Voting for Hills: Hills, Albright, Siegel, Gibson
Voting for Goldman: Fisher-Gomberg, Ross Decter, Pitter-Wright, Goldman, Warren
Steve Siegel and Angela Pitter-Wright are running for vice chair.
Update: Pitter-Wright is the new vice chair, elected with the same five votes as Goldman.
Here are my thoughts: Four of the SC members were looking for change and the mayor agreed with them.
Newton has a very divided School Committee: Four people voted against the new chair and vice chair. The same would be true if Hills and Siegel had won.
My understanding is that Goldman told Hills many times that she wasn’t going to run against him. I’m going to hope/trust that she can handle confrontation better than she handled this situation. What’s so difficult about telling someone that you are going to run against him?
That said, I congratulate Ruth and Angela, and wish them luck.
Congrats to Ruth and Angela, I think they’ll do a great job and it’s a great sendoff for Angela as she leaves the committee to get a term as vice chair.
This is positive news. Congratulations Ruth and Angela who will be a great team to lead the Committee.
Are you serious Shawn? This is why I’m not a Newton Dem. Typical politics and prom queen popularity over real substance, achievement and expertise. Matt Hills has been a gift to the School Committee. He’s a disciplined, strategic data driven business person with a true commitment to public service and public education who has run it like a board instead of of the previous PTO Council coffee clatches, fawning to superintendents and pretending to actually manage a multi-million dollar budget. Well, in a world where Trump is President, I guess acceptance of delusion over substance, achievement and competency is just par for the course of our massively lowered expectations and dumbed-down citizenry.
Personally, I spent a lot of energy digging in my heels advocating for my kids under the old incompetent PTO Council alum system School Committee that just rubber stamped anything and batted their eyelashes at Jeff Young. In one of the richest communities in the country, I had to attend meetings to get them to spend for new boilers and windows at my kids’ elementary school because they had to wear their parkas to school. I haven’t been blogging, complaining or protesting for the last several years because I felt that I had competent SC members like Hills, Albright and Siegel that would do the right thing.
Parents shouldn’t have to spend a huge chunk of their time standing up to ineffective School Committees. But get ready to. This shift in leadership is a real nose dive to mediocrity and contrary to moving our system forward.
Shawn, I’m a year and a half into sending my youngest to college (and have advocated for full day K since my almost 20 year old was 4– hopefully, we can join the majority of MA communities on that point at least) so I am not as personally invested as you should be. Maybe you should stop being so Dem politically correct and think about the real impact that superior SC leadership has on your young children’s education. From my experience going from shivering children to a new school, it does.
What karenN said. Making Newton Meh Again.
At this point it is irrelevant who chairs the SC. Matt Hills lead a group of people who think excess spending on our schools is ordained in heaven. Now we have a school budget that is out of control and unsustainable. In Newton prior to 1999 the budget was shared equally between the city and the schools. Now the schools consume 63 per cent of all spending with no slow down in sight. The schools in 2016-17 have a million dollar deficit as well with no easy solution. Several months ago the city council raised the tax rate to an all time high of 11.4 per cent. This is a very heavy increase for home owners especially on top of recent overrides.
Matt Hills spearheaded these enormous spending policies. I doubt that Ruth and her supporters will change anything. The present SC will simply continue to dig an enormous financial hole.
Karen, I will not criticize our new SC leadership here as they are committed public servants and are my friends, but I will say this about Matt Hills — he has been the most positively impactful leader the SC has seen since I’ve lived in Newton.
He professionalized our body, guiding us to act as a board. We now maintain appropriate distance from the day to day running of NPS (we hire David Fleishman, who is responsible for the daily management of the school department and its personnel), even while we have more direct contact and effective engagement with senior staff than ever. This is an incredibly finess-full balancing act and Matt’s vision alone got us here.
His mantra has always been: “Figure out the right answer and then worry about the politics.” This has lead him to unpopular but correct decisions and the Day Report is a perfect example:
Since last spring there has been relentless political pressure to release the report fully unredacted. Whether one likes this answer or not the unredacted report is unambiguously identified by our superintendent, HR director, outside council, and members of the secretary of state’s staff as a personnel record for the named individuals. The 1993 Ed Reform Act grants full ownership of personnel records and personnel decision-making to the superintendent and strips it from school boards. This means that our committee has no legal right to read this document even though some of our members have fought with Matt, demanding that David Fleishman be forced to make this document available. Release of this document unredacted would have left our individual members legally exposed and undermined staff morale. Matt defended the right answer and from my perch, this action is what precipitated leadership change just now.
Matt has worked thoughtfully and in a politically blind way to fully engage all members in meaningful assignments. Roles for those with whom he had the least smooth relationships included leadership on Facilities, Student Assignment and High School Start Time, Collective Bargaining, and Budget Guidelines. Matt is a rare individual who doesn’t let personal frictions interfere with his leadership roles and responsibilities. Our body is remarkably stronger and more effective because of this. And we are prepared for succession by having held positions of responsibility throughout Matt’s tenure as Chair.
Matt has been unflappable and clearheaded in supporting what is arguably the most important work of the School Committee — Collective Bargaining. Negotiating the right balance between the fair and respectful compensation of our staff (paying what it takes to get excellent employees) and the financial needs of our school department is Matt’s key legacy among important leadership initiatives. Past leadership was routinely quoted as saying “we must pay the most to get the best”. This was an admirable objective with an indefensible result — our compensation growth used to be at 6%, nearly double our revenue growth. This resulted in higher class sizes, narrower programming, and an ever-more-squeezed municipal budget. Changing this has solved the structural deficit, giving the school department the financial resources to provide excellence in education for our students.
More broadly, the elimination of the structural deficit is the cornerstone of the Mayor’s success in Newton. Although Setti Warren has articulated this vision since he began serving, I’ve been in the trenches and experienced the pressure to go back towards “unsustainable” during our most recent round of negotiations. It was Matt’s steady lead that kept us off that path.
The work of the School Committee is relentless and the right answers are rarely obvious. The leadership success of Ruth and Angela will rest on the substantial foundation that Matt has built.
Well said, Steve! And you’re not going to say it yourself, but a lot of the good governance you recite is owed to you, as well.
What, then, is the issue with Matt’s stewardship that caused Ruth to run against him and four others, including the mayor, to vote against him?
What Steve said. Exactly. Particularly this quote of Matt’s: “Figure out the right answer and then worry about the politics.”
I have met very few elected officials who share that mantra.
Real change to the School Committee will come at the ballot box this fall when voters will have the opportunity to vote in a host of new candidates. Anyone considering running should get into the race. We need challengers.
For many involved with the Newton Dems there were ongoing concerns that were publicly voiced; the past treatment of the Newton Teachers Association, efforts to break/outsource the Newton Public Schools Custodians Union, the use of outsourcing as a budget strategy and certainly the refusal to firmly oppose the privatization of public education in Massachusetts (2016 Ballot Question 2) are examples of where we had substantive policy disagreements with former Chairman Hills and his supporters on the School Committee.
@Shawn: How else would you suggest keeping costs under control? The money has to come from somewhere. I worry about having School Committees like the ones who worked with Jeff Young: He told them how much money he needed, they didn’t question him, and they kept pushing the mayor for more money. We paid teachers more than we could afford because we blindly listened to the mayor and superintendent of schools. Matt changed that, not by himself but he was instrumental in collective bargaining that changed the way the School Committee deals with the NTA. (Mayor Warren deserves a huge share of that credit as does Jonathan Yeo, who was chair of the collective bargaining subcommittee at the time.)
I don’t want to see an override campaign in this city anytime soon. We’ll need one eventually but the charter commission and mayoral campaigns are going to be divisive enough, we don’t need to set ourselves up to go back to taxpayers for more money. And I don’t want to see School Committees who can’t operate within their budgets.
@Gail – it is a good question and one the nation wrestles with in many ways, as some areas see jobs outsourced/shipped overseas, etc. Continued privatization reduces accountability and hurts working families by taking away good pay and benefits. As far as teacher pay, our former SC Chairman told me once that assistant teachers, even those with post-graduate education levels, in Newton should just live in their parents’ homes because they are “paid too much already.” People need to be paid fairly – especially those teaching our students. Prop 2.5 has meant it is hard for municipalities to keep pace with inflation over many years, and so budgets are cut again and again. There isn’t an easy answer – cities and towns need more options – but cutting budgets all the way to the bottom is not the way to go.
Shawn, I agree completely that people need to be paid fairly but I don’t believe for a second that Matt said that about assistant teachers. I do believe it’s what you heard.
Respectfully: It’s easy for you to acknowledge that there’s no easy answer, but you criticize the hard answers. You also blame Prop 2 1/2. I agree that Prop 2 1/2 ties hands, but the fact is, it exists and it isn’t going anywhere. Teachers can only get paid more in the current budget if there are fewer teachers. Otherwise, we have a budget deficit.
You can’t create more money by repeatedly saying there isn’t enough.
What Steve and Gail said. Perfect articulated.
I have not followed the School Committee nearly as closely as I did when I was at the TAB or had a kid in the Newton Public Schools. But there’s one thing about Goldman’s and Pitter’s rise to school committee leadership that troubles me…even though I totally recognize that it is not in any way their fault.
And that is that neither Goldman nor Pitter were ever involved in a contested School Committee contest. Again, not their fault, but I like to believe running in a competitive school committee contest helps vet candidates and, by necessity, nudges candidates to spend time talking to and thinking about people like me: folks who don’t have kids in the schools.
Again, Ruth (who I don’t really know) and Angela (who I know from other circles) may be great selections. But I can’t help but think they would have been better selections if they had to define themselves and their positions through at least one competitive election.
Let’s be clear about Prop 2 1/2. First of all, over the last decade inflation has been well under 2 1/2%. Second, although Prop 2 1/2 limits the increase in taxes on assessed property values to 2 1/2%, property values increase due to construction and improvements. So, tax revenue usually goes up a lot more than 2 1/2%. Even if tax revenue went up by only 2 1/2%, the city would still enjoy a real increase in revenue.
Here is a math quiz. 50% of your current income pays for property taxes. You spend the rest of your income on discretionary expenses. If your income increases at an assumed inflation rate of 1%, what percentage of your income will be spent on discretionary expenses in 47 years? How would your answer change if there is one override during this time period?
Regarding the exchanges between Gail and Shawn:
A key learning for me after I got on SC is how different choices look when one must take responsibility for an outcome rather than simply shout out as a carefree advocate. There is no better illustration of this than the appearance of “repeal Obamacare” advocates who are now in power, suddenly own the outcome, and are backing away from their past words.
Our collective bargaining work offers many lessons including these two:
• Listen to one side only and they’ll always be convincing.
• Don’t pass judgment before you know what’s going on.
During negotiations the Newton Dems took issue with the “treatment of the Newton Teachers Association” by the SC and they helped distribute “We Support Newton Educators” (as if the SC doesn’t!) yard signs around the City. Yet in the end NTA President Mike Zilles was quoted by Globe reporter Ellen Iskanian this way: “It was a hard negotiation, but a fair negotiation.” Mike’s job is to do as much as he can for his membership and our negotiating team has always respected this. But even Mike appreciates that he is operating in the real world, within a real context.
Regarding Greg’s comment:
I can appreciate how one might want our Chair and VC to cut their teeth on hard-fought general elections. I know that I was better prepared to start serving after I had been through two of them! But most of our learning truly comes once we are on the committee. Ruth and Angela have been serving for 3+ and 5+ years respectively, and I cannot imagine that engaging in a hard-fought election would give them any more preparation than they have now.
interpretive politics: Mayor is siding with Fuller for Mayor.
@Harry, This won’t be the first time I asked this question: What are you talking about?
Steve you said something that rather alarmed me. You said:
“Release of this document unredacted would have left our individual members legally exposed and undermined staff morale.”
Can you please explain this comment. The way I see it, the only way an individual member can be legally exposed, is if they did something illegal. Is that what you are saying?????
If I may comment on something this story highlights – the rise of female leadership in the city, and the response to it, some of it respectful and some of it tinged with that old time feeling that we need to rely on the men to get “important” things done.
We’re seeing more women rise as part of the total city leadership team at all levels, in all positions. More women running for the City Council. Young women stepping up to the plate and taking a risk. Some veteran female leaders finally looking in the mirror and saying, “why not me?”. This should be seen as a step forward, yet even in 2017, in what’s considered a progressive city and what should be considered a sign of progress, comments continue to undermine these women. And to no surprise, many (but not all) of them come from women. I merely ask you to think about, not just the blatant mysoginist comments, but also those that merely undermine female leadership.
From just the last 3-4 days on this blog:
“Typical politics and prom queen popularity”
“the Women of the Golden Circle will further dig in their high heels”
“PTO Council coffee clatches, fawning to superintendents and pretending to actually manage a multi-million dollar budget.”
“This shift in leadership is a real nose dive to mediocrity” Because we know female leadership is mediocre.”
“the old incompetent PTO Council alum system School Committee that just rubber stamped anything and batted their eyelashes at Jeff Young.”
“My understanding is that Goldman told Hills many times that she wasn’t going to run against him. I’m going to hope/trust that she can handle confrontation better than she handled this situation. What’s so difficult about telling someone that you are going to run against him?” The underlying tone in this statemtent is that women don’t have the courage to stand up to a man.
“The leadership success of Ruth and Angela will rest on the substantial foundation that Matt has built.” No it won’t! Their success or failure lies directly on their shoulders.
It was a hard fought battle and two women won in the end. We’ll all be fine. I have no doubt that Matt will serve out his last term with honor because that’s who he is.
Excellent post. Thank you Jane.
Sorry, Jane, but I’m calling bullsh*t. I can’t speak for everyone but I’m offended by your accusations. What I’ve always liked about Matt on the SC is his ability to handle confrontation — an essential when one is involved in collective bargaining, but something most people shy away from. By suggesting that my statement reflects sexism, you are choosing to undermine my point. I could claim that your easy dismissal of my opinion is sexist too. But I won’t.
@KarenN-
I don’t know enough about the
tenure of Matt Hills to comment,
but I agree with most of what you said and have had very similar
experiences to yours in regards to the Newton schools. I supported Steve Siegel & Margaret Albright and continue to this day. I like having
adults in the room. When Margaret
Albright ran, NTA President Jeff
Zilles, aided and abetted by the PTO
Councils, waged a vicious campaign to keep her from getting elected. Thankfully they weren’t successful.
I ran into Ruth Goldman at the Newton Ctr harvest fair during that election cycle, and when she saw the Albright button on my jacket she made
some disapproving comment that she failed to substantiate about Margaret’s
qualifications. There have been no school committee members more concerned about the welfare of ALL Newton school students than Margaret
Albright and Steve Siegel, except for perhaps Geoff Epstein. All three were, and probably still are, loathed by all the useful idiots that have served on the school committee or have served said school committee members.
I’ll add Susie Heyman here as a plus also. Susie was always a good listener, responder, and was always straight with me and I appreciated that. We didn’t always agree but i believe we shared a mutual respect for each other.
Ruth G and I went to Newton South about the same time -1977-1980 -and we had some common
acquaintances, but I never remember her being particularly political. I was surprised to see she was on the school
committee. A bit of a surprise.
@Paul: I think you’d be hard pressed to find a high school student who aspires to being School Committee chair when she grows up. Not relevant.
Thank you Gail. Consider me duly chastised in a suitably school marmish way. I was simply mentioning that Ruth did not strike me as a political person, i wasn’t close enough to her to attempt to handicap her future plans. The statement i made was germane to the little knowledge i had about her, so therefore it was entirely relevant. Try decaf next time 🙂
Leaders’ success always to some extent rests on the foundations of those who came before them. When there has been a particularly effective leader, those who follow can accomplish more because they have a strong foundation to build on. This is true regardless of the gender of the prior or subsequent leaders.
Mgwa -The positive aspects of change is that new people are able to put their stamp on the ongoing process and progress of governance. Newton has become fearful of change in recent years, perhaps as a reflection of what’s going on in the country.
I like and repsect Steve. He’s a neighbor and we’ve had many long conversations. However, his statement was perhaps the most disturbing to me, in part because he’s a school committee member and in part because he undermined the new leadership. School committee members have to be able to put aside their personal opinions for the sake of the school system. He may think what he stated, but stating it publily was crossing a line.
Tonight’s School Committee meeting was a breath of fresh air. The new Chair and Vice Chair ran the meeting very efficiently. The best part of the meeting for me tonight was hearing from Matt Hills as a member, not as a Chair. He had some great comments, and expertise to share with the committee. Maybe it will be a win-win that he’s not the Chair for his last ten months on the SC, and he can be a solid member who makes great contributions.
mgwa understood my meaning. Our past chair dramatically rebuilt how our committee operates, to the better. Our current leadership may take us to new heights but will go further than they might have otherwise because of Matt’s work. That’s not criticism and it’s certainly not rooted in gender. It’s an acknowledgment that a great structure can lead to future organizational success.
Steve – Now you managed to insult previous SC chairs who have served the city well. Why not just leave it be?
Time to move on. Very nice to hear the meeting went well and everyone contributed to a positive environment.
Jane,
Steve was just being factual. Matt was a class apart from the prior SC chairs. I served under 4 and Matt was by far the best.
Facts are not insults.
Jane,
Steve is arguing accurately and well.
I served under 3 different SC chairs and in my final term, Matt was vice chair. His approach was refreshingly fact based and objective a real departure from prior leadership, and he had a huge effect on the approach to bargaining with the unions. He has from the start been focused on establishing best practices and tried his best to leave a legacy which put the SC in a sound position for future decision making. He succeeded.
Well said, Steve.
And facts are not insults.
I wanted to comment that I have found Ruth Goldman to be extremely helpful and approachable when reaching out to her regarding issues. I am not surprised at the above comment that Paul did not find her very political back in HS. I would say that is true of Ruth today. In my interactions with her I have felt that her involvement is driven by caring about the issues which is not always your typical politician.