The newest issue of the Newton Beacon feature two guest Op Eds about the upcoming override vote:
Vote yes to invest in Newton’s future by Christine Dutt and Kerry Prasad
Vote no, fix core education issues first by Sumukh Tendulkar
Op-Eds for and against the tax overrides
by Jerry Reilly | Mar 3, 2023 | Newton | 66 comments
Sumukh Tendulkar’s motivations for a great NPS are commendable, and his support for the debt exclusion override items is appreciated by Countryside and Franklin parents.
However, the approach he suggests to achieving academic excellence and fiscal stability at NPS is risky and flawed. It is premised on the fact that a failed override won’t hurt NPS because the city can make up the funding without impact, that a failed override is necessary to provide leverage to achieve needed educational goals, and that once those goals are achieved or agreed on Newton will embrace an even bigger educational override to address NPS’s ongoing deficit.
To the first point, the city most decidedly does not have $140M at its disposal to deal with the NPS budget short term without major cuts in the rest of the city. See the FAQ here: https://www.newtonma.gov/government/mayor-fuller/override
If you don’t believe the administration believe someone like Councilor Markiewicz, who actually isn’t taking a position on the operational override. Some city account numbers are artificially high because of timing, some money is being held in escrow in case the Eversource settlement is reversed, the pension funding plan is under control of the Newton Retirement Board and not the Mayor or Council, ARPA money is almost all allocated and on and on.
That means that cuts are going to hurt. Maybe not all at NPS, but maybe road paving. Or neighborhood traffic safety. Or more inequitable fees for students and families. This isn’t a bluff.
The next premise is that a failed operating override is required to accomplish educational change. I don’t see the logic here, or if I do I don’t like it. Is the idea to use the solvency of NPS as leverage, by not just threatening, but worsening a fiscal crisis? How about instead engaging the new superintendent with like-minded parents and educators? I am still a person who believes in the strength of ideas and the power of reasonable people. In addition, I believe that NPS would be in a much better position to implement reasonable changes if they weren’t under severe budget pressure. Yes, NPS will still be under budgetary pressure even with the override. But at least it won’t be a three alarm fire.
And, finally, I believe the proposed idea is that once some suitable approach to the somewhat nebulous concept of academic excellence is agreed to, a new coalition would emerge to support an even larger override that would cover NPS’s full structural deficit. This is an enormous risk based on highly unlikely politics. The “no” coalition is not homogeneous. There are plenty of people in it who will oppose any tax increase, or any more money for NPS. They aren’t coming along. I assume that the administration chose the override amount based on political realities. Convincing more people to support an even larger override after this one fails is an enormous pull. A future mayor may well not want to risk it. That would leave NPS in a horrible position with no way out.
In summary, the goals here and concern for the future of NPS are well placed. The idea that we have to create a bigger financial crisis to solve NPS’s problems is not. Change may be important, but continuous funding is essential. Please give the new superintendent, who has a great track record of communication and consensus-building, enough resources to make improvements and make her case.
If you agree that NPS is under-resourced, then please give them resources. Then let’s work together.
Mike the problem is that seniors and lower income homeowners are not going to support increasing this regressive tax policy anymore. Only Councilor Wright has bravely spoken out for tax reform. Until there is reform the wealthy homeowners that want to continue this structurally racist tax policy will meet with lots of resistance.
The override represents something like a 3% increase in property tax (I haven’t run the numbers, so I don’t know exactly).
Why is that incremental percentage all of a sudden the catalyst for “we need a residential exemption”? Why wasn’t there a big call to action a year ago? Or 10? Where were today’s proponents then? After all, it’s not the 3% increase, it’s primarily the 100% rest of the tax burden that’s the problem.
I support consideration of the residential exemption. I hope Councilor Wright and others don’t just talk, but act on it, override or no. But I don’t see that as a excuse to not address our fiscal needs today with the limited and imperfect mechanisms we have.
And I see plenty potential for social inequity and pain of all kinds when we deny any resident, any family in Newton access to quality services starting with healthy and accessible schools. When we don’t fund and provide public services, the first people we hurt are the most vulnerable people with no other options.
As for older residents and lower- and fixed-income residents, I know better than to speak for them. They are not a stereotype or monolith. They are individuals with their own concerns for themselves and for their community. We acknowledge their needs while trusting their opinions and values. They may just surprise you.
I guess that’s why we vote.
Sumukh Tendulkar has a lot of good goals (who doesn’t support excellence in schools?) but absolutely no idea how to bring those into action. His idea that by defeating the override we will magically come together to truly enact a program of excellence has not basis in fact, nor does the idea that we will quickly come together to pass a future override once we’ve done that actually have any basis in reality either.
We could certainly try that approach. OR…hear me out…we could pass the override, have additional funds at our disposal, push for an excellence committee, vote for new school committee members, and try to improve the schools with a bit more financial tools and flexibility.
Anyone who has been paying attention knows how hard it is to pass an override. If this one fails, we are looking at at least an election cycle before we do this again. How long will our kids have to deal with lower resources while we wait? 5 years like in 2008? A decade, like the time between overrides?
I’ll also note, the people sending me his editorial from both Fig City and now the Beacon aren’t educational advocates. That’s a very small subsegment of opponents. The people thrilled with his take on the override are anti-tax people. They don’t ever intend to support a future override. They are just taking advantage of the naivety of those “improve NPS by starving NPS” people who believe that voting “no” will magically change the schools. See, they say. The override is actually BAD for the schools. And up is down and wrong is right.
On the plus side, there seems to be growing support for the two debt overrides, even among the “no” on the override crowd. I hope at the very least we will see that through. The vote “no” on three supporters seem to be few and far between.
If the override doesn’t pass, I also hope Mr. Tendulkar will be around for the next decade to help fix the harm he has done to the Newton schools. He has been the main public voice against the override as a way to improve NPS. I would expect him to take the lead on the excellence campaign and committee, and push for the funds needed to make it happen. And when the new Superintendent talks about budget problems every year until the next override, I hope he is equally as vocal with ideas regarding how to fix those issues.
Mr. Tendulkar’s argument is laughable on its face. “I want excellence so we should take away resources from the system.” It seems to me that if we want better results, that will require more resources not less.
Here’s the part that you’re missing fellas (@Fig & Halle)… the funding that you’re fighting for is not for AE. If it was specific to AE – detailed plans to increase test scores, school rankings and parent satisfaction – I am certain Sumukh would be the first to hold a Yes sign at the polling station a week from Tuesday. Funding the status quo, because the Mayor does not want to dip into short term funds for what may likely be a short term problem is why many will vote No.
Matt, Sumukh doesn’t even know what he wants for “academic excellence”. And litigating an academic standard change through an override makes zero sense to me. Vote out the school committee if you feel academic standards need to change.
And if the desire is for more funds for academic excellence, great. Where do those come from, year after year? When overall costs are rising?
I do understand a lot of the rationale for a “no” vote on the override. It is a difficult time to be asking for more money. But this concept of voting no because the money isn’t dedicated to academic excellence or hiring more teachers mystifies me. If you think the gap can be solved with existing money, ok. But don’t you still then need more money to fund academic excellence? Either way, aren’t more resources needed?
It somewhat feels that people like Valarie and Sumukh weren’t being heard enough prior to the override on their complaints about academic excellence, and they see this as a chance to force a change. That only in a full blown crisis will we be brave enough to conduct the self-examination necessary to make Newton schools return to former glory. And that might produce some result, even at great cost to some kids currently in the system. But there is no path and no guaranty. And no reason why we can’t rationally make similar changes without the threat of a looming cliff.
I will say that I’ve cast my vote and I’ve said my piece on these three votes. I certainly hope at a minimum we pass the two debt exclusions. I think the kids at those schools deserve better than the schools they have, and I am thankful the city fixed up my kids elementary school, even if most of my kids didn’t get to use it.
On the override, I hope it passes. I think the city will be better for it. But these are difficult times for many of us, and I’ll understand if it does not.
Have a pleasant rest of the weekend Matt. I’m going to try to post less on this, as I’m repeating myself at this point and other voices should speak.
This is for fignewtonville to answer your question about AE – no, we don’t need more money. We need to change the existing policies that take away opportunities from kids to excel, hold them back, treat parents like we have no idea how we should be educating our children, and waste money on things that are marginally helpful.
Mike when the tax rate increases people will look more carefully at the equality of the tax itself. Yes I am a “senior citizen” here and many other seniors that I meet up with are unhappy that they are being asked to carry a disproportionate share of this regressive tax.
Most of the seniors don’t have the funds to spend on slick advertisements to promote the override but I believe our voice will be heard. If the mayor thought that a gaudy senior center would buy the votes of most seniors in this city she is mistaken.
If the override proposal comes back next year with a reformed progressive tax plan I think the result would be overwhelmingly in favor. I still think this city needs to address the growing barriers to homeownership for lower income families here that make Newton a poster child for structural racism.
The Mayor didn’t “think that a gaudy senior center would buy the votes of most seniors in this city”. She responded to the insufficient size and disgraceful shape of the current senior center before the ran for mayor. She has campaigned on a new facility beyond just a senior center. She championed it and prioritized it. She clearly stated that it was to benefit the largest growing demographic in the city. She took political hits because of the citing and cost issues. She won re-election in spite of it, or maybe because of it. And she’s following through with both the building and funding to meaningfully staff the building and provide additional assistance to older residents.
Agree with her decisions or not, her commitment to the senior center is not some quick political ploy.
“If the override proposal comes back next year with a reformed progressive tax plan I think the result would be overwhelmingly in favor.” My assumption is that you can’t implement a residential exemption and an override in the same vote, if a residential exemption is something that gets voted on at all.
That, plus the fact that a residential exemption provides only limited relief for the owners of cheaper properties and higher tax bills for owners of more expensive ones makes me dubious of any claims of “overwhelmingly in favor” of any override.
Mike the Senior Center was a rabbit hole that the Mayor couldn’t climb out of. I have my doubt about how much attendance will rise at the new center. I can see 10 or maybe 20% but wait there will be gym facilities for the seniors to share. Mike the savings in Boston for those who qualify for the residential exemption is $3,456.50. That may not amount to much for you but that’s a big savings to those on a fixed budget and living in a moderately valued home.
I tried to find information about why the residential exemption would take decades to research and vote on and I couldn’t find anything. All of the excuses are red herrings and the well heeled supporters of a higher REGRESSIVE property tax will have regrets that they didn’t reach out to those most affected if they lose this vote. The city tax assistance programs are a joke and anger most people who look at them and realize that almost nobody can qualify and take care of a house and have any chance of providing for any end of life care at the same time. That’s why I am a NO Vote
@Mike the reason that the residential exemption would gather more support (for a future override) is because more taxpayers would save on their tax bill then have an increase. Yes those at the top would see a larger increase than those saving at the bottom but aren’t the wealthy taxpayers as a group supporting the current proposal? It certainly seems that way from the list of those endorsing the override? Would you say that if the property tax was reformed the wealthier homeowners would put all of their resources into fighting overrides?
It’s time for Newton to join Watertown, Brookline and the other 8 nearby communities that have reformed their property tax system. I’m voting no on new permanent Regressive Property taxes
✅ NPS represents 49% of the Operational Override….yet accounts for 95% of the discussion.
✅ the $9.2m is not that we’re voting for. That $9.2m grows every year by 2.5%….forever
✅ available now: free cash, reduce OPEB funding to originally planned levels
✅ coming soon: added revenue from new growth (i.e. Northland and Korff), millionaire’s tax, Healey’s new budget that include education funding….
✅ Mayor is only committed to year one on funding NPS. After year one, the Mayor can budget this extra money however her honor pleases (more consultants)
Makes you wonder who is working for who…? Vote no on the Operational Override. I
@Matt Lai The availability of free cash is not as simple as I had originally thought. There are good fiscal guidelines in place for its use. The city prudently limits the amount it releases for operating uses each year, uses it to fund rainy day funds, and if any is left it uses it for one time expenditures. I also thought we should not fund the municipal retiree liability so fast, but
the Newton Retirement Board of Trustees (not the Mayor) has the sole authority for changing this funding schedule.
I agree there are all sorts of pet projects the mayor has (like those stupid consultants) that she could cut, but as I learned from the previous budget fight, she has absolute discretion about each penny. She has stated the schools will get cut and I fear she will make do on that threat.
We can’t bank on this new revenue you outlined. I’m concerned that the new projects will actually be net cash flow negative for the city because of the added services needed and the higher interest rate environment and recession will stall these projects. As for getting money from the governor from the millionaire’s tax, it’s the less affluent communities that will get those funds not us.
I agree we should throw the mayor out. I looked at your LinkedIn, I think you should run.
I m going to ignore all the insinuations and cheap attacks on motivation and maturity. I am also going to disregard the well-orchestrated campaign of threats, fear and guilt, and boil it down as follows:
• Are we ok with passing an Override AND still have cuts? And if you think cuts w $4.5M are bad, guess how worse it will be to bridge the $60-100M+ gap over 5 years
• Are we ok where erosion of academics means 69% of parents (and 60% HS students) who moved to Newton for schools do not agree w its directions? And this is not purely theoretical – look at MCAS or AP data (link at bottom of my OpEd). For eg: 50% of all Newton and 70% of Newton North students fail at Calc AB (state av is 41%). I think it is us who are failing these kids and teachers with poorly concocted policies.
I hope regardless of your affiliations and intentions to vote, the answer is a clear NO.
And then there is the question of trust – trust if right actions will be taken in a timely fashion. Experience and evidence has eroded my trust – 3 yrs after Covid and flight to private schools, we still do not know reasons. No lessons learned after our much delayed reopening and its impact on students, and why it took 6 months to form a Medical Advisory Board after it was proposed by experts. I still do not understand why something as apolitical as a Medical Board took 6 months.
So the real questions are for the administration and the people in power:
• Hills, Levy. & co accurately identified structural deficit in Jun 2020, why do we still not have a plan, a commission, a something? Instead we go from year to year with cuts and manufactured crisis. http://bit.ly/3ygYL5W
• After 1,700+ enrollment decline from 2017-27 (you can calculate how many schools that would fill or leave empty), why do we not have a plan or know the reasons?
• After an overwhelming majority of parents expressing dissatisfaction and poor outcomes as measured by MCAS and AP, why are we dismissing the data and taking victory laps?
My decision is clear. This is just not sustainable and does not align why many parents chose Newton and NPS. I trust you to make your own decision, hopefully based on evidence rather than emotion.
Sumukh, couldnt agree more. Being gaslit and being told why we are wrong and how to vote is insulting,
Sumukh, you are presenting reasons why NPS needs change, or at the very least to communicate and engage better in ways that improve trust with the parent and education community. And you acknowledge the seriousness of the structural deficit at NPS, but perhaps not the structural deficit of the city.
The major disconnect is believing that things will get better if the operating override fails and NPS loses funding.
You make the case that the city has money to bail out NPS (for how long?), but it doesn’t, or at least without cutting things that really need to be done. I’ve followed up every supposed money-pot that “no” supporters have suggested, and they just aren’t there. I trust the administration and a large group of independently-elected city councilors not to leave money lying around unless there’s a good reason for it.
That means that NPS will be cut, and will in budget crisis mode, even more than now, for reasons that have nothing to do with “educational excellence”. NPS has a huge challenge challenge of addressing legal and moral mandates for special needs and dealing with out of district placement. That, among many other things, is real, and gets worse by the day. That’s what you’re risking.
Then to get your buy in for more funding, this system under stress and budget pressure needs to meet some standard of the vague concept of “academic excellence”. You mention a “Blue Ribbon Committee”. But is that the standard? What does that do? Are their milestones? Results?
All these things make sense to ask for in the context of advancing student education. They stop making sense when they are used to hold the entire NPS budget up. They are separate issues.
A quest for action on academic excellence is fine, laudable even. Every parent likely shares at least some of those concerns. But building consensus on what that precisely means and how to achieve it is not straightforward (especially in Newton!). It’s a challenge that could take years, even without disfunction.
I simply don’t see how conflating budget and NPS reform gets you toward your goal, besides using it to get attention. On the other hand, I see many ways where a cash strapped NPS increases class sizes, can’t meet student needs sufficiently, and can’t continue in-budget school modernization projects such as Horace Mann, decreased clubs, increased fees. Will that improve test scores? Will that decrease flight to private schools? Will that help students anywhere on the academic spectrum? Will it improve Newton’s academic reputation? It all seems self-fulfilling, and destructive to the students who have to live through it.
Finally, there is no way out of this box. I do not believe there is a single elected leader in Newton who believes that the voters will approve a larger override for the schools if this one fails. (I believe that’s your proposal, please correct me if I’m wrong.) We’ll hear the same line, “the city always puts the schools on the ballot to pull on heartstrings”, or “NPS gets enough money”, or “spend within your means” or “I don’t have kids in the schools anymore”.
You’ve written that you aren’t a politician. But politics always comes into play whenever we ask the public for money or trust. We may not have a great surplus of either right now, but there will be even less to back a second school-driven override if this one fails.
I urge you to look for an alternative solution to the challenge of giving every student in Newton the headroom to reach their greatest potential. That’s what many of us want. That’s what many of us are worried will be denied if the continuity of school funding is not maintained. Give the new superintendent, a person who has been widely acclaimed for her skills of parent engagement and management, a chance to chart a new path.
Hey @Frank D. So what you are doing isn’t telling us why we are wrong and how to vote?
@Mike. I hear v14 is instituting a 500 word count maximum. You are screwed. You do realize, in all seriousness, that no one reads your (or fig’s) entire essay.
Be more like matt, jerry and others…brevity is key.
And bruce. No, i only say how i vote. No one is changing anyones mind here. Everyone who posts on this site is already decided
Any substantive criticisms, Frank D, or are you happy gaslighting when it suits your purposes?
@Ted, You know my feelings by now.
-prefunding the pension is nonsense.
-paying for the senior center, while calling for an override to fund a deficit intentionally created…not aligned with my priorities
-too much nimby…we buy webster woods but develop dudley road. Like, wow.
-we live in new england. Bike likes are nice but honestly, why waste money on something that cant be used for 4-6 months a year,
-putting forth legislation to ban natural gas is insane. Pure insanity. Electricity in MA is 66% generated by natiral gas, so yea.
This administration thinks we can solve the worlds climate, inequality, housing, etc problems and shove it down our throats. Let us be, please. Too much government, too many rules, too much bullshit.
Im voting no to the general and i pray everyone else does too.
Frank that was a lot of words on your last post. I’m afraid I stopped reading because it was too lengthy. Please be more brief. Thank you!
And Sumukh:
We’ve been exceedingly polite to you. Reasoned with you. There have been zero insinuations and cheap attacks on motivation and maturity on this forum. There is no well-orchestrated campaign of threats, fear and guilt either. We just don’t understand your logic. And we have every right to say so without being accused of treating you unfairly.
As I’ve said multiple times on the forum, it isn’t bullying to call someone out on their bull. So please spare us the complaint about how folks are being mean to you by disagreeing with you.
You made yourself the face of a campaign against the override, and your main idea is that Newton schools aren’t good enough and need to be better (I can get behind any type of improvement plan) and to do so, we need to…vote against this override. You have zero plan after voting no. None. You just keep telling us Newton schools aren’t good enough and parents are unhappy. Yep. Got it. What comes next? The important part is where do we go from here!
I wish it were true that a larger override would follow an educational excellence campaign. It certainly sounds great. But look at the tremendous difficulty it has been to pass this smaller override. Think of the time that will pass before you can even attempt your plan, and how long it would take to marshal support for a new override years down the road. And wonder why no one on the school committee agrees with you. Not even Paul Levy. He didn’t vote no, like you. He abstained.
Look around at the people voicing support for your position on this forum and elsewhere. Ask yourself, when you push for an override later, are people supporting your position now suddenly going to have a change of heart later and continue to agree when you are asking them for additional taxes? Could it be that your desire to improve the school system has blinded you to the fact that you are being used by the “no” side to justify that their no vote actually doesn’t hurt the school system, and instead, the loss of extra funds actually helps it?
I don’t doubt you think you are doing the right thing here. I respect your passion and willingness to put yourself out there in a debate. I really do. But your position and logic are maddening. If the “no” side wins the override vote, I really do help you will help clean up the mess you will have made. The school system in Newton will need the help.
@Fig…..”Ask yourself, when you push for an override later, are people supporting your position now suddenly going to have a change of heart later and continue to agree when you are asking them for additional taxes?
Yes once the Regressive Property Tax is reformed and a solid plan is brought forth with input from all parties. I would vote in favor of an even larger increase and I believe that many of the seniors that I know would too.
Jackson Joe:
You just made my point for me. I’m sure you would vote for a larger override at that point, as it wouldn’t impact you as much (or at all). I just would like to point out that you are only agreeing to vote for that larger override, once property tax reform happens and you don’t need to pay as much personally. I appreciate the sentiment, but that isn’t supporting a larger override. That supporting a larger override with a condition that is very unlikely to happen, and which would require an even LARGER override to overcome the condition.
For the record, Jackson Joe, that isn’t a criticism, I appreciate the honesty. You’ve been very consistent about why you don’t want to vote for an override, and I understand your argument. We differ on the regressive tax discussion a bit (because of it being a tax on capital too) but it is a good discussion to have.
@Fig…..Actually I don’t think that I would personally save much with a residential exemption but it would help my neighbors and I do care about them. If there was no increase at all I think my tax bill would be about equal with the residential exemption. My issue is with fairness and breaking down barriers to home ownership in Newton against minorities and lower and middle income families.
I want to give you the definition of what a REGRESSIVE Tax is. I think the definition may surprise you. Capital doesn’t come into play when defining what is a progressive or regressive tax is…………What Is a Regressive Tax?
A regressive tax is one where the average tax burden decreases with income. Low-income taxpayers pay a disproportionate share of the tax burden, while middle- and high-income taxpayers shoulder a relatively small tax burden.
@fig, touche!
Frank:
😉
(I admit I’m long winded and no one probably reads my stuff. I’m ok with it and I’m too old to change.)
If resources were what made the best schools, Boston, Chicago and NYC would be top public schools. Every override anyone who questions spending more on our schools is depicted as a cruel ogre. But I just don’t understand the basic math of why our schools need $4.5 million more per year when they’ve lost 1000+ students. Shouldn’t that lead to a reduction in costs? Currently when you add in all the school costs in other departments (like school nurses paid out of the Health dept) I believe our schools take over 75% of our City budget. When we first moved here schools were 50% of the total budget. My understanding is the growing school budget has been eating away at other departments (like Parks, Public Works, etc.) and what do we have to show for it? Needham has Spanish lessons in the elementary schools. Newton lost its foreign languages in elementary before we came.
1/3 of Newton businesses are non-profits – whatever happened to the discussion on payments in lieu of taxes? Especially frustrating is when neighbors stop development which could bring in additional tax revenue and sometimes even add additional non-profit buildings to the City’s care.
I understand what the City wants to spend more money on, but when I see the City spending $2K on a study for a new indoor pool and $1.8 million to repair a church tower, I question whether wants have been separated from needs.
Heading into a recession is a time not to be increasing spending.
Lucia, a couple of possible answers to your questions that I have learned.
Loss of students does not translate linearly into reduced costs. Those slots are distributed across the entire system. There’s a fixed cost associated with individual schools and the teams that teach there. Classroom sizes may shrink and grow without needed a new teacher. In a single school, there may be a principal, custodian, or a math or SEL coach that serves the whole building. Those positions have costs that don’t change when students leave.
On the plus side, we can better tolerate fluctuations in enrollment than we could a few years ago. Franklin was still overcrowded up until just before the pandemic, and the 1938 basement bike storage room that was normally the music room actually became a classroom for several years. That should never happen.
There is a consultant looking at future possibilities for the two elementary schools with the smallest populations. I appreciate the care that NPS is putting into this process. Neighborhood schools are part of the Newton social fabric, and closing schools can have an impact on neighborhoods and transportation alike.
As I put into another comment, NPS is facing real increases in costs. Addressing state mandated and important special needs either in-district or out-of-district is a major cost for all communities across the Commonwealth. We also face costs for extra staff to help with the academic and SEL recovery post-COVID. These kind of services benefit students with all sorts of needs, independent of their academic performance, and allow classroom teachers to focus on their lessons for the rest of the class.
These are kinds of costs we have never had to face to this extent before.
Your point about development has become quite clear to me as well. The override issue focuses the mind. We are paying for schools with override money, while Watertown isn’t. Why? Their development is paying for it. New housing needs new or better schools that serve new and existing residents alike.
Development may look a little different when the alternative is overrides or higher taxes. It’s good to see more of the big picture.
For me the overrides are a bitter pill that I’m going swallow. 30 years ago when Franklin was already probably already 60 years old someone should have said let’s plan for this but with 90000 very different people there is never politically a good time for tax hikes. My kids went to Franklin and we had good teachers there but the school was a total dump. So here we are, we pretended that noise in the motor wasn’t that loud until the car broke down. Nps is starting to break down now so I’m going to chip in and vote yes for all 3. I don’t blame folks who have limited income or no kids in NPS from voting No because they feel it’s unfair to them. They are already paying lots of tax for a school system they don’t even use. My kids have already had teachers and programs cut like the Math Boost at Day. So I want the cuts to stop and I am not holding a dime back from my kids schools.
Agree w/Michael. I was a student at Franklin in the 80s…..and thought the school was dated then. At least the city replaced the old drafty windows with what appear to be more energy efficient ones. But at some point, every facility reaches the end of its useful life and needs to be replaced, and Franklin’s was a long time ago. Thus, I will also be voting yes, but cannot fault those who will vote no.
Too bad that criticisms of Newton’s academic programs get conflated with the debate about the overrides (I believe the moneys raised will be well spent). In my view, the trick for educators is to challenge all level of students while not overworking them. Back in the day, we always worried about losing the best and brightest students to private schools if they felt trapped in slow-moving, unchallenging courses. We also wanted to find an appropriate amount of work to assign for all levels of students including those most challenged. We realized that the average student in Newton might be among the brightest in another community.
A few decades ago, many students complained that with all their homework, they had little time for life outside of class. When graduates came to visit, they acknowledged being superbly prepared for college but lamented the pressure and workload they had to bear.
Now things have perhaps gone too far the other way. We in the English department used to say that if students were reading a great deal, writing a great deal, and receiving appropriate feedback from which to learn, who would complain? These days, with such severe limits on how much work can be assigned, how could we carry out such a program?
Thanks @Bob Jampol. As someone who doesn’t have the knowledge about the academic environment in the high schools as you do, can you expand on your statement about “severe limits on how much work can be assigned”? How long has that been in place and what exactly are those limits. Thanks!
It’s very disappointing to read personal attacks against Sumukh on this website, but that’s what happens when you let people post anonymously. If I was running this website, I would ban those people.
I don’t think anyone can dispute Sumukh’s point that educational standards are declining in the Newton Public Schools along with attendance. People who have money are voting with their feet and taking their kids out of our schools. And there doesn’t seem to be a plan to use the override funds to actually improve school performance. Instead, the Yes vote argument is that we won’t lose teachers not that school performance will improve.
And a Yes vote doesn’t fix the ongoing structural deficit that will continue to grow despite the override. What’s the plan for that folks? More overrides?
So you can disagree with Sumukh’s argument, but let’s stop the personal attacks. Thank you.
What personal attacks Arthur? Can you name one?
It isn’t a personal attack to challenge an argument.
Sumukh is a leader. Leaders come forward with data and solutions. Thank you Sumukh. One issue lightly mentioned here but very important is that the lower grades have many fewer students than upper grades. These reports are available on the NPS site, but in summary, the 2018 projection for 2023 enrollment was 5,600 elementary, 2,900 middle, and 4,200 high school. The 2023 projection for 2028 is 4,600 elementary, 2,600 middle, and 3,800 high. Going beyond the declines, the most recent report (referenced second) shows the 2022/23-2027/28 figures for elementary declining by 8 percent over the projected five years, while middle and high decline by 4 percent each. This means that the following five year total projection will likely decline even more. The City of Newton has a very detailed demographic report showing our population. While the 2020 census has not yet been uploaded, the 1980 school aged population in Newton was 18,648 students, and in 2010 was 18,643 students. Nearly identical. And we’ve added a lot of housing since then. Bottom line, people are leaving our schools while the city’s population of school aged residents is stable. The decline in students paired with increased school funding results in rapidly escalating costs per student. Maybe this is good, maybe it is not. But it is already important and will become more so if present trends continue. An operational override will be with us forever. And if passed, the self-examination needed to unearth declines in public school participation will be further delayed.
Valerie:
Could you let me know what the solutions that Sumukh (and you apparently) are actually arguing for?
What happens AFTER the override is voted down?
Do we not have a funding gap based on the last teacher contract? How do we fill that? Do you think that gap will narrow long term?
Do you, like Sumukh has said previously, feel that a future override could be larger? Do you believe that is politically possible? When?
You state “the decline in students paired with increased school funding results in rapidly escalating costs per student”. I’m not sure why I should care about that in the short term.
You state that if the operational override passes, the “self-examination needed to unearth declines in public school participation will be further delayed” as if that is a fact. But it isn’t. It is an opinion, pure and simple. Why do you and Sumukh feel that it is necessary to push the school system to the brink of major cuts to somehow force this “self-examination”? This seems to be your major argument. If we aren’t in crisis with a capital C (which occurs with override failure), major change just won’t be made. Why? If so many parents are unhappy with the school system, why won’t they vote out the school committee in a year? Change the mayor? Change the city council? Won’t the new superintendent make a major difference? How do you know she won’t? Isn’t giving the new superintendent significant funds important if she does want to push changes?
I’m truly at a loss in understanding this position. I get the “no” votes of folks who don’t want to pay more taxes. The “no” votes of folks who think this will magically improve the schools? Not so much.
In all sincerity, it would be great if those advocating to reform NPS and “restore” academic excellence, could actually lay out a concrete plan, override or no override. All I hear is that rankings are down, test scores are down, and NPs is what it used to be like in the good old days. I hear generalities but have yet to see any concrete plan of what this would look like.
@ Bruce…..#1 raise teachers salaries to a level where the best teachers will know that they will be paid the same or more to teach in Newton and will not have to accept a 5-15% pay cut for the privilege to teach here. I think with better personnel there would be a lesser need for auxiliary staffing, coaches etc. Playing hardball with the unions is not always the best strategy. Look at police vacancies, school test scores. Save a nickel here and pay an extra dollar later
Here’s a solution…
I’m calling BS
The $4.5m going to NPS on the operational override is less than 2% of the overall $280m NPS budget….less than 2%.
Between Free Cash, ARPA and the new growth about to come, if the Operational Override fails, the Mayor and School Committee won’t let NPS fail…as citizens and voters, we won’t stand for it. There’s too much at stake politically, to let NPS fail.
So I’m voting “No” on the Operational Override….because we owe it to our kids to not cave to vail threats and irresponsible budget management. This is real life, and participation trophy politics only go so far. Real life wins in the long run. Fix the structural deficit by balancing the budget and making hard decisions, like every tax payer in this City.
$4.5M is still $4.5M. NPS js 89% salaries, so by simple estimate it is $4M in salary. With benefits that’s about 30 people, I would guess, which is exactly in line with the advertised cuts.
We aren’t talking fewer paper clips, we are talking about teachers and staff who are familiar with Newton Public Schools that are going to get cut.
Let’s not belittle the human impact on either the staff or on the work they perform for our kids.
A surprising number of people are willing to bet that there are piles of money lying around that will magically be used to save NPS. But look at Councilor Wright (a no OO vote) is saying: she is all about the taxpayer impact. She’s not talking about these surpluses. Same with Councilor Markiewicz, an accountant, who is a “make your own decision” on the OO. Sounds like he expects a shortfall, or at least a good chance. It really isolates Councilor Gentile’s comments. (Did he support the overrides for Angier, Zervas, or Cabot? I don’t know.)
If the city had extra cash, they’d be paving a lot more streets. I suspect some money is being held back in case the override fails, but that that’s just contingency to avoid calamity. You can’t solve chronic budget shortfalls with one time money.
Matt:
Where’s your solution in what you wrote? Bravado and clichés?
“I’m calling BS”? On what exactly? The fact that there is a gap? The city needing more revenue?
We “owe it to our kids not to cave to veiled threats and irresponsible budget management”? Why do we owe that to our kids? Don’t we owe them a fully funded education slightly more?
Also, I’m not sure why the truism “this is real life, and participation trophy politics only go so far” applies here. What exactly is “participation trophy politics”?
“Real life wins in the long run”? What does that even mean? Isn’t the budget gap real life?
I do get your point that the city needs to fix the structural deficit by balancing the budget and making hard decisions. I agree. That is exactly what the city is doing. It is doing it on the income side by asking for an override to help fund the gap in income, thereby balancing the budget. That’s a solution. Not a pleasant one, but it actually solves part of the revenue problem.
But nothing that you posted is a solution. It is a bucket of truisms and random phrases masquerading as a solution. It’s like my father telling me to “buckle down and get to work” or Crash Davis teaching
Ebby Calvin “Nuke” LaLoosh how to speak to reporters in Bull Durham “…I just want to give it my best shot, and the good Lord willing, things will work out.”
But the good Lord willing things will work out isn’t a PLAN. Trusting in the city to work things out by cutting something other than the schools when the time comes is a hope, not a solution. A hope for additional revenue that hasn’t been locked down, a hope that the Mayor will have the same priorities when she is balancing multiple competing requests, a hope that costs don’t continue to rise with inflation, a hope that the Commonwealth will come in with additional local revenue or Eversource will lose their appeal. And it might work for a year. Or two. But the trending gap is large. As Sumukh notes, this override won’t even close that trending gap. And the next school contract is going to expose even deeper revenue need, just like it has in every other school community in MA. Because that’s the math. And the real world.
And to bring this back to Valarie and Sumukh, you aren’t arguing their side. Your solution is “hard decisions”, not investing in NPS excellence after a blue ribbon commission. It’s living within our means, not self-examination leading to a larger override later.
ps. Bull Durham is the best. Love that movie.
I think we can agree that “Bull Durham” is an awesome, awesome flick!! 🙂
To be clear, I am NOT discounting the human element of this thing. I’m old enough to have ridden thru layoffs from the .com crash, the mortgage crisis, and many, many years of standard fat trimming labeled as “talent re-alignment” – this the life of Corporate America. It happens, and it sucks – whether it’s your number that’s called, a dear friend/colleague, or you have to be the one to give the unforunate message – but it’s also a fundamental part of budget management. Not every performance review is a 5-start review. Corporate “talent re-alignments” usually averages around 3-5% of headcount, so if the worst case scenario is realized and the $4.5m portion of the override fails, that’s still less tha 2%.
Solutions….I’ve thrown out a few, but to restate – use free cash, take the gas off accellerated OPEB funding. Happy to offer more if I had the access and time to every budget item and beneficiary in the budget. But here’s an alternative to what I meant by “BS”…
How many meetings since October has been about the override? How many hours has Dr. Smith, and the myriad of NPS and City leaders/staff spent on the override? Imagine if the City had to pay for overtime? The Countryside and Franklin Overrides will likely pass. Everyone knows this. So the majority of all of this effort – countless hours spent by all; and paying for a special election – is focused on the operational override; and laser focused on the NPS aspect of the operational override…. and for what…. less than 2% of the overall NPS budget and less than 1% of the overall city budget.
If the override fails, sun will still rise and school doors will open in September. And if the override passes, we still need to address the concerns Sumukh raised about AE and the structural deficit. A yes vote is not an excuse to “lolly-gag”. 🙂
You know what that would make us Matt? A bunch of Lollygaggers.
I’m going to go quote that manager’s speech from Bull Durham to my kids because they failed to empty to dishwasher or walk the dog. Lollygagging through their chores. They will have no idea what I’m talking about. It will be glorious.
Lilly gagging was a great scene. 🙂
ChatGTPs take on the Override:
“The proposed Override in Newton, Massachusetts is a controversial issue that has sparked heated debates among residents. On one hand, supporters argue that the Override is necessary to fund crucial services such as schools, public safety, and infrastructure. They claim that without the additional funding, these services will suffer and that the quality of life in the city will decline.
On the other hand, opponents argue that the Override is unnecessary and will place an undue burden on taxpayers. They claim that the city’s budget is already substantial and that additional funds can be found through cost-cutting measures and increased efficiency.
There are several reasons why one might urge people to vote “no” on the Override. Firstly, opponents argue that the proposed Override is too large and would increase property taxes by an excessive amount. This, they claim, would put an undue burden on residents, especially those on fixed incomes or struggling to make ends meet.
Secondly, opponents argue that the city has not done enough to address inefficiencies in the current budget. They claim that the city should first look to cut costs and streamline operations before asking residents to pay more in taxes.
Thirdly, opponents argue that the city has not provided sufficient information about how the additional funds will be used. They claim that without a clear plan for how the funds will be allocated, residents cannot make an informed decision about whether to support the Override.
In conclusion, whether or not to support the Override is a complex issue that requires careful consideration of the facts and arguments on both sides. While supporters argue that the Override is necessary to maintain crucial services, opponents argue that it is an unnecessary burden on taxpayers. Ultimately, the decision whether to vote “yes” or “no” on the Override should be based on a careful evaluation of the available information and the impact that the Override would have on the city and its residents.”
I think we’re safe from AI….for now.
Matt, you are in fact “discounting the human element of this thing”. We are not talking about a .com going through a growing phase. We are talking specifically about our schools that are facing cuts when new challenges to budget and mission require significant growth. That sharp corner is a potential disaster for any organization. And it isn’t a generic organization. It’s the one right in front of us impacting our schools and our kids.
You mention all the meetings that the acting superintendent and staff have been engaged in, and that it’s all about the operating override, “and for what…. less than 2% of the overall NPS budget and less than 1% of the overall city budget”.
Maybe consider that those people know what they are talking about. Maybe they are investing this time for a reason. Maybe consider they are doing everything they can to communicate that information. David Fleishman was a poor communicator to parents; NPS and the city are trying to fixing that. The new Superintendent, by all accounts, is much better on this specific issue, and Natick parents love that. What on earth is wrong with that? Are they all caring too much?
And, again, Newton Retirement Board has final and authoritative say over the pension funding schedule. Not the Mayor, not City Council. If the city does something that they don’t like, they can have the state take the money directly out of Newton’s local aid. Maybe they can be convinced to act in a way that departs with what it seems our peer communities are doing, but it is *not* the Mayor’s decision. This is a political and fiscal decision with many moving parts and players, and the interests of the retirement fund apparently has top priority. It is not a switch the mayor flips.
And please, don’t post ChatGPT output blather. Frank may get in a knot about my long posts, but at least they include facts and opinions specific to the issues at hand. Your ChatGPT contribution is just more stereotypical BS, and we’ve got enough of that already. Thanks.
In just looking at Mayor Fullers weekly missive I see that there are 2100 staff, administrative, teachers etc in the school system.
There are 11,700 students. That’s something like 5 employees for each student.
There is also talk about having to lose 30 teachers (?). There are probably something like 3o school houses in the city ( elementary , middle and high schools).
1 teacher in every building ?
Can’t the schools adjust to a loss like that ?
Reality Check: Since 2018 both the percentage and number of special education students in NPS has dropped. Also, during this time students sent out of district and students with special agreements with NPS, have dropped about 14.5%
Sorry. My post above was intended to follow Mike Halle’s post below.
Jeffrey, do you know WHY that is? Because so many families got denied special education services. It isn’t because the need dropped. At all. I can’t say much more about this, but your statistic doesn’t tell the full story. And it also don’t show the amount of folks who challenged the district in court, or got out of district placements…
More to the story.
Fig that happens every year and it’s been going on for a long long time. I guess we can find a way to challenge any statistic.
Jackson Joe:
I would suggest you talk to any of the special education advocates who routinely work in Newton. I can only give you information I know from personal experience and the experiences of my small circle of friends.
I just wanted Jeffrey to know the other side of the statistic and a possible explanation.
@blueprintbill – You have that backwards – its 5 students for each employee rather than vice versa
@blueprintbill , the numbers don’t quite tell the extent of the problem. Newton education, particularly in elementary schools but also true in other levels, involves many staff and educators. It’s one of its strengths. I don’t think many parents are thinking that there are too many people helping teach their kids, though they may not appreciate the importance of all their individual roles.
The extra challenge now is that there’s a growing need for more individualized special needs education or assistance (by a wide-ranging definition of the term). That may be a specific physical, mental, or emotional challenge they face, or an academic or social/emotional gap they have post-pandemic.
Providing special needs education is a state mandate (and I would argue a moral one as well). If Newton can’t do it, they pay for out of district services that are increasingly in demand and skyrocketing in cost. Every municipality faces this challenge. Every municipality is forced to engage in a unfortunate pushback with families advocating for their children’s needs.
The only solution is to try to bring the services in-house, which means more hiring of specialized staff. That could for example be more teachers experienced in teaching dyslexic or autistic kids, or “coaches” that help classroom teachers better address challenges in math or SEL in their own classrooms. These coaches in particular improve the consistency of learning and allow classroom teachers to deal more efficiently with the needs of all their students. They help every child’s education.
In our elementary school, the results of both math and SEL coaches on our kid’s education are clear and noticeable. I am so grateful they have been there to help my kid, and his classmates, get through this difficult time so he can learn and grow in middle and high school.
So we aren’t talking about 30-70 teachers total (a range of estimates, and the $4.5M isn’t able to cover the whole NPS deficit, so some people will be let go regardless). It’s 30-70 teachers *net*. While some of the “coaches” may be (very unfortunately) optional, trained special needs teachers for in-district instruction are not. That means classroom teachers may be let go.
Again, this is a budgetary problem and educational challenge across the state, and probably nation. Newton and the Mayor personally are right now leading the charge to get more state aid to address this challenge that municipalities and families face, but there’s no commitment yet.
These issues are pretty invisible to many people, and I’ll admit to not knowing about them before I started learning about the override issues. But they profoundly impact so many families and the entire core of our schools, as well as the city’s budget and our taxes.
Mike I don’t think you are that well versed about special education needs and instruction. It’s not something that you can learn in a matter of a few weeks. There are serious issues in Newton regarding teachers salaries. Some people think they are too high and I think they are too low. Personally I think that the school department has tried to make up for lower salaries by hiring more personnel and that doesn’t usually work. It’s not about the number of personnel, quality is more important.
In response to both Jeffrey Pontiff and JJ, I point to the school budget preview document. I would never make any claim that special needs instruction is something that can be learned in a few weeks. Rather, where possible Newton is bringing trained teachers in-house to best handle students that can be handled in-district. That benefits the system and families if they meet the appropriate needs.
https://www.newton.k12.ma.us/site/handlers/filedownload.ashx?moduleinstanceid=9524&dataid=18071&FileName=FY24%20Budget%20Preview%20to%20School%20Committee%201-23-23.pdf
In particular (page 4)
● Reduced 12.2 FTE due to enrollment
● Eliminated 17.7 FTE additional positions (Included curricular leadership, literacy support, counseling, and technology support)
● Added 13.2 FTE crucial in-district special education programming
and these quotes. I trust the people on the front lines:
“Despite tremendous effort, skill, and creativity on the part of our
educators, a significant number of students returned from the
pandemic with gaps or uneven academic skills. Supporting
students has required highly tailored and individual instruction
paired with careful tracking progress monitoring. Newton had
done an excellent job of providing resources and support, but this
isn’t the work of one or two years. Depending on a student’s age
and experience during the pandemic, they will continue to need
this level of support for a number of years to come.”
“There has been more of a need for teachers to understand
the vertical alignment and prerequisite skills from
previous grades to help address gaps we are seeing in
learning. This is increasing planning time and time needed
with the Literacy Coaches, Math Coaches, SEL
Coaches/Interventionists. The upper grade teachers have
needed more support in learning skills not usually taught
in the upper grades.”
“I don’t think it has ever been harder to be a teacher than
at this moment in time. Students are coming to school
everyday with complex mental health and learning needs
that require incredible support, thinking and collaboration
— the need is above what I have seen in 20+ years in
education. Teachers desperately want to meet the needs of
all of their students, but it is really hard and taking a toll.
Our psychologist and SEL team are inundated with emails
from parents looking for help.”
Yes Mike it is extremely hard to teach with all of the issues facing students and it doesn’t help if almost all of the comparable districts nearby are paying higher salaries. Yes you can make more money teaching in Newton than Walpole or Watertown but is that where we think our schools should rank?
Forget the self promoting BS that is produced by the talking heads in your report. Here are the numbers that mean more than that. Mayor Fuller can be proud of where our teacher salaries rank.
https://profiles.doe.mass.edu/statereport/teachersalaries.aspx
Let’s look at the bigger picture and a historical view of this. In 1993 the Newton Public Schools accounted for 42% of the City budget. Today, that number is 60%. More money is not producing better schools, or better outcomes. Our school enrollment is declining as more and more parents seek private, religious and home school options. Maintenance, upgrading and replacement of schools and all other public buildings, should be easily accommodated in a $480 MILLION dollar City budget. Newton’s elected official have a spending addiction which must end as high taxes are hurting working class, elderly and fixed income residents, many of whom will be forced to move to more affordable (and well managed) cities and towns. The currently administration says they are all about “diversity.” But the best and only way to make Newton diverse is to make it more affordable. VOTE NO on all three overrides on March 14. Force them to tighten their belts and live within their means as the hardworking families and taxpayers of Newton must do each and every day.
Thank you Mark for your comment. It is very true – this override if it passes will push many out of Newton as they will not be able to afford to stay here. I hope everyone understands this and Votes NO on all 3 questions as then the Mayor and City Council will have to go back and I am sure with some effort on their part will find the money within their budget.
Moderators: Is this a spoof comment?
If not, Mark and Didi we missed your sincere and deep concern for the needs of older adults when we were advocating for a new senior center…you know the place where people could meet with friends, exercise, take classes, and access services (if needed). If you are anti-tax, just say you are anti-tax and don’t try to pretend your position is driven by paternalistic concerns for the “elderly”.
Newton elected officials don’t have a spending addiction. While a catchy turn-of-phrase it is ridiculous. Mayor Fuller is acting contrary to her own political interests to ask for the overrides. What politician would take such heat for an unpopular request? — one with courage and a commitment to steward Newton’s future to brighter shores.
#votedYesforall3
This is not a SPOOF and maybe some of us work 3 jobs so that we can try to stay in Newton. Some of us are not lucky like the President of the City Council to Defer her tax Payments to the City Of Newton while collecting a Stipend and also Health and Pension Benefits. We understand the issue of students, Seniors etc. We also understand that the City and it Mayor have not done all they can to use money that is available to them. And they also have used the BUZZ words – Schools, Seniors, Trees!!!
@ Beth. The elderly population in Newton doesn’t need you to speak for what we want or need. Talk about being paternalistic!!! There is good reason why developers and the wealthy support the overrides not only verbally but with their fat wallets too. They know that increasing this REGRESSIVE property tax will hurt the lower income and senior homeowners much more than those with greater resources. That will only speed up flight of seniors and lower income homeowners with developers waiting like vultures to raze those homes and replace them with McMansions. The Mayor and her machine have no objection to this scenario since new construction is another way for the city to raise taxes and make her developer contributors happy. Talk about WIN-WIN!!! Beth can you find out how much money has been raised by each side to try and influence this election? When I see the advertisements on Facebook of people laughing about raising taxes I know the answer because those ads appear all day long. It kind of reminds me of Joe Namath and JJ Walker telling me which is the best insurance to get!
Hi Mark – Can you tell me where you got your data from? Not disputing it, just curious.
Thank you Mark and Didi for your thoughtful comments. It’s great to have a mix of ideas and I appreciate hearing from all sides.
Stores will pass the increased tax on to customers, landlords will raise the rent on their tenants.. People on fixed incomes will find a lot of wealthy virtue signalers in Newton, but actual diversity, equity, and inclusion in Waltham