown upon retirement. The ordinance has a "sunset provision" that sets December 31, 2010 as the expiration date.

"The process is the problem," Byrnes said. "There is no process in place to get ahead of the things we're talking about. We knew it was going to be bad. It's very, very frustrating. I can't fathom how we haven't planned out for the problems we're facing."

"Now we will lay off people and those numbers are probably going to be bigger than they needed because we're starting later than we should have," Byrnes added.

"The silver lining in all the bad news we've been confronting is that people are starting to engage," Byrnes said. "People seem to be paying more attention to what's going on. That's a good thing. Part of the problem of what we're in now is people didn't pay attention and that is the key to getting out of the very dire situation we find ourselves in."

Christie’s latest offensive against teachers may prompt mass exodus of NJ’s best

BY PAT SUMMERS
NEWJERSEYNEWSROOM.COM

With a state budget that focuses almost entirely on cutting spending rather than raising revenues, it's no surprise that Governor Chris Christie has targeted publicly funded teachers and education — astutely transferring financial problems from the state to local municipalities.

As proven on April 20, he can persuade a majority of the voting public — a.k.a. the disgruntled property tax-paying public — to defeat school budgets in districts where teachers refused to accept a pay freeze. The incongruity of a governor acting against his own state education system and its students was obscured by the elections results: for the first time since 1976, the majority of New Jersey's school budgets were voted down.

Talk about a "bully pulpit." Or as a letter to the Times of Trenton had it, "in taking money from the needy and giving it to the greedy," Christie is a "reverse Robin Hood." And that's one of the nicest names he's been called lately.

Christie's latest maneuver against teachers is his plan to reduce pension and health benefits. Next month, he'll request the passage of bills (1) requiring those who retire after August 1 to pay more toward health benefits and (2) changing how pension benefits are calculated, resulting in a loss of income.

Obviously, Christie hopes that rather than continue teaching and accept the projected cuts, eligible veteran teachers may opt out this summer. (Those retiring by August 1 will get a free pass.)

Of course, if seasoned, master teachers are forced to retire early for this reason, the schools, and the students, will be the losers — only for starters.

Overall, according to a Star-Ledger analysis, 20 percent of the state's certified teachers are qualified for retirement. Should this happen, the two Mercer County districts probably most in need of excellent veteran teachers — the city of Trenton and the Mercer County Special Services District — could lose the highest number of them. In Trenton, those eligible to retire represent about 31 percent of the total, while the Special Services District virtually tied, at 30 percent.

And it gets worse, both for New Jersey students and fledgling teachers in the faculty room. More than 42 percent of those with doctorates and 25 percent of those with master's degrees would be eligible to retire.

Through this shortsighted approach, the old management axiom, "Trust the veterans," could become obsolete by September. Sure, the ranks may be re-filled with younger teachers inexplicably willing to enter a profession where they're insulted, devalued and threatened. But they'll lack for the "voices of experience" new teachers have traditionally had on staff, and their road to master teacher status becomes much longer.

All that will make a difference very quickly. Everyone in a town loses when school funding is cut. Ultimately, students who are less well-educated can only contribute less to their communities. Possibly less likely to get or hold jobs, they could become additional drains on the already reeling economy.

Not only does Christie dismiss the incalculable value of teacher experience, but he's also treating the state's fiscal problem with woefully outdated — and discredited — management techniques of his own. He's practicing top-down, power-over "Scientific Management" — whereby employees lose dignity and are treated like machines, with money as the incentive.

Our state's fiscal problems are not unique in the country. But Christie's answer — a focus on cutting spending — has put New Jersey into "a small peer group," the New York Times reported last month. Florida, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia are all led by Republicans, a number with national aspirations.

As has been counter-argued on line and on the street, Christie's selective about the groups he asks to sacrifice. He's not calling on doctors, lawyers or bankers; nor is he asking millionaires to do their bit — which would be easy enough through re-enactment of the "millionaire's tax," which he insists won't happen.

Finally, the ranks of those exempt from sacrifice also include the political appointees on Christie's staff. Their salaries reportedly exceed the total for the same group under Governor Corzine.

NJPP Monday Minute 4/26/10:Healthcare, transit and EITC cuts hurt working families

Gov. Christie's FY 2011 budget proposes $400 million in cuts to programs that provide critical support to low and moderate income families. When unemployment is close to 10 percent and nearly 450,000 people are without jobs, pulling the rug out from under working families is the last thing one would expect.

New Jersey has long recognized that struggling working families need support if they are to work in a state with one of the highest costs of living in the nation. In the long run, affordable health coverage, mass transit and the benefits of the Earned Income Tax Credit avoid more costly alternatives like welfare, homelessness and charity care at hospitals. These alternatives are bad for families, bad for business and ultimately bad for the economy.

Here are three examples of these bad choices.

FamilyCare - $100 million cut

New Jersey's FamilyCare program provides affordable health coverage for kids and certain low income parents or guardians. It is for families who do not have employer insurance and cannot afford to pay the high cost of private health insurance which costs between $6,000 and $12,000 per parent. To save money, the state has made the following program changes:

• FamilyCare coverage is no longer available to parents whose income is greater than $23,352 for a family of three. In FY 2011, approximately 39,000 parents will be denied coverage, regardless of their medical needs. NJPP's research shows that when enrollment is closed to parents, fewer children are enrolled. Closing the door to so many parents makes no fiscal sense. In FY 2011, the state would save $24.6 million but lose about $46 million in federal matching funds.
• Enrolled parents who lose coverage because they can't pay the premiums (which will be raised) or who do not renew their coverage will no longer be able to reenroll in the program if their income exceeds $23,352.
• About 11,700 legal immigrant parents in this country for less than five years lost their FamilyCare coverage based on an Executive Order issued by the governor that bypassed the Legislature. Under threat of a lawsuit, the Christie administration extended coverage for three months, after which parents will permanently lose their coverage, saving $30 million in the FY 2011 budget.

New Jersey Transit - $300 million cut

Getting to work is an essential part of having a job and in New Jersey about 10 percent of all workers use mass transit. At a time now when families can least afford to pay higher transit fares, the funding cuts have forced NJ Transit to increase fares by an average of 22 percent, affecting almost a million New Jerseyans who commute to work on buses and trains. This is the second highest NJ Transit fare increase in history (averaging a $1,000 annually for a train pass).

But according to Gov. Christie these fare increases are preferable to raising the cost for people who drive. For example, the daily round trip fare between New Brunswick and Trenton will increase to $17.00 per day from its current fare of $11.75. Driving will become a cheaper option than using mass transit - IF they can afford it. Either way this will be a huge hit for working people.

NJ Transit estimates it likely will lose another five percent of its riders on top of the four percent it lost last year. All of these decisions, of course, contribute to the downward spiral in transit revenue and add 4,800 pounds of pollution to the air for every commuter who decides to take a car to work.

The fare increase hurts everyone, but it will be hardest on lower income families, the elderly, people with disabilities and college students. Using mass transit will be a greater burden for them because many have no alternative to public transportation-another barrier to work and education, another barrier to independent living.

At the same time the governor slashes transit funding, he has steadfastly refused to consider a gas tax increase, saying it will harm the economy. But gas prices in New Jersey are low relative to most places in the country, largely because New Jersey has the nation's third lowest gas tax which has not been increased since 1988. This is yet another example of the administration's unbalanced approach to the budget. Cuts in transit service and fare increases amount to taxes on those who use those services. User fees are acceptable as long as people have alternatives and that's exactly the problem-many people have no alternative but to use public transportation.

State EITC - $45 million cut

The Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) is a federal and state credit for people who work but have low wages. Recognizing that New Jersey is an expensive place to live, the New Jersey credit is calculated at 25 percent of the federal EITC. About 485,000 households received this state credit last year. The governor's budget would reduce that to 20 percent of the federal EITC. This would mean that a family of four with one parent working full time at the minimum wage ($15,000 a year) would lose $251 next year.

The state and federal EITCs are one of the most effective ways to encourage work, prevent families from becoming dependent on welfare and reduce the number of children in poverty. In fact, some of the welfare savings are still being used to fund the state EITC.

New Jersey's economy is dependent on a diverse workforce, and it is in the state's best interest to help make it easier for families to continue to work and contribute to an economic revival. Placing more burdens on low and moderate income workers during a recession is not the way to do it, but that is precisely what Gov. Christie's budget will do.

It's Your Town Newsletter Volumn 2, Issue 8 For 4/19/10

Middletown, It's your Town Hall Newsletter is now available for reading.

This latest edition covers the Township Committee meeting that took place on Monday, April 19.

There area resolutions attached to the newsletter that includes the bill list for the period of March and April, which makes this edition of the newsletter rather lengthy, it consists of about 100 pages.

See what the Township is spending YOUR money on instead of cutting costs while preparing a municipal budget that has a ~$5M deficit and calls for the layoff of 40 township employees.

Read the Newsletter >>>> Here

If you would like to subscribe to the newsletter and have it sent to your email, you can be placed on a mailing list by send your request to itsourtown@yahoo.com

Saturday Morning Cartoons: An Elephant never forgets

I know, I know.... it's Saturday morning and you don't want to think of school, but in light of the recent school budget defeats learning in the classroom may become a little harder for all of us kids in the not to distant future.

So, if we need some extra credit to help us get through the school year Saturday may have to become the new Friday

President Obama's Weekly Address: 4/24/10 Good News from the Auto Industry

As the auto industry and financial markets begin to stabilize, the President says the government’s emergency interventions are now winding down. He pledges that real reform, particularly on Wall Street, must now begin.

Patrick Murray: Interpreting the School Budget Vote

posted by Patrick Murray on his Real Numbers and Other Musings blog

Yesterday, New Jersey voters did something they haven’t done in more than 30 years: defeated a majority of school district tax levies. [Note: I’m calling them “levies” here because that is more accurate. Voters don’t really have a say on the spending portion of the operational budgets of their local schools. They only get to vote on the amount in property taxes that the district proposes levying for the year.]

They also turned out in record numbers. The final statewide vote count hasn’t been compiled, but it is somewhere north of 20% of all registered voters. That may not sound like much, but the previous high for school elections, going back to at least 1976, was 18.6%. 1976 was also the last time a majority of school levies failed. That year, 56% went down. This year, it looks like 59% have been tossed out by voters.

A Monmouth University/Gannett New Jersey Poll released last week found that 29% of registered voters – if they did vote – would support their local school levies, while 37% would oppose them. Based on a sampling of county returns, it looks like that 8 point margin may hold up in the final statewide vote.

There are some other interesting findings as well. Taking Middlesex County as just one example, compared to the April 2009 election, turnout in this one county was up by 65%. The number of “No” votes went up by 90%. But the number of “Yes” votes also went up, albeit by a lower 40%. In other words, turnout increased on both sides of the issue.

So what does this all mean?

Chris Christie and his supporters have claimed victory, saying that New Jersey voters sided with the governor in his battle with the state teacher’s union, the NJEA. However, the governor urged voters to defeat budgets in districts where the teachers made no concessions – and a good number of these actually passed. On the flip side, in the few districts where teachers actually agreed to wage freezes or other concessions – the districts one would expect to be rewarded if voters were out to show support for the governor – a good number (anywhere between 6 and 13 depending on what you count as a "concession") of the school budget levies failed.

The NJEA claims that the school vote was a repudiation of the governor’s draconian cuts in school aid which forced school boards to raise property taxes in order to maintain needed programs and services. Maybe, but polls also indicate that the public expected teachers to be willing to take pay freezes and pay for their benefits.

Local school boards say the vote was the product of a rush to make drastic cuts in a short time frame with few available tools to lessen the pain for both the educational system and the taxpayers. They may be partially right, but polls consistently show that voters believe there is a whole lot of waste in school spending to begin with.

So, here’s what we know about the New Jersey public:
1. They think the size of the cuts in state aid to local schools is unfair.
2. They think the teachers’ unions should be willing to come to the table and agree to a wage freeze and benefit contributions.
3. They don’t want educational programs cut.
4. They don’t want their property taxes raised.

All of these are reasons why Garden State voters voted yesterday. They are the reasons why more people than usual turned out to vote “No.” And they are also the reasons why more people than usual turned out to vote “Yes.”

Anyone who claims with certainty that any of these reasons is the main factor behind a majority of school levies going down yesterday is just blowing smoke....

Read more >>>Here

Patrick Murray is the founding director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute and is a frequent media commentator on politics and public opinion,

With The School Budget Defeated what’s In Store for Middletown?

The voters have spoken and the words that they spoke yesterday all started with the word "NO"; "No" to the school budget, "No" to the incumbents, "No" to the teachers, "No" to higher taxes and "No" to the kids of Middletown.

So now with "No" being the word of the day, what's in store for Middletown after the dust settles and reality sinks in?

With residents voting "No" on the school budget, the school budget will be sent to the Township Committee for review. The Committee will look it over and decide if there is anything left within the bare bones $140M budget to cut. Without a clear idea of where to make specific cuts, they will in my opinion, make a token gesture at cutting a few hundred thousand dollars from the budget and insist that the Board of Education eliminate excess administrators from its staff, thereby seemingly to save after school and extracurricular activities.

By voting out all the current incumbents, Pat Walsh, Dawn Diorio and Leonora Caminiti from the Middletown Board of Education, residents have lost strong and experienced voices that always had the best interests of the students first and foremost in their minds while making policy decisions.

In their place you will have 3 unproven individuals in Vincent Brand (who has never attended a Board of Education meeting in his life), Michael Mascone (President of Middletown Soccer League, who wants to open up the turf fields at the high schools to his soccer kids) and Chris Aveta (who as a member of the Carteret BOE became a caustic member of that board and became known for his confrontational incidents with teachers and administrators while serving just 1 term). All three, despite their denials to the contrary, were recruited by and sponsored by the members of the Middletown GOP in order to gain influence over the school board.

I can only hope that Brand and Mascone were being sincere when they told me at the April 16^th BOE Candidate Forum that they would be their own men and not succumb to pressure from GOP members on the Township Committee who they barely know.

Those that voted "No" on the school budget fell for the caustic anti-teacher, anti-tax rhetoric touted by Governor Christie in his battle with the teachers union. Christie couldn't legally break contracts that Governor Corzine negotiated with state labor unions, so he attempted to have local municipalities circumvent the collective bargaining process for him by taking local school board surpluses and cutting state school aid, forcing Middletown and other districts throughout the state to announce massive layoffs of teachers and support staff. All of which Governor Christie said could be avoided it teachers agreed to a one year wage freeze and contribute more to their health and pension benefits as a way to control property taxes.

Unfortunately the governor wasn't being honest with people in Middletown; Christie took $11M away from the school system. That type of funding cut could never have been made up with wage and benefit concessions from teachers alone. Layoffs, cuts to student services and a tax increase were going to be needed regardless of whether or not the Middletown teachers agreed to open and renegotiated their labor contract. By rejecting this budget there will be no significant impacted on the amount of property taxes that Middletown residents pay.

Finally, how will the rejection of the school budget affect the children of Middletown? That will ultimately depend on the Township Committee and how many additional cuts they chose to make to it.

Further cuts to the budget could mean that sports programs and extracurricular activities are eliminated, an increase to class size and maybe in a worst case scenario redistricting of the school system by closing 1 or more schools.

But before making further cuts to the budget the Township Committee should keep in mind that many students rely on extracurricular activities for college entry. Admissions officers at colleges look for "well-rounded student", who not only get excellent grades, but who also play sports, perform in the band, join clubs and/or work a job.

Rejection of the school budget does have consequences that a majority of voters may not have realized at the time of their vote. I hope that their short sightedness and temporary anger at the teachers for not accepting a wage freeze does not have an adverse affect on the kids of Middletown, who on the contrary to what Governor Christie said about the teacher throughout the state using them as pawns in their fight against him, it is in fact Christie who has used the students as pawns against the teachers union.

.

Middletown Vote “Yes” On The School Budget

Today’s the day; finally it’s time to vote on the school budget and chose those that we feel will represent the best interests of our children and community here in Middletown. I intend to vote in favor of the budget and for those that have shown that they really care about the future in which our kids are heading and I encourage all that read this blog to do likewise.

We will all vote to either approve or disapprove the school budget for our own reasons. I chose to vote “Yes” on the school budget because as a member of a community that values our children’s future it would be irresponsible for me to do otherwise.

Voting “No” today on the current Board of Education budget proposal will only lead to further cuts to the budget that has already been trimmed by $9.6 million. This budget has been cut to the bare bones, there is nothing left to cut without directly affecting the quality of our kids education.

Those that take Gov. Christie’s advice and vote against any school budget that does not include a teacher’s wage freeze and higher contributions to health care are naive to think that it would make a difference in Middletown.

Governor Christie took $11million dollars worth of state aid away from Middletown, a temporary wage freeze and a 1.5% contribution toward benefits by the teachers in no way would make up for that loss.

Christie is making teachers a scape-goat in his fight against unions and is trying to have local municipalities do for him what he wasn’t able to do on the state level, which is break already negotiated contracts with the unions to circumvent their collective bargaining agreements.

It’s a fight that Middletown students cannot afford to participate in; 124 individuals will be losing their jobs come June, 72 of which are teachers, larger class sizes and the loss of individual attention to students needs are looming.

The Asbury Park Press has an editorial today that asks to “Think before you cast your ballot today” it states:

”…voters should support budgets where districts have worked hard to economize and vote against those where not enough has been done to control costs.” And “…Some districts have worked hard to save taxpayer money all along and should not be punished for it now…” “…If your district made every effort to excise all the fat from the budget, this year and in the past, support it…”

This is the exact case in Middletown; the Board of Education has worked extremely hard over the years to control costs but regardless of those efforts Middletown students are being penalized for other districts excesses.

The editorial concludes with:

“…But bear in mind that a defeated budget will likely amount to little more than a protest vote. The better option may be to take it out on incumbent school board members, replacing them with more fiscally prudent candidates, and putting pressure on state lawmakers to approve reforms that will help contain the salaries and benefits of teachers and all public employees. “

I agree with the first sentence of the above quote, if the Middletown school budget is defeated it will amount to little more than a protest vote due to the fact that the Township Committee will then only make a token effort at spending cuts. But be aware, any more spending cuts to the budget could lead to more teachers being laid off and extracurricular activities being eliminated.

The second part of the quote in general I agree with, however in Middletown that is not the case.

The incumbents on the board of education over the years have done a fine job overseeing the education of our students and they are one of the reasons why Middletown had been voted one of the best places to live in the United States by Forbes Magazine a few years ago.

While I am not officially endorsing candidates for the Board of Education, I believe that you couldn’t vote wrong if you choose all three current members Pat Walsh, Dawn Diorio and Leonora Caminiti for new terms. They have worked extremely hard over the years to ensure our kids receive a quality education while keeping the tax rate one of the lowest in all of Monmouth County. They have continually seen to it that tax rate increases have remained below state mandated caps and have even done a better job at keeping rate increases lower than the Township Committee has done over the past 5 years.

If you decide to use your vote as a protest in order to vote against the budget or for unproven candidates that may have political agendas or ties to Middletown Republican Party and have never even attended a Board of Education meeting than you get what you deserve; a school board that will be crippled by undo political influences and essential services, like after school activities and sports being eliminated.

I don’t want that happening in Middletown, neither should you.

NJPP Monday Minute 4/19/10: Christie budget gets an "F" in higher education cuts

In preparation for yearly budget hearings, the Office of Legislative Services analyzes each state department and posts analyses online. Because the Christie administration was slow to provide budget details this year, OLS analyses are less comprehensive than in past years. The information available, however, details significant changes in the administration's proposed appropriations for higher education.

OLS' Higher Educational Services report estimates that resources available to students and institutions of higher education will be nearly 14 percent less than current year spending. Of the more than 30 detailed changes included in this analysis, only one represents an increased appropriation.

COLLEGE FUNDING
Because state funding to colleges and universities has decreased while operating costs increased, state support as a share of college budgets has declined precipitously - from an average across all of the colleges and universities of 48 percent in 1990 to less than 14 percent in the budget Gov. Christie has proposed for FY 2011. Cuts in institutional funding and caps on tuition and fees limit the number and scope of courses colleges can offer.


TUITION AND FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
The Christie administration proposes reductions in support to state colleges and universities, and funding cuts to all financial assistance programs but one.

On average, college tuitions in New Jersey are already among the highest in the nation. A survey for 2007-2008 by The College Board ranked New Jersey's $9,984 in-state average tuition and fees as second only to Vermont's $10,428.

As tuition and fees have grown, student assistance also has generally increased - until this year. Tuition Aid Grants (TAG) and the New Jersey Student Tuition Assistance Reward Scholarship I and II (NJSTARS) are the state's largest aid programs. TAG may see a cut of $10.9 million to $292.6 million in FY 2011. Currently, one in three full-time New Jersey college students receives a TAG grant. The budget estimates that TAG appropriations will support 63,735 students in academic year 2010-2011, 924 more than in 2009-2010. It will support more students, in part, because awards to students at private colleges would be much smaller due to a reduction in the maximum size of these awards.

The budget plans to increase the NJSTARS programs by $1.46 million to $20.1 million. This is the only increase identified in the OLS analysis. But while it is expected to support 2,100 students in college now (252 more than in 2009-2010), incoming freshman students to county colleges who do not already have a scholarship lined up are out of luck. No support will be available to them for the foreseeable future.

THOMAS EDISON STATE COLLEGE
Perhaps the most bizarre recommendation regarding higher education in the FY 2011 budget is the elimination of the $5.3 million appropriation to Trenton's Thomas Edison State College (TESC) and the recommendation that it (along with the state library and the state museum) be transferred to Rutgers University "as a new model for the revitalization of Trenton's cultural district." Presidents Pruitt at TESC and McCormick at Rutgers reportedly heard about this plan only shortly before the Governor's budget address.

The colleges have little in common and seem to have little to offer one another. TESC's instructional program is not provided through a traditional classroom but as distance learning through online courses. According to NJ Biz, TESC's 18,206 students make it the second largest institution of higher education in New Jersey (after Rutgers and just ahead of Montclair State University). Just under half of its students are active duty military personnel; the remainder are non-military and about 5,500 of them are New Jersey residents. Because TESC has no residential facilities and no campus-based classrooms, its costs are lower. Its $4,815 in-state and $6,840 out-of-state tuition and fees are respectively about 40 percent and 33 percent of those charged at Rutgers.

It is unclear how either institution would gain. Rutgers limits the number of credits that can be transferred from other institutions; TESC does not. Rutgers limits the number of credits that can be earned through testing, prior learning assessment or from military and/or corporate training; TESC does not. Rutgers has few programs tailored to adults and has limited experience with online education for adults; this is TESC's bread and butter. Rutgers operates on a traditional academic calendar; TESC begins a new semester each month, enabling students to begin when they are ready and finish when they complete their degree requirements.

Considering these differences, it is difficult to believe anyone thought about this much at all-particularly when it must happen by July 1 after less than four months of deliberation. In a budget as loaded with controversy and questionable decisions as this one, what really is the point here and who benefits?

FLUNKING OUT
A recent update of NJPP's 2006 report Flunking Out: New Jersey's Support for Higher Education Falls Short found that the budget cuts proposed by the Christie Administration will likely lead to tuition increases, a serious hardship as the state-and the nation-struggle with recession. The further erosion of state support will make it more difficult for the state's colleges and universities to maintain their current programs and will curtail growth. The longer the state waits to invest in these institutions, the more expensive it will be to do it.

Gov. Christie is well aware that New Jersey institutions of higher education are under-funded. His own transition team reported that, "...some [are] grossly under-funded, so more funding for operating support would be a positive thing, especially given NJ's bottom-of-the-nation ranking in funding changes for higher education over the last several years."

Education is vital for those entering the job market, for those in low-level jobs and for the unemployed. The higher tuition rates rise, the tougher it will be to get that education. The state's future and economic vitality is a function of the quality of its workforce. Without a quality workforce, New Jersey will limit its ability to participate in a high tech economy.

The state's decision makers need to consider strong support of New Jersey's universities as a vital and necessary investment in New Jersey's future and economy - this budget proposal does not take this long-range view.

Patrick Murray: Conflicting Polls on the Teachers' Union? Not Really.

Patrick Murray, who is the founding director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute and is a frequent media commentator on politics and public opinion, has posted on his blog an explanation for the seemingly conflicting poll results that were released last week dealing with Governor Christie's budget, school aid cuts and state unions. He points out that even though the three polls seem to tell conflicting storys. they don't. The separate polls "really tell separate pieces of a cohesive – but nuanced – story."

Here's what he has to say:

A trio of polls were released last week on Governor Chris Christie’s budget, particularly focusing on school aid cuts and state unions. According to at least one report, these polls were “seemingly at odds” with one another (also here). But if you look at what the three polls actually asked, they really tell separate pieces of a cohesive – but nuanced – story.

The Eagleton Poll (and here) found 57% of New Jerseyans feel that school aid should not be cut and 72% are opposed to “making it easier” to lay off teachers to solve local budget problems.

The Monmouth University/Gannett New Jersey Poll found 68% of the public see the cuts as being unfair to some groups (with teachers being among the top “victims”) and Governor Christie is seen as the more negative party in the NJEA dust-up, and ultimately more responsible for the impending teacher layoffs.

The Rasmussen Poll found 65% of likely voters favor having school employees (including teachers, administrators and other workers) take a one year wage freeze to help make up for the deficit in state funding.

I really don’t find anything too contradictory in those results. Public opinion is rarely black and white (as national polling about the health reform debate dramatically illustrates). The real difference in these three polls is that each chose to cover a different facet of the issue.

Both the Eagleton and Monmouth polls asked residents about their opinion of the governor’s proposed budget and how it will affect them personally.

Eagleton also asked quite a few questions about what areas of the budget should or should not be cut and what, if any, tax increases the public is willing to accept in order to avoid those cuts (none, apparently).

Monmouth’s survey included questions on impressions of Christie’s budget in comparison to Jon Corzine’s first budget (trends are a wonderful tool for providing context) and a focus on communication with the general public, including the NJEA battle and reaction to key terms used to describe the budget (e.g. “tough” and “fair”).

Rasmussen’s poll asked four questions, mainly focused on state worker concessions to deal with the budget crisis.

In terms of election polling, Rasmussen has a very good track record and, by my reckoning, had the most accurate final pre-election poll in last year’s gubernatorial race. [And admittedly, Monmouth, along with Zogby, YouGov, and Democracy Corp, came up with the wrong end of the stick in the final days of that campaign. Eagleton did not issue a final election poll.]...

You can read more >>> Here

All Candidates For Middeltown Board Of Education Urge Approval of School Budget At Friday's Forum And Other Observations

Friday morning I attended the Middletown Board of Education's Candidate Forum at Panera Bread in Middletown. This last of three forums was hosted by Stephanie Murray of the Middletown Mornings organization. When I got there Friday morning I didn't quiet know what to expect in the respect of turn out, but I was pleasantly surprised to see over thirty people in attendance.

Ms. Murray opened the forum by having each candidate take a minute and a half to introduce themselves and explain why they felt they should be elected to the BOE this year.

Six of the seven candidates were in attendance and in order of their opening remarks are:

Patricia Walsh
Dawn Diorio
Gerry Wexelberg
Michael Mascone
Vincent Brand
Leonora Caminiti

Chris Aveta, who is running on the same ticket as Mascone and Brand was not in attendance Friday morning.

I recorded the meeting in its entirety and was going to break it all down into individual questions and answers, but because I have been hit with some kind of "Bug" that attacked me late Friday night and have been in bed since, I have decided just to post the whole recording.

It runs for 46 minutes but seems to play faster than that. The meeting was fast paced and kept all of those there engaged.

For me the only real news that came out of the forum was that each candidate agreed that the this years school budget should be passed by voters on Tuesday. Failure to pass the budget would only mean more drastic cuts that would penalize students and teachers alike.




After the forum was over I mingled amongst the crowd and spoke to a few candidates. I had a very nice conversation with Mike Mascone and Vinnie Brand, both of whom were polite and cordial but who took exception with me for my earlier blog post that accused them and their running mate Chris Aveta of being lap dogs for Middletown Deputy Mayor Tony Fiore and the Middletown GOP.

Each profess that they had only met Fiore no more than three times and wouldn't even recognize him if the saw him in the street, which I took with a grain of salt put didn't pursue.

I told each of them that my problem wasn't with them as individuals but with the perceived endorsement of Fiore, who signed Brand's and Aveta's school board petitions.

Brand thought that it wasn't a problem and that Tony Fiore (or anyone else for that matter) should be able to openly endorse his candidacy if they so chose.

I disagreed with that statement and I let them know that for years the Middletown GOP has tried to gain influence over the Middletown BOE to varying degrees of success. And when they did gain control several years ago with their "Back To Basics" slate of candidates it was a disaster. The expansion and upgrades to Bayshore, Thorne and Thompson Middle Schools were over budget and wrought with problems, and contract negotiations ended when over 200 teachers were sent to jail.

In my opinion, there is no room for partisan politics on the school board and just having the Deputy Mayor's signature on both Brand's and Aveta's petitions is enough to raise doubts in my mind and others.

Fiore's signature on those petitions poison Brand's, Mascone's and Aveta's candidacy for the board of ed no matter how sincere Vinnie Brand's and Mike Mascone's insistence to me that they are there own men and that they would not be influenced in any way by Fiore or other members of the Middletown GOP.

With that being said, listen to the audio and make up your own mind, but most importantly vote "YES" for the budget and vote for the candidates that you think will be the best representative for your and your child's best interests on Tuesday April 20th

President Obama's Weekly Address: 4/17/10 Holding Wall Street Accountable

The strongest consumer protections ever. Bringing transparency to financial dealings. Closing loopholes to stop recklessness and irresponsibility. Holding Wall Street accountable and giving shareholders new power in the financial system. President Obama lays out what Wall Street Reform is about, and questions whether opposition from the Senate Republican Leader might have something to do with his recent meeting with Wall Street executives.

Saturday Morning Cartoons: Super Mario

Good Morning, it's time for a cartoon!

Former Assemblyman Joseph Azzolina led charge for Battleship New Jersey

From NJ.com -

MONMOUTH COUNTY -- Former Assemblyman Joseph Azzolina, a former Navy reserve captain who served 24 years in the legislature, relished his effort to bring New Jersey’s namesake battleship back home.

"He never got the salt out of his veins from serving in the Navy," said Assemblyman Sam Thompson (R-Middlesex), who spent eight years representing the same district as Azzolina.
Azzolina, 84, a longtime Republican lawmaker from Monmouth County, died Thursday night at St. Vincent’s Hospital in New York City from complications related to a December surgery for pancreatic cancer. His three sons were by his side.

"He was a great mentor to his family, friends and people that surrounded him," said his son, Joseph Azzolina, Jr.

Azzolina served in the occupation forces in Europe after World War II and in the Korean War. He remained in the naval reserve until the 1980s, when he served an eight month stint aboard the U.S.S. New Jersey. He later led the charge to refurbish the ship and bring to the Garden State. It sits as a museum in the Delaware River in Camden.

Azzolina, a Republican from Middletown, was first elected to the Assembly in 1965, where he served until moving up to the state Senate from 1972 to 1974. He returned to the Assembly from 1986 to 1988, and again from 1992 to 2006.

Azzolina was born in Newark and grew up in Highlands, over a candy store his parents owned. He opened a grocery store called the Food Basket with his father in 1950 and expanded it into Food Circus Supermarkets, a chain that today has 10 stores. He also owned the Courier, a weekly newspaper that covered the Bayshore area.

State Sen. Joe Kyrillos (R-Monmouth) said he first heard of Azzolina from his fourth grade teacher.

"Little did I know that I would go on to work in his supermarket as a teenager and to serve side by side with him in the Legislature," he said.

State Sen. Jennifer Beck (R-Monmouth), who was Azzolina’s chief of staff in the 1990s, said he donated hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of food from his supermarkets to local charities.

"To the chagrin maybe of some of his management, he never said no," she said. "At one point I asked him if he wanted to write a press release. He looked at me and said ‘No, I don’t do it for that reason.’"

Beck said Azzolina established the Sexual Assault Nurse Examiners Program, which treats sexual assault victim and trains nurses in the collection of forensic evidence.

Calling hours will be held Wednesday from 4-8 p.m. and Thursday from 2-8 p.m. at Saint Mary’s Mother of God Church in Middletown. The burial service is set for Friday at 10:30 a.m. at the church.

(picture Assemblyman Joseph Azzolina and son Joseph Jr.)

1926-2010 Bayshore Legend & Former NJ Statesman Joseph Azzolina Sr. Passes Away

It is with a heavy heart that I report the passing of a true NJ Statesman, Entrepreneur, philanthropist and Bayshore Legend Joseph Azzolina Sr.

"Big" Joe Azzolina served Middletown and the Norhtern Monmouth bayshore regione in both the NJ State Senate and Assembly serving in the New Jersey General Assembly from 1992-2006 where he represented the 13th legislative district. He also served in the Assembly from 1986-1988 and from 1966-1972. Azzolina also served in the upper house of the New Jersey Legislature, the New Jersey Senate, from 1972-1973.

Mr. Azzolina served in the United States Naval Reserve from 1944-1986, Captain (Retired).[1] As a reservist, he returned to active duty in 1983 for a tour of seven months – four of them off the coast of Lebanon – aboard the battleship USS New Jersey. He received three Meritorious Service Medals and two Navy Secretary Commendation Medals in addition to other combat awards and honors. As an Asemblyman, Azzolina led the effort to acquire the retired ship and have it docked in New Jersey waters where it has been transformed to a floating museum.

Joe Azzolina was also the founder and President of Food Circus Super Markets, which has many locations through out Monmouth and Ocean Counties.

Mr. Azzolina received a B.S. from Holy Cross College in (Naval Science) and attended the New York University Graduate School of Business where he earned his Masters Degree.

Joe will be missed greatly by all who know him.

I had the opportunity to meet him on several occasions and he was always a gentleman and was someone I grew to admire even though I really did not know him well. He always greeted me with a warm smile and a big hello whenever our paths crossed.

Joe Azzolina leaves behind his wife Lynn Azzolina and his six children sons Joe Jr.,Mark, Greg, John and daughters Mary Anne and Judith.

Mr. Azzolina was predeceased by another son Paul when the child was seven years old.

There is no news as of yet on funeral arrangements.

Happy Tax Day: Tax Day rhetoric aside, Americans' bills are lower

Happy Tax Day everyone,

 

Dispite what the Tea Partiers and others may want you to believe the tax burden on our fellow americans is not as high as we may all seem to think according to the following article posted at Yahoo Finance:

 

Yahoo Finance -

WASHINGTON (AP) -- You wouldn't know it by the Tax Day rhetoric, but Americans are paying lower taxes this year, even with increases passed by many states to balance their budgets. Don't expect it to last.

Congress cut individuals' federal taxes for this year by about $173 billion shortly after President Barack Obama took office, dwarfing the $28.6 billion in increases by states.

In the next few years, however, many can expect to pay more. Some future increases were enacted as part of Obama's health care overhaul. And former President George W. Bush's tax cuts expire in January. Obama and the Democrats want to renew only some of them, thus raising taxes for individuals making more than $200,000 and couples making more than $250,000.

As this year's April 15 federal deadline passes, the debate about future tax increases has Republicans in Congress and conservatives across the country portraying Democrats as tax-and-spend liberals even before any new levies are approved. The discussion also is helping frame the congressional elections this fall.

"The fact is in the past year we have had more tax cuts than almost anytime in our nation's history," said Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn. "It's something that people don't realize because of the false rhetoric that is spread throughout this Congress."

Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, said conservatives didn't see any need to wait before protesting.

"I thought that we were going to have to wait until the tax increases started to see popular unhappiness," Norquist said at a Capitol Hill forum Wednesday. "Last year, people started reacting, the tea parties started organizing, in reaction to spending too much. They didn't wait for the tax increases to come."

The massive economic recovery package enacted last year included about $300 billion in tax cuts over 10 years. About $232 billion was in cuts for individuals, nearly all in the first two years.

The most generous was Obama's Making Work Pay credit, which gives individuals up to $400 and couples up to $800 for 2009 and 2010. The $1,000 child tax credit was expanded to more families, and the working poor can qualify for as much as $5,657 from the Earned Income Tax Credit.

There were also credits for qualified families who buy new homes or make energy improvements to existing ones, as well as tax breaks to help pay college tuition or buy new cars.

"From investing in small business to buying a home or making it energy efficient, to sending your children to college to buying a car, these tax cuts are helping families and businesses across the country," said Rep. Russ Carnahan, D-Mo.

At the same time, many states raised taxes last year because they are required by state constitutions to balance their budgets, even during a recession. In all, states increased personal income taxes by $11.4 billion, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. They increased sales taxes by $7.2 billion and business taxes by $2 billion.

States also increased a number of other taxes, including levies on alcohol, motor vehicles and tobacco, for an additional $8 billion.

The biggest tax increase in the health care overhaul is limited to individuals making more than $200,000 and couples making more than $250,000, though other increases would hit lower income taxpayers.

For the first time, the Medicare payroll tax would be applied to investment income, beginning in 2013. A new 3.8 percent tax would be imposed on interest, dividends, capital gains and other investment income for individuals making more than $200,000 a year and couples making more than $250,000.

The bill also would increase the Medicare payroll tax by 0.9 percentage point to 2.35 percent on wages above $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for married couples filing jointly.

"We know the tax man cometh, and over the next few years, boy, will he be coming with a vengeance," said Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah.

Here's An FYI On That Call For Change On The Middletown Board Of Ed.

Below is the text of another email that is circulating around that was written by Middletown resident Kathy Noah. This email is a direct counter to the anonymous letter posted by someone calling themselves " Jersey Strong" that was making the email circuit tour and was posted on another out of town, local blog that has been known for its right-wing views:

Yikes! People like this scare me!

I did a little checking into this group/person. The word around town is that the 3 guys running are fairly well tied to some of the people on the Middletown Town Council. I don't have a big problem with that, except I hear that the Town Council is looking to have more say over the Board of Ed. I don't think people should be voting in less qualified people just so it will make life easier for the Town Council. I think we should be voting on the best qualified person for the job. I guess using the word "job" is not right considering it is not a paid position.

This person/group who wrote this seems to think that the Middletown Board of Ed should be breaking the union. This is a very big fight, and it would need to be addressed at the state level. When the contract with the teachers was negotiated it was considered to be fair and comparable with other local teacher's union contract. The BOE did request that the teachers consider taking a pay freeze, the the local union leadership did not allow the teachers to take that vote. The union does have the right to work out their contract as written. I do think you will see some changes in the upcoming contract negotiations.

The idea that "you don't like how life is, so let's bring in all new people" is just crazy. The fact that our Real Estate taxes are tied to the quality of the education that our children receive is another broken system. This is not something that the BOE or the Town Council can fix. It must be dealt with in Trenton. We need people who are smart and dedicated, and they must have the children's needs at heart. I think the people on the BOE work very hard to do that. I question the dedication of some of the gentleman this person is recommending. Mascone did not show to the 1st Candidate Forum, nor did he even have the courtesy to respond that he would not be attending. Brand also did not attend the forum, but he sent a very long statement that did not really say much. Hard to know what you are really getting with them.

They also seem very concerned with the number of Administrators that the district has. They do plan to cut 7 (15%) with the proposed budget! These people have big job descriptions including curriculum, state testing, staff oversight & evaluations, student discipline, security, oversight of sports & clubs, etc. I am sure years ago you expected 1 vice principle to handle all the discipline for 1,500 students, and security was not a big issue. Times have changed. In a corporation of 1,500 employees, 10,000 daily guests/students and 17 buildings how many managers and Vice-Presidents would you expect to have?

One of the only things I do agree with them on is nobody wants their taxes going up. Unfortunately, New Jersey is in a fiscal crisis, and Governor Christie has forced large cuts everywhere. He decreased state aid to our school alone by 34%, and some schools lost all state funding. We all pay a lot of income tax to the State of NJ, so I personally have a hard time understanding how this is fair. Considering these drastic cuts the Board of Ed did their best to come up with the proposed budget.

Voting down the school budget on April 20th will still mean Middletown will lose 72.5 teachers positions, 7 Administrators, 20 Para professionals, etc.

If this budget fails, these cuts will still happen and even more will be cut. That means more teacher cuts and larger class sizes. Most likely all Middle School sports and clubs will be eliminated. Maybe the Freshman teams will be lost too. To stay on a sport you cannot miss too many days of school & you must keep your grades up. Not all kids are the perfect academic student by nature. We need ways to keep them interested in going to school and learning.

APRIL 20th VOTE YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
4 PM - 9 PM

I will make up my own mind about the budget.

I was forwarded the following letter last night by someone who wished not to be identified. The person took acception to Governor Christie's recent statement that urged voters to turn down their local school budget if teachers in their towns refused to take a wage freeze .

I agree with the letter writer and the comments that this person added at the bottom of it from a few who responded to the story that was posted on NJ.com about the governor's comments.

I think the governor's comments were both reckless and callous. If voters turn down school budgets across the state next week it will result in more teachers being let go and sports programs and after school activities being cut or eliminated, which would be a real shame due to the fact that many students need of those types of programs for possible scholarships opportunities and to bulk up their college transcripts in order to get into their preferred college of choice.

Here's the letter:

Imagine telling your grown kids, heck, your parents how to vote. I don’t know about you but it would go over like a lead balloon in many New Jersey households. I believe one of the basic tenets of the constitution is the right to make a free and unfettered choice on how to vote on Election Day. Chris Christie must have missed that day in civics class.

I would never have believed this headline if I had not read it for myself.

“Gov. Chris Christie urges voters to reject school districts' budgets without wage freezes for teachers” NJ.com

First of all, you have to wonder what the real reason is behind this declaration. Is it that Christie is nervous about the tax increases that have accompanied those proposed budgets? The ones that were caused by “The self-proclaimed “conservative” Republican is cutting suburban property tax relief by amounts unimaginable even under the liberal Democrat he defeated” to quote Paul Mulshine.

Those tax increases scare him and that does not even take into account what will happen the following school year when districts have no tax relief to offer their residents. He may be at war with the NJEA but his GOP legislators are the ones who have to hang their hats and their necks on the line for this budget, especially next year when they run for election. From what I hear the legislative kitchen is getting pretty hot these days.

Then you have to wonder why the Governor doesn’t lead by example. Let him take a pay cut and contribute 1.5% of his salary to his health insurance. Well he hasn’t even offered. Neither have all those legislators in Trenton who should know better.

They can’t even get the stories straight in Trenton, because today at a Senate budget hearing , Department of Education Commissioner Bret Schundler said he would not recommend voters reject those budgets when they go to the polls on April 20. Schools are dealing with a nearly $820 million cut in funding while facing increasing salary and benefits costs. He tried to reinterpret what the Governor said to make it sound more palatable. I’m sorry, I like many other voters choked on the Governor’s very clear words.

If you check out the latest Monmouth University/Gannett poll it makes it very clear.

The governor is more likely to be blamed by registered voters for impending teacher layoffs statewide than either the teachers unions or local school boards, according to the results of a Monmouth University/Gannett New Jersey poll.

Fully 44 percent cite Christie as the party responsible for school districts reducing work forces in order to balance budgets for the next school year, while 28 percent blame the unions and 17 percent the school boards, according to poll results.

"It's Goliath versus Goliath," said Patrick Murray, director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute in West Long Branch. "But the governor's bluster in taking on the teachers union has backfired."

It goes on to say,

When asked specifically about the governor’s proposed cuts in state aid to towns and school districts, more than half (52%) feel those cuts are unfair in comparison to cuts made in other areas of the budget. Only 28% say these cuts in local aid are fair.

“The local aid reduction, particularly to schools, was always going to be the flashpoint for criticism of the plan, and the governor’s clash with the NJEA only increased the heat. If part of his strategy was to win over public opinion, it hasn’t been an overwhelming success,” said Murray.

I don’t even need a poll to tell me that. I found some particularly enlightening words on Bluejersey.com.

I think it's fair to say the students are being held hostage in the disputes between the Governor, the school boards, and the unions. In that complex multi-sided hostage standoff, Christie just asked the bystanders to shoot the hostages. We already have voters who routinely reject school budgets because they resent paying taxes for the public school system that has been benefiting our society for generations. To recklessly ask them to reject budgets wholesale is in my opinion a shocking tactic, especially when rejecting a budget will not release school districts from the contract their leadership willingly signed. Rejecting the budget won't hurt most teachers directly.

I say let people judge each budget on its own merits. Let’s not let anyone dictate to us how we should vote. In Middletown, the budget has been cut by a staggering amount ($9,608,000) and is already putting 124 district personnel on the street in July. Those people and many others will be joining the ranks of the unemployed who will require unemployment benefits from our deleted funds. They may find more residents going into foreclosure and selling homes, dampening a poor housing market.

The one thing I can promise is that if budget are voted down your kids will be the ones that are hurt.

Just listen to some fellow residents posting on NJ.com

Posted by lakeline
April 12, 2010, 3:14PM
I'm not a teacher, but I have two kids in school and I wish the Governor would stop hurting their education. Since he has failed to sway the Teacher's Union himself, he's pushing us to do it for him. Every failed budget reduces a kids education in multiple ways. Sure, negotiate with your teachers for reasonable compromises, but Vote Yes for your budget. We don't all have the Governor's money to send our kids to Private School

Posted by netspider
April 12, 2010, 2:44PM
Gov. Christie you have crossed the line with this statement. Shame on You. How can you ethically make a comment on how anyone should vote.

Posted by kadtom
April 12, 2010, 2:31PM

Are you kidding Me? The governor is now trying to dictate what the public people should do?? I can't believe I voted for a dictator who's children don't even attend public schools? I moved to Chatham for the good schools. Good schools and location are why my property values are highly appraised. If I want to vote yes I will! Don't dictate to the people who elected you governor! You lost my vote, that’s for sure.

Site for Monmouth Poll: http://www.monmouth.edu/polling/admin/polls/MUP33_1.pdf

It's Your Town Newsletter Volumn 2, Issue 7 For 4/05/10

The latest edition of It's Your Town Newsletter is now availible for your reading pleasure.

This newsletter details the event and happenings at the April 5,2010 Middletown Township Comittee Workshop Meeting.

It reports on the discussions pertaining to the review of current boards and commissions, presentation of resolutions and ordinances and public comments about flooding, retirement of bonds,the strategic planning commission and the West Front Street turf project.

The newsletter should be required reading for anyone interested in knowing what goes on during Township meetings. Since the inception of the newsletters, those that read it can compare what it contains to the official meeting minutes that are eventually posted on the Township's website.

Often readers see a stark contrast between the information reported by the newsletter and what is considered by the Township as official information.

If you would like to subscribe to the newsletter and have it sent to your email, you can be placed on a mailing list by send your request to itsourtown@yahoo.com

NJPP Monday Minute 4/12/10: Budget Cuts Hurt School Kids

The Monday Minutes for the next weeks will focus on spending issues in the FY 2011 budget. They will address proposals that affect different populations in New Jersey: school children, college students, working families, seniors, among others. It is not possible to analyze everything so the proposals selected will address small but important programs that have a particularly large impact on certain populations.

While New Jersey continues to struggle with the effects of the recession, Governor Christie's budget eliminates $15.9 million in state funding for three important programs that help working families, their children and the schools they attend. If the Legislature includes these cuts in its final budget, many children will lose important, life sustaining benefits that help them from the time they eat breakfast in the morning until they go home at night.

The Governor's proposed budget:

Eliminates all State funding for the school breakfast program: $3.0 million
Cuts State funding for the school lunch program: $2.4 million
Eliminates State funding for the New Jersey After 3 program: $10.5 million
School Breakfast and Lunch Programs

The Christie administration proposes to cut $5.4 million from school breakfast and lunch programs in the coming year. Luckily the federal government provides important (but not sufficient) funds so these vital programs will continue but at a reduced level.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) reimburses schools between 24 cents and $2.70 for the cost of meals they provide to children depending on the meal and the family's income. A child in a family of four earning less than $27,560 is entitled to a free breakfast and lunch at school. The school is reimbursed between $2.50 and $2.70 by the federal government for that lunch. As family income rises, the school receives a smaller reimbursement. But even for children who pay the full price, the school receives between 24 cents and 33 cents per meal from USDA.

Cutting the state subsidy for meals provided by school districts will likely raise the meal prices charged to kids, reduce the quality of meals served or create a deficit in the food service program. If food services are provided by a private company and the costs of meals are fixed by contract, fewer children will probably be fed.

Access has been a problem in the school breakfast program. Although state law mandates that school districts with a 20 percent participation in the free and reduced price school lunch program must also participate in the school breakfast program, New Jersey ranked among the bottom ten states for school breakfast program participation in the 2008-2009 school year, according to the Food Research and Action Center. Only 38 out of every 100 students in New Jersey's school lunch program also participated in the school breakfast program.

Expanding the school breakfast program in the past has been a priority. The Association for Children of New Jersey expects these budget cuts will curtail efforts to expand the program. Obstacles to feeding more children breakfast include the cost to the school of having adequate adult supervision for the students before they begin class and preparing the meals. A $3 million cut to the school breakfast program reduces state reimbursement to schools by 10 cents per breakfast served. Losing this revenue will particularly hurt school districts with successful school breakfast programs, such as schools in Newark which offer universal school breakfast and serve as a national model.

NEW JERSEY AFTER 3

Most working parents don't finish work before 3 pm. Studies show that high quality after-school programs expand student learning time and keep kids safe.

Founded in 2004, New Jersey After 3 is a public/private partnership that works with local nonprofit agencies who collectively operate 115 programs-in local Ys, Boys and Girls Clubs, Jewish Family Services, and other organizations-that provide safe high quality affordable after school programs in 29 towns to approximately 12,000 students.

The Christie administration proposes eliminating the entire $10.5 million appropriation for the program in FY 2011. Since its inception, this program has raised approximately $45 million in non-state financial support. Among its lead investors are PSE&G, Bank of America, Americorps, Capital One Bank, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Novartis, Victoria Foundation, Verizon, JPMorganChase, PNC Bank, Sanofi Aventis, State Farm Insurance, the US Golf Association, the US Tennis Association and the Trenton Public Schools. With no state funding, it will fall on these lead investors to make up the state's investment in these programs. Failing that, programs will close and/or after school child care costs will be unsustainable for many working parents.

Governor Christie's mid-year budget cuts in February eliminated half of New Jersey After 3's funding, leaving working parents with the dilemma of putting their children in more expensive programs or risk losing their jobs when they leave work early to pick up their kids from school. One mother from Vernon, New Jersey told the Star-Ledger that the New Jersey After 3 program at her local school gave her daughter high-quality care right on school grounds for $900 less per month then she was paying a private center. "I know they're safe, they're fed, they're cared for." This was important given that she and her husband each work an hour away from Vernon.

When Governor Christie proposed his budget he spoke of shared sacrifice, but corporations and the wealthiest New Jerseyans are not being asked to pay more. Rather, New Jersey's children, their parents and the teachers and support staff who work with them are asked to sacrifice tremendously. Cuts to programs that hurt kids and put their parents' and teachers' jobs at risk in a shaky economy - that's too much sacrifice.

Rush Holt on health care vote: Decision made after weighing all the arguments

Congressman Rush Holt has an excellent opinion piece in the Asbury Park Press today explaining his decision to support health care reform. He writes about those throughout the 12th congressional district who have written to or have spoken to him about their needs and concerns over this issue. And he is convinced that the reform that he supported and that was signed into law by President Obama will have a lasting positive inpact on his constituants.


"Listen to me" the placard read, held by the demonstrator. As Congress prepared to vote on the health reform legislation, I heard from passionate supporters for reform and against reform. The most passionate advocates argued that if I had listened to them, I would vote exactly the way they wanted me to. In fact, I did listen to them and lots of others.

Throughout the debate over health insurance reform, I talked with patients, seniors, doctors, nurses, small business owners and others to learn their perspectives. I heard from those unsure about the health care bill, but certain that the current system isn't working for them. I value and understand the concerns raised during this debate.

For me, the debate about health insurance reform always has been about the families who struggle to secure and afford the coverage they need. It's about patients with diabetes or cancer who can't even obtain insurance. It's about the small business owners who face rising costs paying for employees' health insurance costs. It's about seniors who can't pay for their prescription drugs. It's about the woman who explained that her father died because he did not have access to good health care. It's about the hard-working, upstanding family forced to declare bankruptcy because their insurance company cancelled their coverage when their daughter's illness became expensive.

When I voted for the health care package, I did so on behalf of the many thousands of New Jersey residents who desperately need greater control over their health care. My vote was for a constituent from Marlboro, who wrote me about his daughter-in-law who was diagnosed with breast cancer. While she has good coverage now, he believes she will have to stop working when she undergoes her cancer treatments, causing her to lose her insurance.

Because of reform, she can continue to have health coverage if she has to change jobs. She will be able to purchase coverage at group rates through a new insurance marketplace and have help with her insurance premiums to make sure they are affordable. She will not have to worry about being discriminated against because she has breast cancer. In fact, no one in the U.S. will ever be discriminated against because they have a preexisting condition, which can include diabetes, epilepsy or even pregnancy.

Read more >>> Here

Saturday Morning Cartoons: Casey At The Bat

It's time to "Play Ball", so finish up those bowls of cereal and lets play two !!

President Obama's Weekly Address: 4/10/10 Relief for the Middle Class at Tax Time

As April 15th approaches, the President discusses several of the tax breaks for middle class families he has signed into law. Find out more about the Making Work Pay tax credit, breaks for first-time homebuyers, rewards for making your home more energy efficient and more through our Tax Savings Tool.