| ||||||||||||
The Record ‘Terms end without renewal for one third of N.J. county education chiefs’
Njspotlight.com ‘Christie Summarily Dismisses Seven County Superintendents of Schools’ …A six-sentence email lets superintendents know they're out of a $120,000 job’
The Record ‘Christie wants to expand applicant pool for superintendent posts’
Star Ledger ‘N.J. Supreme Court to hear arguments on constitutionality of Christie's education budget cuts’ ...Abbott districts back in spotlight
The Record ‘Terms end without renewal for one third of N.J. county education chiefs’
Monday p.m., January 3, 2011
Last updated: Monday January 3, 2011, 7:08 PM
BY LESLIE BRODY
The Record
STAFF WRITER
Governor Christie has fired seven county education chiefs, including the acting leader in Bergen.
All of the executive county superintendents whose three-year terms expired Monday were notified Thursday afternoon by email that they were being terminated. “Your last work day is today,” said the email.
“Happy New Year, you’re fired,” summed up Richard Bozza, executive director of the New Jersey Association of School Administrators. “I don’t know how many people in professional positions get one day’s notice their employment is over.”
No replacements have been nominated.
“These were holdovers from the prior administration whose terms had expired,” the governor’s spokesman, Michael Drewniak, said in an email Monday. “It’s that simple. The governor will be filling them with his own nominees.”
Drewniak declined to elaborate on the last-minute nature of the notifications.
Executive county superintendents have significant authority to oversee local districts, including the power to veto local budgets and contracts for top administrators. They also monitor schools’ compliance with state rules, certify substitute teachers and field complaints from parents unhappy with district decisions on special education services, discipline and other issues.
The positions were created in 2007 and pay $120,000 a year. Those fired represent the first group to get the jobs in early 2008; others were hired later to oversee the rest of the state’s 21 counties. The gubernatorial appointments are subject to approval by the state Senate.
Educators said the sudden vacancies left even more uncertainty as districts get ready for difficult budget negotiations and a host of possible changes in the coming year. Christie has announced caps on superintendents’ pay and called for reforms in tenure policies, teacher evaluations and public pensions.
Bozza, whose group represents most of the dismissed superintendents, said they had been asking the state Department of Education for months whether their contracts would be renewed but got no answers. “Most expected they would be returning to work” in 2011, he said. “Not to have a plan for a transition is one of the most surprising parts.”
One of the seven fired was Patrick Piegari, appointed last month to fill the seat of Aaron Graham, who retired as Bergen’s executive county superintendent. Piegari, who became schools chief for Middlesex County in the first wave of hirings, lost both jobs. He declined to comment.
Trudy Doyle, who was fired from leading Somerset County, said she was doing errands at home on vacation when she got a call from a colleague Thursday to check her email. “It was quite a shock,” she said. “We were told it was not a performance issue, we all had good ratings. … I’m very disappointed.”
Christie has said he wants job retention for teachers and principals to depend on solid performance.
Doyle noted that filling the executive county superintendent seats took most of a year when the position was established. “These posts will be vacant for a while,” she predicted.
Lynne Strickland, executive director of the Garden State Coalition of Schools advocacy group, said she worried about such a loss of institutional memory and leadership at a crucial moment of reform proposals and tight coffers.
Strickland expressed concern that new appointees would “be more of a change agent for the governor and less knowledgeable of the system when they have to get into the nitty-gritty.”
“We wish it didn’t happen so precipitously so there would have been more advanced preparation for transition,” she said.
Other county superintendents who lost jobs were those running Burlington, Cape May, Hunterdon, Monmouth and Ocean counties.
Robert Gilmartin, executive county superintendent in Passaic, said he had two years left on his contract and still had his job. He said it would be more challenging for leaderless counties to keep operations running. “Like anything else, when you start to unhitch the horse from the wagon it gets tougher to pull,” he said.
These vacancies add strain to a state Education Department stretched thin, some school officials said. Six of the seven assistant commissioner jobs are open, including the supervisor for county chiefs. The governor’s pick for education commissioner awaits confirmation hearings.
“I’m concerned we need to stabilize the leadership,” Gilmartin said.
Districts must get approval from the executive county chief to finalize contracts with superintendents. The Bergen vacancy puts in limbo efforts by districts such as Englewood to hire new leaders. Those deals were already stalled by the governor’s announcement late last year that his salary caps should be obeyed even though they don’t officially take effect until Feb.7.
“There is so much confusion going on,” said Richard Segall, the Englewood superintendent who plans to step down. “This leaves us with another question of how does the district move forward.”
“We’re going to be a bit rudderless for a while,” said Daniel Fishbein, superintendent in Ridgewood, “but there are things that can’t be put on hold.”
E-mail: brody@northjersey.com
njspotlight.com ‘Christie Summarily Dismisses Seven County Superintendents of Schools’ …A six-sentence email lets superintendents know they're out of a $120,000 job’
By John Mooney, January 4
For decades, New Jersey’s county superintendents of schools were hardly headline-making jobs. They were often filled by career educators or state department veterans whose tasks included things like technical assistance on local budgets or tracking school bus routes.
The rules started changing dramatically a few years ago, under a Democratic governor who gave his superintendents broad new powers over budgets and contracts.
Now a Republican governor wants to change things even more -- right down to some of the folks serving as superintendents.
The Terminator
Gov. Chris Christie started the new year by unceremoniously firing seven executive county superintendents, from Cape May to Somerset, each of whose three-year contract was up at the end of 2010.
On Thursday, they received a six-sentence email from Gregg Edwards, the commissioner’s acting chief of staff, that they were out of their $120,000 jobs, effective immediately.
On Monday, a few of the former superintendents were talking publicly, complaining they were never warned of their imminent demise, and, in some cases, indicating they saw themselves as loyal soldiers for the controversial governor.
“Being somewhat naïve, we thought we’d back to work on January 3,” said Trudy Doyle, who served as the Somerset County executive superintendent. "Needless to say, it comes as quite a shock."
The governor’s office said it was the executive branch’s prerogative as to who serves in the three-year posts These have become especially critical positions with Christie planning a full-scale push on his education agenda and a new state commissioner coming on board this month in Chris Cerf.
Holdovers from Earlier Administration
Christie spokesman Michael Drewniak yesterday said in an email: "These were holdovers from the prior administration whose terms had expired. It's that simple. The Governor will be filling them with his own nominees."
Drewniak didn’t say when the governor would make the appointments, which are also subject to state Senate confirmation.
Either way, the moves over the holiday break speak to the changing stakes -- and politics -- of the once-quiet job overseeing what is effectively the state department’s field office in each county.
The changes actually began under former Gov. Jon Corzine and his education commissioner, Lucille Davy, who with the legislature gave the county superintendents vast new powers to monitor and trim local budgets, review local contracts, and start the process on regionalizing schools.
Then Christie last year punched up those powers even further, giving the county superintendents more authority in fighting local spending, including tough new caps on administrator pay and proposals to allow the county officials to red-line local labor contracts.
The superintendent salary caps -- among the toughest in the country -- are the most contentious, and the county superintendents had so far fulfilled the governor’s wishes in cracking down on a handful of the labor deals even before the caps were formally in place.
"There was certainly tension on the issue, but we had done what we were asked to do, when to do it," Doyle said yesterday.
In her three years leading the nine-person office, the former Hopatcong assistant superintendent said she had done considerably more as well. For instance, Doyle said she brokered a deal to better coordinate bus routes, saving districts millions, and also help set up a countywide career program for special needs students.
Doyle said she had no illusions that it was a job for life. But she and other county superintendents whose terms were up had asked as recently as December 20 about their fates, she said, never getting a straight answer. She said they still have not been given reasons.
"It’s all hypothesizing on why," she said. “I thought we’d be judged by our work, But then to be told professionally that you are done and not to come back to work, the best word for it is shock, I’m in shock."
The holiday-week purge caught the eye of legislative Democrats, too, who said many of Christie's new spending limits rely on enforcement by these same county superintendents he's now firing.
"I can't imagine how not retaining a third of the county superintendents is in any way appropriate," said state Assemblyman Patrick Diegnan (D-Middlesex), chairman of the Assembly education committee. "Not one or two could be retained? It's more than disturbing, very disturbing."
The dismissed superintendents came from the following counties: Burlington, Cape May, Hunterdon, Ocean, Middlesex, Monmouth and Somerset.
Star Ledger ‘N.J. Supreme Court to hear arguments on constitutionality of Christie's education budget cuts’ Abbott districts back in spotlight
Monday, January 03, 2011
By Chris Megerian and Jessica Calefati
The Star-Ledger
For almost three decades, the court case Abbott vs. Burke has been a fault line running through New Jersey government. The original 1985 decision on school funding, which has diverted billions of dollars toward education in the state's poorest communities, still divides residents and elected officials by demographics, economics and party politics.
This week, the controversial case will burst back into the spotlight. The state Supreme Court has scheduled oral arguments for Wednesday over whether Gov. Chris Christie's cuts in education spending are unconstitutional.
Adding to the already hot-button issue of school funding is another wrinkle: The court itself is the subject of intense controversy stemming from Christie's unprecedented decision to jettison a sitting justice in May.
Now, the court is revisiting one of its most progressive and far-reaching cases at a time when the governor is trying to rein in a court he says has overstepped its bounds.
"I'd love to be a fly on the wall when the justices discuss how they will decide this," said Paul Tractenberg, a Rutgers-Newark law professor.
Indeed, this combination of political and legal battles - with massive implications for the state's budget and school system - makes this case one of the most closely watched in state history.
And Salem City School District officials will no doubt be keeping close tabs on the case. Salem is one of the state's Abbott districts.
"There are so many divisions within society that this represents," said Joseph Marbach, provost of La Salle University. "This has really been the one public policy area that has defied any compromise."
At the heart of this year's court battle is the state's school funding formula and Christie's first budget.
The Supreme Court, in 2009, allowed the state to deviate from the original Abbott decision with a law that allocates education dollars based on enrollment of needy students, rather than a blanket classification of a district as poor or wealthy. But there was a caveat: "Our finding of constitutionality is premised on the expectation that the state will continue to provide school funding aid during this and the next two years at the levels required by (the) formula each year," the court said.
Christie, however, cut school funding by $820 million while closing a nearly $11 billion budget gap. In response, the Education Law Center, which advocates for the state's poorest districts, filed a legal challenge, saying schools are not receiving "the funding necessary to provide a constitutional education."
The Christie administration, in court filings, says the economic crisis forced the state to reduce education spending, adding that cuts were equitable.
"The reductions do not give rise to any constitutional deficiencies in educational funding and, hence, no judicial involvement is necessary or appropriate," the state's brief said.
The court's decision could have enormous implications for the state's upcoming budget, and Tractenberg, founder of the Education Law Center, sees three possible outcomes.
First, the court could allow the state's cuts, handing a victory to Christie. Second, the court could grant the state a "time out," meaning a temporary reprieve from fully funding schools during the economic crisis. The third option would force the state to fully fund the formula. The court may even require it to pay schools the $820 million already cut, which would be devastating to Christie, who has tried to pare state spending and avoid tax increases.
Sen. Raymond Lesniak (D-Union) said the court's decision could throw a massive wrench into budget negotiations.
"It makes a very difficult budget process extremely more difficult," he said. "It will almost be unsolvable."
Christie admitted last month he was anxious about the case.
"Of course, I'd be stupid if I wasn't concerned," he said. "I don't think the court should be in the business of telling the governor and the Legislature how to spend the people's money."
A look at past rulings shows Christie may have good reason to be nervous - the court has historically forced the state to spend more on schools.
"The idea that a new court would just sort of say, We're going to go in a different direction, would fly in the face of not just one precedent, but an awful lot of litigation," Rutgers-Camden law professor Robert Williams said.
Another front in the conflict opened last month, when Associate Justice Roberto Rivera-Soto announced he is abstaining from voting in all cases in protest, saying the presence of a temporary jurist in Wallace's spot is unconstitutional. Because the court only needs five members for a quorum, calling up Stern on an interim basis was unnecessary and improper, Rivera-Soto wrote in two opinions.
That could have direct implications for Abbott vs. Burke. Although Rivera-Soto said he will continue to sit on the bench and participate in discussions of the case, he won't be voting. Rabner is also recusing himself from the case, meaning, unlike Rivera-Soto, he won't be participating at all. That leaves five voting members - including Stern.
By Chris Megerian and Jessica Calefati/The Star-Ledger
A COURT DIVIDED
The furor over the Supreme Court, stemming from Gov. Chris Christie’s decision to not renominate Associate Justice John Wallace Jr. in May, means only five justices will likely vote in the hotly contested school funding case. Here are the justices now serving on the bench:
• Chief Justice Stuart Rabner, a Democrat, has recused himself from the case. He did not give a reason, but he served in the Corzine administration, which formulated the school funding formula currently in question.
• Associate Justice Roberto Rivera-Soto, a Republican, will participate in oral arguments, but he is abstaining from voting in protest over what he calls the unconstitutional presence of a temporary justice on the court. He is up for renomination in September.
• Edwin Stern, the chief appellate judge and a Democrat, is the temporary justice Rivera-Soto is protesting. He was appointed by Rabner to the seat vacated by Wallace.
• Associate Justice Barry Albin, a Democrat, received tenure in 2009, allowing him to serve until 2022, when he reaches the mandatory retirement age of 70.
• Associate Justice Jaynee LaVecchia, an independent, wrote the 2009 unanimous opinion upholding the state’s new school funding formula. She also has tenure and will reach mandatory retirement in 2024.
• Associate Justice Virginia Long, a Democrat, will reach mandatory retirement in March 2012.
• Associate Justice Helen Hoens, a Republican, is up for renomination in October 2013.
— Chris Megerian
A HISTORY OF COURT BATTLES OVER SCHOOL FUNDING
• 1973: In Robinson v. Cahill, the Supreme Court decides that the state’s heavy reliance on property taxes to fund schools discriminates against students in poor areas. Two years later, the Legislature creates the income tax to boost education funding so that all children "may be able to read, write and function in a political environment."
• 1981: The Newark-based Education Law Center files a lawsuit arguing the state has failed to uphold its constitutional obligation to provide a "thorough and efficient system of public schools" for students in poor, urban school districts.
• 1985: The court’s first Abbott v. Burke ruling orders that urban children receive "inadequate" education funding and that they must be given an education whose quality equals what students in the state’s wealthiest districts receive.
• 1990: After the state passes a new school finance law, the court orders funding equalized between the richest and poorest districts. It also orders that the state create supplemental programs in the urban districts to mitigate disadvantages.
• 1997: The court rules a second school funding law "does not adequately address the unique educational disadvantages" of the state’s poor urban districts, and again orders that funding match what’s available in wealthy districts. One year later, the court mandates urban districts gain access to a series of specific programs, including universal pre-school and new school construction.
• 2007: Gov. Jon Corzine proposes a new school funding law that provides additional resources for any districts with disadvantaged students, erasing the Abbott distinction. It’s signed into law in early 2008.
• 2009: The Superior Court rules that the new law "represents a thoughtful, progressive attempt to assist at-risk children throughout the state of New Jersey, and not only those who, by happenstance, reside in Abbott districts." The Supreme Court unanimously upholds the formula.
• March 2010: In an effort to help close the state’s nearly $11 billion budget deficit, Gov. Chris Christie announces an $820 million cut in education aid, distributed in amounts up to 5 percent of the total budget for each of the state’s roughly 600 school districts
• June 2010: The Education Law Center files a legal challenge that the governor’s aid cuts "indisputably violated" the state’s legal obligation to fully fund the formula for state education aid upheld by the state Supreme Court in 2009.
• July 2010: The state, in response to the law center’s motion, argues the cuts were warranted in a year when the state was "pummeled by a national recession."
— Jessica Calefati
The Record ‘Christie wants to expand applicant pool for superintendent posts’
Monday, January 3, 2011
BY PATRICIA ALEX
The Record
STAFF WRITER
The Christie Administration wants to bypass credential requirements for hiring leaders for the state’s struggling school districts and has proposed changes that could open the jobs to applicants without experience as educators.
The proposal could give the administration much wider latitude in choosing leaders for state-run districts like those in Paterson and Newark, where it was looking for a way to give Mayor Cory Booker a bigger role in running the schools.
The proposed changes also could affect more than 50 districts, including Clifton and Passaic, that have been deemed “in need of improvement,” and others where state test scores are lagging.
The administration proposes to amend certification requirements for superintendents in those districts so that the job could be open to those with a bachelor’s degree and managerial experience provided they have no criminal record.
Superintendents are now required to have a master’s degree and several job-specific credits. Certification is an extensive process that includes testing, an internship and at least one-year of mentoring, said Richard Bozza, director of the New Jersey Association of School Administrators.
The proposed changes will be introduced at the state board of education meeting on Wednesday. They were drawn by the state Department of Education, where spokesman Alan Guenther did not return calls for comment on the proposal Monday.
The effort to eliminate some of the education-specific requirements for superintendents mirrors a move made by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg in tapping publishing executive Cathie Black to be the city’s new schools chancellor.
Black took the helm of the nation’s largest school system on Monday despite a lack of school-district experience. The appointment required a waiver from the state education department since she has neither the required teaching experience nor an advanced degree.
Bloomberg and others have argued that administrative and managerial experience can trump a background in education and can be an antidote to entrenched bureaucracies.
The changes could increase the pool of applicants at a time when Christie’s cap on superintendent salaries is expected to limit the number of candidates who apply for the jobs.
Others are wary about relaxing the job requirements.
Bozza, of the administrators association, called the changes a “free pass.” He said it was clear that the Christie administration wanted to “go in a different direction,” adding, “our view is clear: you need to have an educational background to lead a district.”
“Particularly in school systems ‘in need of improvement’ you need someone who understands teaching and learning,” Bozza said.
“I guess they want to turn public education into a business,” said Passaic schools Superintendent Robert Holster, who was named to that post 19 years ago after working for decades as a teacher, curriculum director, principal and assistant superintendent. “But you need and understanding of teaching and learning … It’s not just debits and credits.”
E-mail: alex@northjersey.com
