RutlandHerald.com - We Are Vermont

Blackmail in Springfield



Toolbox

Published: April 3, 2009

It is amazing what comes out of our educational system when the system is faced with a reduced budget. Political blackmail. The recent article in the Rutland Herald on the Springfield School Board and administration cutting 58 teacher positions and only five administrative positions is just such an example of "if you don't give us what we want, we'll show you!"

School improvements were sold to us as a means for enhancing the Springfield students' education. The education still seems to be lacking, according to test score results from state standards. How is it that money spending is being equated to good education rather then quality teaching and educating? Maybe it is the items we have been reading in the paper: "It is only costing the taxpayers of Springfield X dollars." Someone, somewhere still has to pay the bill.

How many programs in our educational system could be cut, consolidated, taught every other year, or need to really be looked at as a benefit to our town, state and national needs. It comes down to a simple: Do I want or do I need? Do we need to pay $5,000 for someone to come up with a mission statement for our school? Do we need to spend $50,000 on 50 laptop computers when laptops can be bought for under $500 and taking the funds from capital improvements? What is justifiable expense?

If I, as many other Springfield property tax payers, sound like we are not supporting our students' education, it is far from it. We want good, sound, and responsible spending of our tax dollars for the education our students should be receiving. When your money is limited, you don't eat caviar or pad your grocery bill with cheese doodles. We have been eating crow far too long from an overstuffed administration of education. With many of the latest statements in the papers it is a self-serving attempt to hold the taxpayer hostage if we do not succumb to their demands. The figures we have received just do not add up. We do not have an itemized budget of school expenditures to make sound choices. Can I support the current proposed school budget? No, and neither should you.

C. WILLIAM MATTOON

Springfield








READER COMMENTS


The No Child Left Behind Act asks the school district personnel do all that they can to have ALL children proficient in Reading and Math by the year 2014. It is very unfortunate that the students in Springfield began this journey significantly disparate in both reading and math in 2001 when we first started collecting data. Research demonstrat6es that poverty contributes greatly to low performance on these assessments. With a school like Park Street at 52% free and reduced lunch, the students are already behind the 8 ball. However, a 15% gain in Reading and a 12% gain in math, statistically, is pretty significant. Additionally, the state of Vermont has set a pretty high bar for proficiency status, much higher than most other states who identify higher percentages of students performing proficiently but
in reality have students performing poorer than in other states who have the guts to keep the bar high. I agree that those scores are not acceptable but they are evidence that the district is doing what they can to try to meet the impossible demands of NCLB. Give them the benefit of the doubt- the alternative is no budget and ultimate disaster.
-- Posted by just sayin on Sun, Apr 5, 2009, 6:34 am EST

report this comment


By the way, Just Sayin refers to the "gains in reading and writing from 2007 to 2008 in all student's scores..."

I guess it takes Paul Harvey to give us the rest of the story. J.S. isn't being completely forthright, for the gains, while real, still don't come close to achieving COMPETENCY in either reading or writing.

Here are the actual numbers:

Reading scores: Students considered "proficient" (Levels 3 and 4) or better in Springfield only increased from 51% in 2007 to 66% in 2008.

Writing Scores: Students considered "passing" (Levels 3 and 4) in Springfield jumped from 26% in 2007 to 38% in 2008.

Last I checked, 66% was a big fat "D" and 38% was...well, 38% was just plain pathetic.

"Nice gains..." perhaps, but barely if at all literate!

Year after year after year of endless school budget increases, yet our students continue to perform below average (even far below average in writing proficiency).

No wonder Just Sayin isn't exactly just speakin' the truth! The truth would hurt too much!

VOTE NO!

------------------------------------------------------
-- Posted by Bill O. Rights on Fri, Apr 3, 2009, 9:18 pm EST

report this comment


Without benefit of a line item budget, I fear what we know of irresponsible waste is the tip of the iceberg. It's important every voter read the $5000 mission statement for themselves, www.springfield.k12.vt.us/pages/SpringVT_DistMisc/aboutus
Unacceptably, the statement makes no mention of preparing students to succeed in college, or equally beneficial, trade skills to earn a rewarding livelihood. Little wonder, the majority of students leaving Springfield High School have no career goals.
Site listing of only five schools is intentionally misleading. Separately staffed and located are two other schools, Gateway and Choices. If the voters had any idea of the per pupil cost to operate these two unmentioned schools, outrage would run much deeper.
Give us a line item budget!
-- Posted by Major Taxpayer on Fri, Apr 3, 2009, 7:48 pm EST

report this comment


Gullible, naive, impressionable, simple-minded fools! That's what the Springfield School Board thinks the voting public sonsists of if they expect any of them to buy the budget tripe they're serving up!

I've said it before and I'll say it again...A 5% budget increase under the current (and chronic past) economic circumstances is ludicrous. And it matters not whether the bond interest payments comprise the bulk of the budget increase. The taxpayers of Springfield should not be asked to sacrifice any further.

The town and school officials should have conducted a highly detailed analysis of the department by now, beginning with a determination of what constitutes "vital" educational resources. Those should then be prioritized and funded within a budget that is level with that of last year (the 2008-2009 school year).

Be not fooled by the emotionally fueled, objectively devoid rants of those impugning the motives of loyal citizens and patriots who wallets can no longer sustain these endless budget increases.

It's time to treat the School Department like the children they serve and tell them "NO!"

Rest assured that A NO VOTE UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES IS A RESPONSIBLE VOTE. It is a vote that screams "We care!" We care about raising our children, feeding them, clothing them, housing them, transporting them, loving and nurturing them, seeing to their medical care, and yes, educating them! We care about our town, our families, our homes, and our ability to make our limited financial resources stretch to pay a reasonable amount of tax while still remaining able to provide for our families needs and maintain our houses, autos, and other private property. We do not confuse support to "education" with blind, indiscriminate "spending". We understand that education can occur effectively under even the most austere of settings -- as many less prosperous nations around the globe spend far less on education yet their young people now surpass our own students' test scores in a broad array of subject matter. We don't confuse "elaborate curriculum" with "education". We understand that our households must conform to an affordable budget and we expect our towns and schools to do the same. During lean times, reasonable budget sacrifices must be made.

The Springfield school budget, as presented for this revote, has not yet incorporated such reasonable sacrifices. By their superficial attempt to address the public's concerns and their sensationalized threats to slash the teaching staff, the Superintendent and the School Board have not only failed the citizens of Springfield, they have revealed themselves as weak, ineffective, and incompetent public servants.

VOTE NO AGAIN! WE DESERVE A TRULY AFFORDABLE BUDGET!

------------------------------------------------------------
-- Posted by Bill O. Rights on Fri, Apr 3, 2009, 7:14 pm EST

report this comment


None None, in your attempt to use a big word "juxtaposed" I am not sure what is being compared blindy. Taxpayers, also know as voters have a right to an opinion and will base that opinion on what they often know best, their pocketbook. Those that are staying on subject here are not disputing how the school's daily schedule is run, that is why you get paid. The dispute is are we paying to much. I am not sure if I fit the "misunderstand the issues, or oversimplify the situation" label you placed on these writings, but I do know this, our school leaders pointed out 63 positions that they can live without. If this is true then how much waste is there in our schools. If this is not true, and maybe you know, is it smart to threaten the voters?

Like it our not the school system as become a business. Yes you must educate everyone that comes thru those doors, but that doesn't mean you need a basket of money to do it successfully. This is why you have a business manager and a school board. You can write all the mission statements you want but they don't mean the paper they're written if not everyone walks that line. A mission statement is marketing, which by the way is part of doing business.
-- Posted by Harry Bird on Fri, Apr 3, 2009, 3:49 pm EST

report this comment


I am a firm supporter of education in Springfield even though I have never used nor will I ever use the school system or its' programs. I do not have children but realize as a taxpayer in Springfield, I have a responsibility to the town and the services offered. I am concerned, however, that we just had the Elm Hill School renovated and are now being asked to consider additions to this school as well as others in the district. With budgets being so tight, how can we begin to entertain more spending? I did exercise my right to vote and I chose to vote against the proposed school budget. I did this because I can not afford to pay more in taxes. There is no ulterior motive here. It was a fiscal decision to hopefully avert personal financial disaster. Just like teachers (and I have a great respect for you), I work in the public sector and have seen huge budget cuts leading to layoffs. This is what a recession looks like. We are all being asked to do more with less. We have to learn to think outside of the box. But rather than focusing on the fact that I (and most people) will not get a raise this year, I choose to focus on the humility I feel for just being able to say that I have a job.
-- Posted by Concerned Taxpayer on Fri, Apr 3, 2009, 3:19 pm EST

report this comment


Anytime anyone suggests that any school needs to reassess how it spends its money, things go downhill. If you question the superintendent or principal, you are:
1. stupid
2. evil
3. hate kids
4. don't understand the system
5. don't understand economics
6. cannot work with people
All of these things have nothing to do with questioning a budget and charging that administration needs to be reduced. But those are the responses you will get when you demand that people do their job.

I do not expect miracles, but I expect professionals to treat kids fairly and with respect. And no, its not always easy, but thats what the job calls for, and if you don't want to treat kids fairly, regardless of economic standing, social position and whether or not that kid is an employees child, then you should leave.
-- Posted by Colleen Wright on Fri, Apr 3, 2009, 11:47 am EST

report this comment


First off I would like to say that I am biased, I work in the school system. However, I would also like to think that it gives me insight into the current contentious situation that the town of Springfield finds itself in.

I wish I could say I am surprised by all the bitter comments, rock throwing, and people with an axe to grind, juxtaposed by the blind school system cheerleading. None of which is going to better our schools, improve the education of students, or heighten the level of discourse.

It seems to me that all of the comments so far, including the initial letter itself, either misunderstand the issues, or oversimplify the situation.

There are a lot of great students, and staff members working very hard every day at learning and educating. At the same time there are some, both staff and students, that make the system less effective than it could or should be.

Educational systems are inherently complex, and should not be compared to a traditional business model. To do so would be a disservice to the town and students.

Public Schools have to provide and equal opportunity for education to every student. Some children with severe multi-handicaps, the emotionally disturbed, and brightest who challenge us to challenge them every day.

We do not get to decide our market, our clientele choose us, and we have to make it work.

The best thing I can recommend is that before people make broad generalizations, and outrageous assertions, come visit us. Spend a few hours, or days visiting the schools. They are your schools, and the more aware people are of what goes on here, the more constructive the conversations will be.

Yes, you will be surprised, and at times it appears to be controlled chaos. Our schools are very dynamic and welcoming environments, and at the least, that is something we can all be proud of.
-- Posted by None None on Fri, Apr 3, 2009, 10:52 am EST

report this comment


I too would like to add that this whole "pass the budget or else" is crap . When are they going to tell you that the administration passed their contract for a 5% increase in pay? They weren't going to tell you that one! But instead, we will cut teachers? Doesn't make sense to me that admin gets a pay raise????? we should tax that 5% raise like the goverment is doing with AIG executives! It's just wrong!
-- Posted by Heather None on Fri, Apr 3, 2009, 10:38 am EST

report this comment


Mr. Mattoon - I agree with you wholeheartedly! You have said it so well. I cannot for the life of me understand where the people who support the school budget as it is being presented, think they can squeeze that amount of money out of the voters. It is true, I do want good, sound and responsible spending of our tax dollars but I also believe in living within ones' means. That is why I also cannot support the current proposed school budget. Vicki Siliski
-- Posted by Vicki Siliski on Fri, Apr 3, 2009, 10:16 am EST

report this comment


This letter is right on target. Springfield's school system is a shadow of what it once was. Look no further than Springfield to see that throwing money at education does not fix it. It just feeds more hogs.

ex-vermonter says he escaped this prison town; I have hoped for years to follow suit. Destination: Anywhere But Here, USA!
-- Posted by mark on Fri, Apr 3, 2009, 9:26 am EST

report this comment


Just Sayin starts his/her letter by name calling and degrading the writer, a transparent attemtp to degrade and embarrass the writer into silence. Why would you need to charge then school system $300 dollars to write a useless mission statement. There are many quality laptops available for under $500 why do you say yours will last longer, do the schools laptops need an extrat 50 gigs to load more games? As usual Sayin's letter offers nothing except the same old "we're doing great in the schools". With your student to teacher ratio of 10:1 you should be. No teachers aren't they highest paid people and they all aren't great at their job, some are very, some are god and some are not so good just as in every working environment. Maybe it's time to operate the scools year round on a trimester where students attend school 2 of the three semesters, we wouldn't need as many teachers or class rooms and could afford to pay more. Stop trying to treat the taxpayers as ignorant tightwads. Also Springfield has always been known as one of the most expensive school districts I don't where you get that prudent spending, a poor attempt at disinformation maybe, or maybe you don't know what you're talking about you're certainly not contributing to the solution, simply trying to convince people to along with the same old same old. I moved out of Springfield a couple years ago, the best decision I ever made, I'll certainly never move back.
-- Posted by ex-vermonter None on Fri, Apr 3, 2009, 8:07 am EST

report this comment


Why should it take $5K or even $300.00? The mission is very clear - Educate the students not feed the fat cats!
-- Posted by Richard Merrill on Fri, Apr 3, 2009, 7:37 am EST

report this comment


No question, there are plenty of good things and improvements happening in our schools. Test scores have improved slighty and kids seem to have respect for their schools. I believe the town voters are not trying to take anything away from their youth. But...and the butts are showing here, the leaders in our school system have said they can afford to cut several positions. We all know this makes no sense. It is a bad gamble to threaten a voting history that seems to be based on anger. Now the teachers (several seem to be non-residents) want to rally and get folks out to vote, is this to pass a budget for our children or to save their jobs? If the later, then pay and benifits cuts would be very helpful and save the district thousands of dollars, please feel free to offer that up if you're serious about saving positions other than yours. Teachers, before you send your letter pointing out how hard you work and the future is in your hands let me say this, don't bother. This is not about pity, it's about doing the right thing. Mr. Mattoon is right about living leaner in tough times, and living leaner means giving somethings up. And please don't give us that "union says" baloney, you're teachers, free thinkers, developers of future leaders so try practicing some that yourself. Look around, look at the lack of help wanted adds and then availability of only low paying jobs, then look at the cost of living starting with our local tax structure. So "just sayin" I will contribute to the solution. It is time to count heads, large business look to expand when times are good and pull those expansions back when belts need to be tighten. Have you noticed that Whitcomb as closed their outlet on Bridge Street? This is a sign of the times, more tax dollars have left town. Our school leaders have spoken, cuts can be made. So let's go to work and make the minimal cuts.
-- Posted by Harry Bird on Fri, Apr 3, 2009, 6:54 am EST

report this comment


Another clueless resident who can't take the time to investigate his concerns. The Springfield District has long been considered one of the must prudent of spending districts in the state. The suggested purchase of laptop computers for less than $500 shows a complete lack of the concept of investing toward the future- that scenario will have the district purchasing new ones again in 3 years. The writer mentions test scores lacking and although there is always work to do, the latest NECAP results on the Vermont DOE website show gains in reading and writing from 2007 to 2008 in all students's scores, gains made by both genders in reading, math, and writing with a particularly nice gain made by males in reading, and reading and writing score gains for the students on free and reduced lunch. Admittedly, there is work to do in math for most of the students in the district. And I personally would be happy to develop a mission statement for the district for $300.00! I know the people structuring the educational system in Springfield and they are good people- certainly not the caviar-eating, grocery-padding, overstuffed leaders you speak of. Relax and contribute to the solution.
-- Posted by just sayin on Fri, Apr 3, 2009, 4:56 am EST

report this comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Register | Log In

Logout