• Belmont has spent around $1m of its own $$$ to fund the redesign of Trapelo Road. Trapelo Road redesign is very highly rated road project state-wide. Transport planners think we’re awesome! Woot.
• Massachusetts already spends close to $.50 of every $1 on health care costs with 1 in 5 residents in the State on Medicaid. (Did I hear that right?)
• Federal funds are up in the air for next year, including healthcare reimbursements from the Feds and money for transportation.
• Municipal plan design reform: allowing the mayor or selectmen of the municipality to change a municipality’s health cae plan design or enter the Group Insurance Commission (GIC) without entering into collective bargaining. Will backs it – doesn’t think it will be a raw deal for municipal unions.
• Funding education, police, fire. “Issues of regionalization” will become more urgent in the coming years. Agreed on that. Go to willbrownsberger.com for more information!

UPDATE: We’re now hearing a report out from the Ad hoc Subcommittee on Town Meeting Communications. Bullet points:

• There’s an inconsistent level of detail about issues.
• TM members don’t really have enough time to consider issues up for discussion.
• Its not easy to address complex issues that can’t be addressed in one sitting

There are a bunch of suggestions:

1. Open and close Warrant in January instead of March
2. Star Annual Town Meeting in May so as not to conflict with school vacation.
3. Encourage precinct caucuses
4. Institutionalize separate budget and non-budget Warrant briefings
5. Schedule annual Community Forum to address vision issues.
6. Increase the use of electronic communications with Town Meeting members – e-mail and Website to include background information on Warrant articles.
7. Create Moderator appointed standing committee to improve information for Town Meeting members (print materials, electronic, etc. A resource for TM members).
8. Identify and clarify process on how TM can obtain more information on a topic and keep that topic alive so that TM members have all the information they need to make a proper decision.
9. Implement a TM member orientation handbook. Revise and distribute it to TM members.
10. Organize a TM Member Association to handle things outside of TM.

There’s a written report (I’ll try to post it on B2). Thanks TM Communications Subcommittee!! Great work.

UPDATE: Articles 14 and 15: Ralph Jones is explaining why we should agree to take 0% interest loans from MWRA for sewer and storm drain line improvements in town. Just smiles on this one. Both motions are approved unanimously. Thanks, MWRA. I think your tap water tastes yummy!

UPDATE: We’re now on to the next item: Article 11 – revised motion authorizing expenditure from the town’s Revolving Fund. Ralph Jones, Chairman of the Board of Selectmen, is now explaining some last minute changes to this – $300,000 for the town’s Ambulance service will come out of the Capital Budget. Filing fees for Wetlands Protection – these fund administration and enforcement of the Wetlands Protection Act. This is confusing. I guess we don’t need to vote on this because its required by State law and there’s a separate fund to hold these accounts – this shouldn’t be part of the Town’s revolving account.

UPDATE: Article 6 – Appropriating $22,500 to provide non-contributory pensions for eligible employees of Town Depts…this concerns a single Town employee. Its approved unanimously.

UPDATE: Article 7: Appropriate $5.04m to provide contributory pensions and expenses in connection with Chapter 32 of MGL…Barbara Hagg, Town Accountant is speaking. The town’s pension is around 52% funded. Mark P. of BOS is saying it will be fully funded by 2028. Question from the floor: given that we’re behind – what did we pay in the past and what do we project we’ll pay over the next 10 years, given that our pension obligations won’t be fully funded. Barbara said she doesn’t have a 2010 actuarial study on this question. The amount we’ll have to shell out will increase 4.5% year on year, and we do new actuarial studies every couple years to see if our numbers are getting off course. This could be a big hit to town budgets in years to come, but there’s no way to know for sure. Its put to a vote and passes unanimously.

UPDATE: Angelo Firenze of BOS is introducing Article 8 – asking for approval of $532,410 for the repair, improvement and construction of highways within the Town. It is put a vote without any question and passes unanimously.

UPDATE: Ralph Jones of BOS introduces Article 5 appropriating funds to pay elected officials. Only two of these folks: the Town Clerk and Town Treasurer make any real money – $72,499 for the clerk and $89,145 for the Treasurer. The total assessment here is $185,586. There’s some interest here, as there’s a proposed amendment from the Warrant Committee to knock the Clerk’s salary down from $72k to $62k. BOS recommends approval of this. Ouch! Now Liz Allison, Chair of WC is speaking. TM allocated $60,000 last year. The 62,000 is a 4% increase. The Warrant is requesting a 20% increase and WC is calling bulls**t on that, it appears. Roy Epstein of WC is now addressing TM…Long and short is that average salary across similarly sized towns for Town Clerk is $60k. Also: TC gets a $2,500 stipend for sitting on the election board. Mass Municipal Association data also suggests a salary figure in the low $60k figure. Town Clerks Association data – which also tracks years on the job and total compensation (i.e. stipends). WC says when you correlate by size of town and years of service (in Belmont’s case: 2 years), the number is $65,000. Hmmm….doesn’t look good for Ellen!

Don Mercier is up to ask how big the Town Clerk staff at comparable towns. Good question!! Roy says they only considered full time clerks. Comparability of the office – Roy called around to different towns to ask about similarity of the job and seems satisfied that this is an apples:apples comparison in terms of job description and staffing. The discussion quickly gets heated, as defenders of our Town Clerk challenge the effort to knock down the salary level. Folks against this are saying 1) Ellen’s doing a great job (hard to argue), 2) Its a tough job – fair day’s work for a fair day’s pay 3) $72k is a living wage – this whole discussion is unseemly and not the way to do this, even though we can. I think folks like the idea of controlling salary growth, but singling out the two positions that TM actually controls isn’t going to accomplish that and the WC isjust  looking small and mean here. You’re a small, mean committee, Warrant Committee!! Mark P of the BOS is saying that the BOS is pursuing a top-down salary review of non-elected employees. Question: Town Clerk and Treasurer: how does oversight of those positions compare to non-elected town employees.

UPDATE: Oh G-d, this is such a flog. The motion passes by a narrow margin. I voted against it – Clerk should be appointed, not elected, same with the Treasurer. WC is trying to make a “point” here with this $10k salary increase – thereby missing the large “point” altogether.

UPDATE: Article 12: $150,000 transferred from the sale of cemetery plots. Passes unanimously. RIP.

UPDATE: Article 10: These are big $$ transfers from Sewer and Stormwater Enterpise Fund for water and sewer functions. These are fully funded from water and sewer rates – $5m and $7m. These are self sustaining funds, paid for by fees.  Both items pass unanimously.

UPDATE: Article 9: (Last one of the evening): Sum of $2m appropriated for public safety, public works, maintenance, etc. This is a dog’s dinner of different items – a boiler at BHS. Snow plow replacements, sidewalks and pavement management, networking equipment for the BPD, etc. etc. Site improvements: tennis court resealing. Hopefully we don’t go down a rabbit hole on this one.

“This remarkable new film shines a light on the price our kids pay for this “race to nowhere.” Cheating is commonplace, stress-related illness, depression and burnout are rampant, and ironically, young people arrive at college and the workplace unprepared and uninspired. Featuring the heartbreaking stories of young people who have been pushed to the brink and educators who are burned out and worried that students arenʼt developing the skills needed for the global economy, RACE TO NOWHERE points to the silent epidemic running rampant in our schools.”

The film screens in Belmont on May 5

Read more details about the event below.

+++++++++++

The Belmont PTA/PTO’s are proud to present a special screening of the critically acclaimed documentary film:

RACE TO NOWHERE

(Directed by Vicki Abeles)

Thursday, May 5th at 7:00pm at Belmont Studio Cinema

Film will be followed by a discussion with author Alfie Kohn and student success expert Cal Newport.

Tickets are available for $10 online at http://rtnbelmontstudiocinemas55.eventbrite.com/
Or $15 at the door.

Half the price of each ticket sold will be donated to Belmont’s Public Schools.PTO/PTA’s.

Event Information:

There has been a groundswell of interest in this film across the country. 800 people attended the screening at Belmont High School and a recent screening at the Belmont Studio Cinema sold out.  This special one-night event hosted by all the Belmont PTA/PTO’s is a fundraiser for our schools, which are facing dire budget cuts.   The evening includes a post-screening discussion led by noted local authors Alfie Kohn and Cal Newport.  Alfie Kohn is the author of twelve books, including NO GRADES + NO HOMEWORK =BETTER LEARNING.

Cal Newport created Study Hacks, the Internet’s most visited student advice blog and is the author of three books of student advice. His latest, HOW TO BE A HIGH SCHOOL SUPERSTAR, argues that it’s possible to do well in the college process without becoming overloaded or over-stressed.
Film Synopsis:

A concerned mother turned filmmaker aims her camera at the high-stakes, high-pressure culture that has invaded our schools and our children’s lives.  Race to Nowhere points to the silent epidemic in our schools: cheating has become commonplace; students are disengaged; stress-related illness and depression are rampant; and many young people arrive at college and the workplace unprepared and uninspired. Race to Nowhere is a call to action for families, educators, and policy makers to challenge current assumptions on how to best prepare the youth of America to become healthy, bright, contributing and leading citizens.

For questions about the May 5th Belmont event, contact Benita Gold at benita@benitagoldpr.com or Argelis Roman at roman.argelis@gmail.com.

We hope to see you on May 5th!  This is a great way to come together to support our schools and to join in the national dialogue on student stress and wellbeing.

At stake is a more than $2 million gap between what the Town’s Warrant Committee has identified as “available revenue” for the schools and what the School Department has identified as its “mission critical” budget – in other words: a budget that represents the barest needs of the district if its to fulfill its stated educational mission.

As often happens in Belmont, the anger or misunderstanding about the School Department’s first try at a level service budget (which it now calls its “mission critical” budget) has put a bee in the bonnet of the town’s political class and become the focus of attention, rather than what matters: the really severe cuts to services that we all use and the likely increase in use and family fees that will accompany a failure to address Belmont’s budget gap.

As at last week’s meeting, the members of the Board of Selectmen this evening are likely to push back – asking whether the town and schools have done all they could to realize savings and questioning whether an override this years is the right thing for the town. They did so last week, with all three raising questions about the size and timing of an override.

What’s confusing to me is that, in the case of two Selectmen: Ralph Jones and Mark Paolillo, their position on the override is 180 degrees of what it was just last June when both (to their credit) stood up and took forceful political stands in favor of an override.

To underscore that, I’m posting links to some video testimonials that both made at the Belmont Town day last June ahead of the June 14 special vote for an override. I think both men speak eloquently for the need for an override. In his testimonial, Mark talks about the dire cuts to school and town services and on the urgent need for increased revenue, as well as an increased focus on cost savings.

“The revenues we expect without the override are insufficient to provide the services that we think the citizens of Belmont want…The basic question is ‘what level of services do the citizens of Belmont want and need, and how do we pay for those services,” Ralph says.

Mark similarly notes his belief that periodic overrides and other revenue infusions are unavoidable. The $3.5 million operating deficit “will result in significant cuts in town and school services. The (then) $2 million override is vital to avoid those cuts and for “long overdue capital projects,” as well as structural reforms that are meaningful and long term.

The question for those of you who are planning to attend tonight’s meeting, of course,will be “what has changed?”  If anything, between last spring and this fall the town’s operating deficit has only expanded, while federal stimulus funds that have floated us for the last two fiscal years are all but depleted. Given that, why is Belmont suddenly unworthy of an override whereas it was deserving, in the minds of both Ralph and Mark, in June? What money has the town wasted or what fat has been injected into our town and school operations that wasn’t there 9 months ago?

In fact, the only thing that has changed between now and then (besides the increasing volume of red ink) is that  the override campaign by One Belmont (of which I was a part) fell short by a couple hundred votes. Surely no “mandate,” and the throngs of folks who attended last week’s BOS meeting and have been e-mailing suggest that there’s considerable debate over Ralph’s question of whether Belmont really does want to be a town that settles for less a leaner, but also meaner version of what we have now.

And, if the reasoning is ‘I’m not for the override now because the last campaign for an override failed,’ then what they’re saying is that  their’s is merely a political stand with the “no” crowd versus a considered position that looks at the needs and interests of the whole town. In the meeting last week, both seemed concerned about the failure of the June “OneBelmont” effort. Mark noted that

“Last year’s override – and I supported it, I proposed it –  was a balanced approach to tax revenues – unfortunately it failed. It was $1 million for the schools, $600k for capital, and $400k for the town. But it failed. It was balanced, but it failed. It’s tricky. It’s tactically tricky, and getting the support. Many of us here are willing to pay more, I am, but there are many in town who cannot. We’re still in recovery mode. We have to take that into account – there are residents in this town who simply cannot afford a tax increase. There are families who we all know where one or both spouses are out of work and struggling to make ends meet but they want to stay in town. So we’re taking all of that into consideration.”

That’s well and good – but its not like the conditions in town have deteriorated any since last June. It’s not like we’re a mill town and the mill just closed. I don’t know what the unemployment rate is in Belmont or if its higher or lower than six months ago, but I’m willing to bet that its not appreciably different, and may even be better, given that the Massachusetts economy is faring better.

Ralph, also, said that “My reservation, is tactically, can we pass $3million. That’s all.”

I appreciate both Mark and Ralph’s support last year for OneBelmont, and hope to find them pushing for an override next year, but as I see it right now, both are being politicians, not leaders when it comes to the override question: dangling the possibility of “found money” which – even if it exists – will just be another one year band aid that will bring back the same divisions and arguments next year, and pushing to delay the question for a special election at the end of the year – at additional cost to the town.

As they said last June: the time is now – Belmont needs an override and it needs it now.

After watching a video presentation from Superintendent Entwistle’s budget presentation last week.  Janice Darias reviewed the key points of the Administration’s budget and said, in essence, what our Superintendent has been saying for weeks now: the available funds suggested by the Warrant Committee won’t cover the operations cost of the Belmont Public Schools and will necessitate deep cuts: teacher layoffs at the elementary and middle school level, the loss of music and art education,  the loss of curriculum director positions, the elimination of language instruction at the middle school and language electives at Belmont High. The cuts will be deep enough that, as long threatened, BPS will have to revise (read “dumb down”) graduation requirements to accommodate the cuts.

That was followed by some comments from Selectman Ralph Jones (who is running for re-election this year), and that’s where things got interesting.

Let me say, that I like Ralph Jones a lot and think his heart is truly in the right place. He’s been a moderate, fiscally conservative member of BOS. It was Ralph who asked me to research the parking meter question and I think he’s got his brain fully engaged – he’s detail oriented and he’s honestly interested in putting the Town’s accounts in balance. But Ralph’s now running for re-election and he didn’t distinguish himself  last night – addressing an audience of parents who were just told that their kids would be losing music, art and – for the most part -physical education next year by charging, in essence, that the School Administration and School Committee were lying to them, hiding money, and favoring grown ups (i.e school employees) over kids. Nasty!

Let’s unpack this a bit. Ralph’s argument, if I understand it, is that the Administration hasn’t truly presented a level service budget to the Warrant Committee, because the budget they did present didn’t assume that the various unions it must negotiate with would agree to a salary and step freeze for FY2012.

Instead, the administration budgeted for a contractual step increase as part of its Level Services budget – basically budgeting for contractual pay increases, rather than a pay freeze for FY2012. My understanding is that the total of those increases may be between $700,000 and $800,000. Now, its possible that the School Committee will succeed in winning a step and cost of living freeze for next year and be able to reduce its FY 2012 budget by that amount – I’ve heard encouraging chatter to this effect. But its not a foregone conclusion that the teachers will agree to such a freeze, and the schools aren’t banking on it at this point.

That’s, of course, prudent. And the School Department might have broken out “with step” versus “no step” in its Level Service numbers. Banking on a raise is a point worth taking up, for sure, and if I were the School Department or a teacher, I wouldn’t.

But that’s not what Ralph was saying. And what he was saying didn’t win him votes in the room, that’s for sure. How so?

• By playing parents against teachers and (wrongly) accusing the School Committee and Administration of playing games.
• By suggesting that the School Committee did not honor the will of Town Meeting in allocating a free cash distribution to keep the elementary school libraries open. The Committee and Administration did better than that – using the money to hire a full time elementary librarian to serve the town’s four elementary schools: the first time the town had had such a position in years. Alas, that position was terminated with the FY 2011 cuts.
• By saying that the parents in the room had been urged by teaching staff to come – they hadn’t. E-mail was sent out by the school PTOs, not teachers. If an e-mail did go out to a BPS listserv, it was inadvertent, certainly not a coordinated campaign. In any case, portraying worried parents as dupes of the teachers’ union isn’t cool.
• Finally, he was wrong by claiming that there was money in the budget to cover an almost $3 million gap in school funding, but that the school administration was not being forthcoming or transparent about it. No such thing is true and he knows it. As I said – it may be the case that wage concessions will trim the budget gap facing the schools by as much as $800,000. That will be awesome. It will also leave us with a $2 million gap and nobody is suggesting that there’s that much fat in the budget. It was misleading to suggest there was (and I called Ralph on it).

My take away: we’re going to have to fight like hell to even get an override vote on the ballot, let alone pass it. In doing so, don’t expect too much in the way of help or cover from either the Warrant Committee or the Board of Selectmen. Both showed last night that they’re convinced that the Administration is hiding money – their mantra for much of the last decade, despite the real evidence of cuts and pain on the schools side – and nobody has any swift ideas for bridging the gap or generating new revenue. Except, of course, parking meters, which I’ll be talking to Ralph and the BOS about on Monday. No kidding.

Elementary Schools – Art, Music, Phys Ed whacked, Two teachers laid off.

At the elementary school level, the School Department said on Tuesday that the available funds budget would require the elimination of both art and music instruction as well as the elimination of two full time teachers. Physical education instruction would be cut by 50% and there would be reduced levels of service for areas like reading, nursing, tutoring, clerical support, as well as supplies, textbooks and equipment. The elmentary library program – eliminated in the FY2011 budget – would not be restored.

Middle School: Foreign language instruction and three teacher positions gone

At the Middle School level, the biggest cuts proposed to meet the available funds target would be a reduction of three full time teaching positions and the elimination of foreign language instruction for grades 5 and 6. Middle school intramural sports, including cross country, will be eliminated. Beyond that, there will be a slew of service reductions: fine arts electives, tutoring and instructional support as well as supplies like text books and materials needed by teachers.

High School: Reduced graduation requirements, elimination of foreign language and social studies electives

Planned changes at the High School include the elimination of foreign language electives and social studies electives as well as the elimination of library aide and instructional aide positions, reduced supplies including textbooks and equipment. Freshmen sports will not be restored, though its unclear whether there will be other cuts to athletic programs.

District: curriculum director positions, instructional support positions and clerical positions eliminated

At the district level, the cuts will require the elimination of curriculum director positions – these are folks who help make sure that, say, math or foreign language is taught consistently across the district and who work on improving instruction and insuring quality instruction in the classroom. Curriculum director positions for foreign language, science and social studies are on the chopping block here. The central office staff will be further reduced (the public schools already jettisoned the critical Human Resources position last year).

I don’t think its overstating things to say that this “available funds” budget is the final leg in the stool that’s supporting what has been considered one of the finest and top performing school districts in the state – and even the country. The cuts to elementary music are an especially bitter pill to swallow. Belmont’s elementary music education program has been the jewel in the crown for the town for much of the past thirty years and our students regularly return from state- and national tournaments with awards and accolades – the product of superior music education that starts at an early age (third grade). This budget effectively ends that proud tradition, eliminating funding for elementary music education – which is already supported, in part, by fees – altogether.

The available funds budget is a disgrace and underscores, only more deeply, the need for the Belmont Board of Selectmen to put a Proposition 2 1/2 Override Question on the Town-wide ballot in April. Anything less than that would be an utter betrayal of working families in this town that rely on the public schools and the programs they provide, and who can hardly afford to reach into their pockets for yet more parental “use taxes” in the form of activities fees. Enough!

Fortunately, the Warrant Committee meeting at which this budget was to be presented was postponed due to the blizzard on Wednesday. I will let you know when that is rescheduled. We’ll need a big turnout of school supporters to make it clear to the powers that be that the “available funds” math doesn’t add up for families in this town.

Vive la flip-flop

A little over a week ago, I wrote here about my plans to run for re-election to Belmont School Committee. I wrote, at the time, about what a challenging and rewarding year it had been. How I was proud of the votes I’d taken on the budget, funding for the Library Aide positions and about the challenges that lay ahead, with an even deeper hole to budget our way out of. It’s with sadness and some regret that I write now to inform the B2 audience that I’ve decided to forgo my run for School Committee this year.

Obviously, this is a change of course. Up until last week, I fully intended to run again for re-election. The last week, however, brought new charges in both my personal and professional life that, I concluded, would make it difficult for me to carry out my duties responsibly as a candidate for re-election and, should I win, a School Committee member.  I know that some will be disappointed by my decision, which has been a difficult one for me to reach. I ask for your support.

This will be a busy Spring, with both town-wide elections and a likely push for a Proposition 2 1/2 override. I look forward to continuing my involvement and engagement in issues before the town’s leadership and to making BloggingBelmont a source for progressive news and views on the debates going on within Belmont.

- Paul

Hey all. Apologies for a long hiatus on posting to B2. I wanted to write this evening to inform the B2 readership about two important events to put on your calendars. The first is a very important opportunity to discuss (and help shape) the future of our public schools at a community dialog hosted by the Belmont Public Schools on October 27 at the Field House at Belmont High School. The entire community is invited to participate in this: parents, school administration and staff, civic and business leaders and elected officials. There’s a great presentation from Superintendent Entwistle  available on the BPS Web site that explains the program. In short: participants will take part in both some directed “big topic” discussions on issues important to the future of our public schools, and then in short (50 minute) self-directed dialogs on educational and organizational topics suggested by participants themselves. This isn’t some empty “team building” exercise — the output of these sessions will be operationalized by the BPS leadership team and will help inform an 18 month improvement plan adopted by the School Department.

Take part in a Community Dialog on the future of the Public Schools

The dialog runs from 4:30 to 8:30 pm on the 27th, with a short break for dinner at around 5:00pm. The first Session begins at 5:35 pm.  and the second at 6:30 pm.  You must RSVP for the Dialog to attend. Call 617-993-5401 or by sending an e-mail to Cathy Grant - CGrant (at) belmont.k12.ma.us!!

The second event is an opportunity to speak with Massachusetts House Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Murphy. He’ll be dropping in to Belmont on October 13 for a conversation with residents at 7:00pm in the Selectmen’s room in Belmont Town Hall. Murphy will be accompanied by State Representative Will Brownsberger. The Belmont Citizen Herald and Brownsberger are co-sponsoring the discussion, which is sure to hit on the State’s precarious finances and the impact that will likely have on local aide to Belmont and other towns.

Wellington School Site Plan - Now Available Online

The new site plan, as well as detailed plans for the ground floor and second floor of the new school are available in PDF format. There are also pictures available of the scale model of the completed school, which is currently on display at the Wellington library. Check them out!

I hope you’ll take the time to come out to tomorrow night’s meeting at the Community Room at CMS and/or tune in and watch!  I hope to see you tomorrow evening.

One area of discussion and concern with preliminary plans for the new school is around the impact of the new building on parking and drop-off/pick up space. Some Wellington neighbors have voiced concerns about traffic on adjoining streets, and fire and public safety officials want to make sure that the new school will be easily accessible by emergency vehicles in the event of …well…an emergency. Needless to say, there are also State mandates and codes that the building must conform to. While the Wellington Building Committee is responsible for many of the design decisions affecting the construction of the new school, many of the traffic issues fall outside of the group’s realm of responsibility.

Now an important meeting has been called to help address the concerns of neighbors and get all the responsible parties in the room to discuss the issues at hand. The meeting will take place on Wednesday, September 16 at 7:30 PM in the Board of Selectmen’s room at Town Hall. The meeting was called by Pat Brusch, Vice Chair of the WBC and Chair of the Permanent Building Committee and will involve members from the Planning Board, the Traffic Advisory Committee, the Board of Selectmen, the School Committee, Wellington PTO, the WBC and the Fire Chief, Police Chief, and Building Inspector.

There has been a lot of inaccurate or incomplete information floating around about the Wellington project. Some of that is due to the slow trickle of information from the WBC that’s been released to the public. Some of it is due to concerns from those involved in planning the new school that  information that’s released before it is in its absolutely final form just leads to confusion, misplaced concerns and other distractions.

One thing’s clear: more and more open lines of communications between all of the many parties involved will help clear the air and alleviate tension. So if you’re a neighbor, Wellington Parent or simply a concerned citizen and want to have your voice heard on this important issue, make a note of the meeting date and time. We’ll see you there!