"...We hope that voters are more careful, and that they weigh the trade-offs in each district. In Ridgewood, for example, the school board tried to win agreement for wage and benefit concessions, and the teachers voted narrowly against it. The proposed budget now includes 60 layoffs and a 4 percent hike in local property taxes. If voters reject the budget, the district will likely have to increase layoffs and further cut programs. “The governor’s rhetoric really hasn’t helped,” says Superintendent Dan Fishbein (Past President -GSCS). “And even if our teachers took a freeze and gave 1.5 percent of salary to medical benefits, it wouldn’t make up for the loss of state aid.” Local voters need to weigh the trade-offs carefully. Some districts are overstaffed and can afford layoffs. Some can’t without cutting into muscle and bone. Some waste money, and some are careful. The point is it’s local, and the governor’s approach ignores that..."

New Jersey voters should judge each school budget on its own merits By Star-Ledger Editorial Board/The Star-Led... April 16, 2010, 5:45AM Gov. Chris Christie takes questions from the 4th grade classes at John Hill Elementary School in Boonton on April 2, 2010.
Give him this much: Gov. Chris Christie is right to confront the leadership of the state teachers union. We are in a crisis, and the union is refusing to help dig out. It is holding tight to the generous benefits and wage increases that were negotiated in better times. And that’s going to hurt students and taxpayers. The math is inescapable.
But now the governor has gone too far. He is urging voters across the state to reject school budgets next week in any district where teachers have refused to accept a pay freeze and share the costs of health benefits. Who will be hurt by that? Not the overpaid union bosses in Trenton. The hammer will land on students. Districts across the state are already planning widespread layoffs to cope with deep reductions in state aid. Even districts in which teachers have accepted pay freezes are drafting budgets that call for signficant layoffs. Given that teachers in only a handful of districts have agreed to a freeze, the governor is effectively calling for rejection of school budgets across the board. We hope that voters are more careful, and that they weigh the trade-offs in each district.
In Ridgewood, for example, the school board tried to win agreement for wage and benefit concessions, and the teachers voted narrowly against it. The proposed budget now includes 60 layoffs and a 4 percent hike in local property taxes. If voters reject the budget, the district will likely have to increase layoffs and further cut programs.
“The governor’s rhetoric really hasn’t helped,” says Superintendent Dan Fishbein. “And even if our teachers took a freeze and gave 1.5 percent of salary to medical benefits, it wouldn’t make up for the loss of state aid.” Local voters need to weigh the trade-offs carefully. Some districts are overstaffed and can afford layoffs. Some can’t without cutting into muscle and bone. Some waste money, and some are careful. The point is it’s local, and the governor’s approach ignores that.
We believe teachers, and all public unions, should accept a freeze this year and contribute toward their health benefits. Christie’s plan for a 2.5 percent cap on property taxes and labor costs is a good start, and if the Legislature agrees will make for lasting change. But for now, the obstinance of most teacher unions leaves an ugly choice: deep cuts to education programs, or higher local taxes. Voters in each district need to look at the facts and make their own call.