| Montgomery County Taxpayers League |
| Views |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| No public view wanted on this action. In voting for both the Montgomery County Public Schools superintendent’s contract and the three unions prior to any public comment period, the majority of the school board has again revealed inability to understand simple economics (‘‘Weast’s contract extended, union deals approved,” Feb. 14). With a real revenue shortfall coming, no one did a relative cost comparison, an affordability study, or placed measures that tie pay to performance. The superintendent praised Larry Bowers, the school system’s chief operating officer, for completing the contracts in a timely manner but, given the 60 percent premium over federal workers’ raises this year, it is no wonder that the unions voted to complete the contract. Robert Monsheimer, Silver Spring |
The writer, a certified public
accountant, is education
chairman of the Montgomery
County Taxpayers League.h
accountant, is education
chairman of the Montgomery
County Taxpayers League.h
| Honorable Councilmember Roger Berliner: March 05, 2008 In response to your request for thoughts on how you can make "ends meet" in the upcoming budget discussions, I would like to offer the following: The taxpayers of the county have serious concern about the budget now being prepared by the County Executive for consideration by the Council. It was clear last year, when the 2008 budget was approved, that there would be a budget problem this year. This was due to the fact that the County representatives negotiated, and the Council approved, huge cost of living increases for county employees and for employees of the schools for the next three years. These increases, when added to the normal step increases, gave these employees 8 to 9 percent year-over-year increases in salaries and wages. Now that the economy has gone into a downturn, this is clearly not sustainable. The actual year-to-year cost of living increase was about 2.4 percent. |
To: Margaret Spellings Feb 16, 2008
Secretary of Education
Does anyone look at school numbers? We very urgently need new rules for the Child Left Behind. The school tests
are totally meaningless and are pure fraud, we are very overstaffed, our pupils are being used to inflate salaries,
special education pupils are being cheated and our taxpayers are being drained without much in return.
Some of the things we need:
Outlaw tests created by the State or County. Tests by national testing organizations - different every year - should be
delivered under seal within a couple of days of the tests to keep from teaching the actual tests. It should be a felony to
open the tests before they are given and a felony if the teacher or anyone else stands before the class and gives the
answers (I have been told by students that this happens). It should be a felony to alter the tests or the results after the
pupils take them. Require the test scores to be given to the public by both percentile and percent proficient (% above
50 percentile). The actual percentile scores would help keep the schools honest if people can see them.
I have been reviewing the School System in Montgomery County, MD and the State of Maryland on behalf of the
Montgomery Taxpayers League. Last year I was able to obtain Percentile scores for Montgomery County. I was
shocked that one school claimed that their entire 5th grade class averaged 98 percentile and another claimed their 5th
grade averaged 96 percentile. Indeed, 39 of 139 schools claimed scores of 90 percentile or above. I immediately emailed
our elected School Board and pointed out that no school anywhere in the country could possible score that high.
I got no response since they have apparently turned everything over to the Superintendent and do not make any
decisions. I then contacted our County Council, County Executive, State Board of Education and the Governor. No
one responded except the State Board and they claimed that they never issued any scores even though I had them in
my hand. The State created the test and supposedly administered the tests. That was the last I heard from any of
them. I then attempted to contact the Gazettte which is owned by the Washington Post and several reporters at the
Washington Post. I also contacted several other local newspapers. None would even talk to me or contact me in any
way. I am sure some other Counties are doing the same thing. I also contacted the Federal Dept of Education and
received a complete rebuff. No one wanted to listen.
This year both the State and County Boards of Education refused to release test scores even under a “Freedom of
Information” request. Both the State’s Attorney General and the County’s States Attorney refused to enforce the
“Freedom of Information”. The County Attorney said he only processed that type of document for convicts. The State
Attorney said he would not push to get any other tests except the ones the Schools reported. Ordinary citizens don’t
count. The only way the Schools released scores was “Percent Proficient” which is the percent of pupils who score
above the National Average of 50 percentile. Even these scores proved extremely high to the point of fraud. 14
classes claimed that 100% of their classes of pupils scoring above average. Does anyone believe that. 89 of 139
schools claimed that 85% - 100% of their pupils were above average. These scores simply cannot be true. Our
students and our teachers simply are not that smart. The students are from every economic grouping and many speak
English as a second language. I have sent the report to the County Council, County Executive and Montgomery’s
Inspector General. I have received no response. However, the Superintendent did publicly acknowledge that the tests
have been “dumbed down”. When our pupils go on to Montgomery Junior College, 39% have to take remedial reading
and/or math. What do you do when no elected official will do anything and no newspaper will report any wrong doing?
I then looked at staffing. I discovered that if we filled every classroom with a teacher we would have 598 teachers left
over. This does not include the 1021 Art, Music, Physical Education and Library teachers. We have enough classroom
teachers to have a class size of 17.1 but the actual class size was 19.7. This meant that 281 of 3005 classroom
teachers don’t teach. Probably the worst were the Special Education classes. Some claimed that they had up to 43 K-
5 pupils with only one teacher. Far more had 20 pupils in grades K-5 with only one teacher. It seems as though the
schools claim pupils are Special Education to get additional Federal money and then mainstream the pupils. This is
cheating both the Federal Government and the pupils. It also places a stigma on the pupil. I also found that the School
System could not even average scores. Almost none of the schools had accurate composite scores for the 2nd grade.
They also had a “Pupils / total professional (which I did not include in my report). I never could figure out how they
derived the number.
Joe Russek
Secretary of Education
Does anyone look at school numbers? We very urgently need new rules for the Child Left Behind. The school tests
are totally meaningless and are pure fraud, we are very overstaffed, our pupils are being used to inflate salaries,
special education pupils are being cheated and our taxpayers are being drained without much in return.
Some of the things we need:
Outlaw tests created by the State or County. Tests by national testing organizations - different every year - should be
delivered under seal within a couple of days of the tests to keep from teaching the actual tests. It should be a felony to
open the tests before they are given and a felony if the teacher or anyone else stands before the class and gives the
answers (I have been told by students that this happens). It should be a felony to alter the tests or the results after the
pupils take them. Require the test scores to be given to the public by both percentile and percent proficient (% above
50 percentile). The actual percentile scores would help keep the schools honest if people can see them.
I have been reviewing the School System in Montgomery County, MD and the State of Maryland on behalf of the
Montgomery Taxpayers League. Last year I was able to obtain Percentile scores for Montgomery County. I was
shocked that one school claimed that their entire 5th grade class averaged 98 percentile and another claimed their 5th
grade averaged 96 percentile. Indeed, 39 of 139 schools claimed scores of 90 percentile or above. I immediately emailed
our elected School Board and pointed out that no school anywhere in the country could possible score that high.
I got no response since they have apparently turned everything over to the Superintendent and do not make any
decisions. I then contacted our County Council, County Executive, State Board of Education and the Governor. No
one responded except the State Board and they claimed that they never issued any scores even though I had them in
my hand. The State created the test and supposedly administered the tests. That was the last I heard from any of
them. I then attempted to contact the Gazettte which is owned by the Washington Post and several reporters at the
Washington Post. I also contacted several other local newspapers. None would even talk to me or contact me in any
way. I am sure some other Counties are doing the same thing. I also contacted the Federal Dept of Education and
received a complete rebuff. No one wanted to listen.
This year both the State and County Boards of Education refused to release test scores even under a “Freedom of
Information” request. Both the State’s Attorney General and the County’s States Attorney refused to enforce the
“Freedom of Information”. The County Attorney said he only processed that type of document for convicts. The State
Attorney said he would not push to get any other tests except the ones the Schools reported. Ordinary citizens don’t
count. The only way the Schools released scores was “Percent Proficient” which is the percent of pupils who score
above the National Average of 50 percentile. Even these scores proved extremely high to the point of fraud. 14
classes claimed that 100% of their classes of pupils scoring above average. Does anyone believe that. 89 of 139
schools claimed that 85% - 100% of their pupils were above average. These scores simply cannot be true. Our
students and our teachers simply are not that smart. The students are from every economic grouping and many speak
English as a second language. I have sent the report to the County Council, County Executive and Montgomery’s
Inspector General. I have received no response. However, the Superintendent did publicly acknowledge that the tests
have been “dumbed down”. When our pupils go on to Montgomery Junior College, 39% have to take remedial reading
and/or math. What do you do when no elected official will do anything and no newspaper will report any wrong doing?
I then looked at staffing. I discovered that if we filled every classroom with a teacher we would have 598 teachers left
over. This does not include the 1021 Art, Music, Physical Education and Library teachers. We have enough classroom
teachers to have a class size of 17.1 but the actual class size was 19.7. This meant that 281 of 3005 classroom
teachers don’t teach. Probably the worst were the Special Education classes. Some claimed that they had up to 43 K-
5 pupils with only one teacher. Far more had 20 pupils in grades K-5 with only one teacher. It seems as though the
schools claim pupils are Special Education to get additional Federal money and then mainstream the pupils. This is
cheating both the Federal Government and the pupils. It also places a stigma on the pupil. I also found that the School
System could not even average scores. Almost none of the schools had accurate composite scores for the 2nd grade.
They also had a “Pupils / total professional (which I did not include in my report). I never could figure out how they
derived the number.
Joe Russek
| The County Executive's budget has identified the need for an override of the Charter Limit in the amount of $138 million to help balance the budget. In the 17 years the Charter Limit has been in effect there has only been three occasion when the Charter Limit has been overridden. The total increase for the three years amounted to $70.8 million, approximately 1/2 of the total asked for this year alone. Will we ever see another voter mandated Charter Limit budget in the future? Where is the money going? The excessive costs incurred as a result of labor negotiations place a financial burden on the county that is unsustainable. Yearly salaries compounded over the three years of a typical contract result in average annual increases of 9% for eligible employees. The purpose of establishing salary schedules is to attract and retain an effective employee population. Montgomery County is a leader in the region in both aspects of employment. Quoted "personnel studies" showing the county to be noncompetitive are quoted but are not supported in county Personnel Management Review (PMR) documents. 80% of the tax supported budget is going for salary and benefits. For MCPS the figure is 89.3%. The MCPS recommended budget showed a total student increase of 18 students, yet the requested budget increase of $126.2 million included $112.7 million to support the request for 200 additional employees. What are these additional employees doing? The Administrative and Supervisory union with its 716 employee staff earn an average of $116,683 annually and can anticipate a FY 09 5%, $5,834, average salary increase, a total of over $4 million. Yet 36% of their members choose not to live and pay taxes in Montgomery County. The question is what as an individual are you prepared to do about it? Have you ever written or called a Council member or the County Executive? Have any of you written a letter to the editor to give your opinion on your concern for your future as a resident of Montgomery County? The Taxpayers League spoke in your behalf against Council passage of the excessive awards for the negotiated labor contracts last year. In spite of our efforts the resulting vote was 9-0 for passage without any meaningful debate and failed to identify the detailed cost impact to county residents. Once again we are seeing a similar process. Will we get the usual approval process once again this year? Its very likely without your support. The League is only marginally successful without public support. We need vocal public support. Things you might focus on are based on your individual concerns. Some thoughts that have been discussed at League meetings include the tax and spend mentality of our elected officials. Every year they spend every dollar and tell you about the great things they did for you, most of which you don't really care about. We also discussed the effect of the policy of the single year budget mentality. Is this the way you handle your personal budget or how our elective officials should handle the county budget? Government is a trust, and the elected officials are trustees, both were meant to be created for the benefit of the people. There are 34,000 employees that the Council seems to go out of the way to support. What about support for the greater number of the 365,000 county households, with 975,000 residents, who face future uncertainty in employment and housing. County estimates indicate homeowners are likely to be facing falling property values for the remainder of 2008 if not longer. Will the state reflect the reductions in their new assessments? Will the county recognize the need for resident financial consideration as we struggle to survive in difficult times. The League has done what we can and we will continue to do so. The chances are remote that there will be any change without broad support from the general public. The future is in your hands. Your efforts can turn things around. Without it we face a bleak financial future. Below is a list of elected official contacts that can assist you in making your thoughts known to your elected representatives. Sincerely, Marvin Weinman. Elected Official Contacts County Executive OCE@montgomerycountymd.gov 240-777-2500 County Council County.council@montgomerycountymd Council President Knapp Councilmember.Knapp@montgomerycountymd.gov 240-777-7955 Andrews Councilmember.Andrews@montgomerycountymd.gov 240-777-7906 Berliner Councilmember.Berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov 240-777-7828 Elrich Councilmember.Elrich@montgomerycountymd.gov 240-777-7966 Ervin Councilmember. 240-777-7960 Floreen Councilmember.Floreen@montgomerycountymd.gov 240-777-7959 Leventhal Councilmember.Leventhal@montgomerycountymd.gov 240-777-7811 Trachtenberg Councilmember.Trachtenberg@montgomerycountymd.gov 240-777-7964 |
To: Montgomery County Council Members May 15, 2008
Subject: Thoughts on the current budget process
The Council budget process appears to be an in house process that continues to deny the general public the
opportunity to join in the dialog on setting the property tax rate and how those taxes should be spent. The last week
has been a clear demonstration that this is the case.
We are expected to be thankful to be allowed three minutes for testimony which is restricted by Rule 9 (f), prohibiting
debate. In eight years of testimony I have never been asked for a follow up on testimony. Once again the lack of
county government interaction with the general public was demonstrated in the review of the establishment of the FY
2009 property tax proposal. Information needed to fully understand the MFP proposals were unavailable to the public
until the day of the Council review. So much for open government.
Some limited preliminary data on the MFP May 9th session was distributed internally via an undated three page
handout as opposed to the 23 page document available today, the day of the Council discussion and approval. The
initial data raised more questions than it answered.
Subject: Thoughts on the current budget process
The Council budget process appears to be an in house process that continues to deny the general public the
opportunity to join in the dialog on setting the property tax rate and how those taxes should be spent. The last week
has been a clear demonstration that this is the case.
We are expected to be thankful to be allowed three minutes for testimony which is restricted by Rule 9 (f), prohibiting
debate. In eight years of testimony I have never been asked for a follow up on testimony. Once again the lack of
county government interaction with the general public was demonstrated in the review of the establishment of the FY
2009 property tax proposal. Information needed to fully understand the MFP proposals were unavailable to the public
until the day of the Council review. So much for open government.
Some limited preliminary data on the MFP May 9th session was distributed internally via an undated three page
handout as opposed to the 23 page document available today, the day of the Council discussion and approval. The
initial data raised more questions than it answered.
While I recognize the difficult job of the Council my involvement in numerous efforts to help redirect the flawed budget
process found it is talked about on a yearly basis but nothing is done to make needed changes to improve the process.
The document received today was quite an improvement but failed to provide adequate information necessary to allow
for a adequate review and thoughtful decision. Below I have identified non addressed issues and concerns.
process found it is talked about on a yearly basis but nothing is done to make needed changes to improve the process.
The document received today was quite an improvement but failed to provide adequate information necessary to allow
for a adequate review and thoughtful decision. Below I have identified non addressed issues and concerns.
- There is a need to identify the actual number of and the specific property reduction for all nonresident
beneficiaries.
- Page Circle 8 identifies only samples for commercial and industrial, apartments and residential nonowner facilities
identified to receive benefits.
- There is a need to specifically identify cost impact to accurately define all anticipated revenue impacts which could
be even be greater than figures identified for the four MFP options. .
- The public benefits for commercial and industrial owners is a mandate that will not necessarily benefit the public,
as there is no guarantee that it will stabilize prices at the facilities involved. The public doesn't need subsidies for
stores they wouldn't shop at as opposed to allowing county residents make the best independent choices for
themselves. How will the candidates beneficiaries be selected and evaluated?
- The MFP options were hastily conceived and not well thought out. Another Council give away without any verifiable
public benefit.
- The Council appears to have made the choice to fully support the negotiated contracts at the expense of higher
property taxes for resident homeowners. Someday the Council might choose to allow the public to participate in the
process on spending their taxes.
| Subject: The Open Mike June 13, 2008 Honorable Councilmember Knapp: Please stop congratulating yourself for the unfair budget you have passed. Perhaps you can afford it, but many of us that will see increased property and energy taxes cannot. Many county residents are angry to see that you allowed the county employee unions to bully you into forcing the county property owners to accept a 13 percent tax increase (due to increased assessments, yes a reward for living in this great county) to pay the union's unreasonable 8.5 percent salary increases this year. |
| Councilmember Floreen: 2008/05/30 This is in response to your monthly newsletter invitation to comment. You should not be pleased with a budget that imposes a 13 percent increase on property taxpayers in order to pay for an unreasonable wage increase package for the union members working for Montgomery County. Perhaps you can live with that kind of continuing increase in taxes but many of the rest of us cannot. Then to add to the grief, you are proud that we are all going to pay a higher energy tax on our electric bills. Thank you for that, too. It is time to reduce spending. It is time to live within our means. Start by reducing the really important spending like giving $2,000,000 to Live Nation so they can set up a for-profit night club in Silver Spring. So no need to continue to pat yourselves on the back. The council did a terrible job. Even the union leadership was surprised that they got away without giving up anything. They were prepared to defer raises but the council never asked. I guess that says it all. Philip Schneider |
| The burden you have placed on property taxpayers in order to fund the outrageous salary increases negotiated by the unions, is unreasonable. We are not getting 4 or 5 percent cost-of-living increases in our incomes, but must pay for the county outrageous increases. And we can expect no better next year. I am afraid that the perception is that the council took the easy way out. The head of the union announced that he was anticipating a budget battle, which never materialized, in which they were prepared to defer some increases. I think that is very telling. Only county employees came out as winners in this budget. It is good to work for the county. Who else gets 8.5 percent salary increases each year, plus great health and retirement benefits? The rest of us will have to try to sell our homes and move to a more reasonable county or try to elect more reasonable councilmembers. Philip Schneider |