exMayor.com

In the past year, the State of New Jersey delivered millions in state aid to the Clinton Township school district — funds in excess of what voters approved for spending. The funds were intended to be used to reduce our property taxes. In fact, both Governor Christie and New Jersey Department of Education Commissioner Christopher Cerf notified our school board that tax relief funds should be used to cut taxes:

“Using this aid to lower taxes is an important step towards new and effective management of our schools that focuses on improved student achievement, rather than increased spending.”

Nonetheless, the board of education spent the money.  (In March, board member Mark Kaplan — chair of the finance committee — claimed, “I don’t know what people mean when they say ‘tax relief’.”) Rather than improve management and cut taxes, the board cut taxpayers out of the budget process by eliminating school budget elections. And then went on a wild spending spree while powerless residents protested at two different budget hearings.

But they didn’t just spend it

The BOE spent this one-time windfall on recurring expenses — primarily salaries and benefits, and academic programs.

During the public hearing on the budget on March 29, 2012, a resident approached the microphone to ask what happened to just $1.1 million of the estimated $2.8 million in aid received by the district.

Mark Kaplan — the chair of the finance committee that produced the budget — confirmed that the school district indeed received an additional $1.1 million in state aid that taxpayers never approved for spending. Kaplan also confirmed that, in spite of written promises by board president Jim Dincuff and superintendent Kevin Carroll that tax relief funds would be used to lower the tax levy, the board spent the money on stuff that creates recurring costs.

The resident summarized the facts in simple English:

It didn’t matter what the public had to say about spending at the public hearing about the budget. The board had already spent the money. The resident walked out of the hearing in disgust. “It’s done,” he said. “It’s done.”

“Your programs are trashed”

The Clinton Township school board has funded long-term recurring costs with a windfall of tax-relief funds that the BOE is counting on the state to deliver year after year… when each year the BOE complains that state aid is so unpredictable that they don’t even want to project how much they will get.

When the aid dries up, Clinton Township schools will be doomed. If these special “tax relief funds” are not delivered by the state year after year, the school budget will crash. Teachers will be laid off. Programs will be cut. The only way to maintain the artificially-inflated spending levels created by the BOE will be to raise property taxes dramatically.

Bloated schools: Fewer kids, higher spending

The Clinton Township school board continues to bloat the district with expenses, while the student population shrinks.

• Between last year and this year, the school district’s cost-per-student has increased over 14%.
• Between 2007 and this year, the student population dropped from 1,805 to 1,680.
• During the same period, the number of school staff has increased from 249 to 267.

Fewer kids; more staff; higher spending.

This year alone, the school budget is up $1,569,200 compared to the budget voters approved last year, an increase of 6.5% in just one year — and almost 12% over two years. For fewer kids.

That budget increase was made possible with tax relief funds stolen from overburdened taxpayers by a board majority that has run amuck now that it doesn’t have to rely on voters’ approval for its spending.

School board president Jim Dincuff threatened board member Michelle Sullivan with legal action and suggested she resign (the discredited Dincuff later folded for lack of evidence) because she voted against the bloated budget and dared to point out the truth:

Poor fiscal management

Board president Jim Dincuff, finance committee chairman Mark Kaplan, and board members Michelle Cresti, Kevin Sturges, Rachel McLaughlin, Kevin Maloy, and Maria Grant have allowed lame-duck superintendent Kevin Carroll to commit Clinton Township taxpayers to long-term spending of an insupportable magnitude. Only two board members, Sullivan and Marc Freda, voted against the new budget, citing Dincuff’s and Carroll’s broken promises and the lower student population.

Do you believe the state will keep dishing more aid to prop up higher spending on fewer students by our board of education? When the state’s revenues are down by half a billion dollars this year alone?

This is how the Clinton Township school board has doomed our schools. When the state aid stops, the district will crash.

: :

Clinton Township school board president Jim Dincuff has accused two school board members and the editor of this blog of inappropriately contacting the New Jersey Department of Education (DOE) and inappropriately communicating with one another.

There is no law or ethics rule that prohibits citizens or school board members from contacting the DOE, or prohibiting board members from talking to or working with their constituents on issues. In fact, there is an ethics rule that says:

“No elected member shall be prohibited from making an inquiry for information on behalf of a constituent…” (see below.)

Intimidation and harrassment

At the April 23, 2012 school board meeting, Dincuff cited an e-mail sent by the editor of this blog to the NJ Department of Education. This is the complete e-mail, along with e-mails from Patricia Scott, an official of the Department of Education:

Misrepresentations to cover up a breakdown in management

Dincuff claimed the e-mail required a resolution notifying the DOE that the editor of this blog “does not represent the Clinton Township Board of Education or any of its members or any administrators in any capacity whatsoever.”

However, what the e-mail describes is the total breakdown of Dincuff’s administration — none of them knew when their budget was due, and they failed to take public input about cutting taxes into account. As a citizen and taxpayer, the editor was seeking guidance from the DOE because Dincuff mismanaged the budget process ignorantly. Apparently, two board members were seeking the same thing.

In a public statement he made at the March 29, 2012 school board meeting, Dincuff misrepresented statements made by the editor of this blog in the above e-mail. Said Dincuff:

“I am in possession of an email exchange between the unelected member of the community and the Department of Education in which he represents himself as contacting them on behalf of board members and states that one of two specific board members by name will be calling the Department of Education.”

However, the e-mail above says nothing about contacting the Department of Education “on behalf of” anyone — nor did the editor claim any official role during discussions with DOE. (In fact, I specifically stated to the DOE that I am not an elected official, not on the board of education, and that I was calling as a citizen.) Dincuff’s claims are a total fabrication. More here: Former mayor responds to Clinton Township school board resolution that singles him out by name.

Threats and retaliation for “No”

In the same statement, Dincuff threatened board members:

“I do not know what the intentions of these two board members are. However, I have been in contact with our board attorney and he advised me to make this statement in public.

“He has also advised me that I am on behalf of the board within my rights to ask these members for their resignations.”

Dincuff’s speech repeatedly intimidated and harrassed board members because they were in contact with a constituent and because they contacted the DOE. More important, Dincuff’s threats were made against the only two board members who expressed their disapproval of Dincuff’s budget — and who then voted “No” on that budget. Dincuff goes on to claim that the board members should not have contacted the Department of Education without his knowledge, and claimed that:

“…they may have also gone so far as to attempt to act independently of the board in collusion with an unelected member of the community by contacting the state Department of Education to request assistance in completing out local budget.”

Dincuff’s real agenda

There is no obligation on the part of board members to obtain the permission of the board president — or anyone else — when they want to talk to the DOE or to constituents. Elected officials talking or working with constituents is what democracy is all about.

However, it appears Dincuff has violated the New Jersey School Ethics Act, which protects the right of board members to make inquiries on behalf of their constituents. The law says:

18A:12-24
i. No elected member shall be prohibited from making an inquiry for information on behalf of a constituent, if no fee, reward or other thing of value is promised to, given to or accepted by the member or a member of his immediate family, whether directly or indirectly, in return therefor;

The reason this editor contacted the NJ DOE and board members was because board president Dincuff, board administrator Anthony Del Sordi, superintendent Kevin Carroll, finance committee chairman Mark Kaplan, and county superintendent Jeff Scott made it clear in March that they did not know what the deadline was for submission of the school district’s budget to the state. Their failures of expertise and leadership thus put the school district and taxpayers in jeopardy. Dincuff led the board to delay submission of its budget until mid-April because he didn’t know any better — he had not done his homework, nor had his administration team.

The DOE informed Dincuff that the budget was due at the end of March.

It’s clear that Dincuff’s real agenda is to stop board members from talking to the state DOE; to stop board members from talking to or working with their constituents; and to stop the public from scrutinizing the questionable finances of the school district. As a former school principal, Dincuff has handed out detention to those who offend him.

Do state officials know whom they’re talking to?

The editor of this blog now has the distinction of being held out to the New Jersey Department of Education as a citizen who does not represent or speak for the Clinton Township board of education. As if the NJ DOE doesn’t know whom it is talking to.

: :

At the March 29, 2012 Clinton Township board of education meeting, board president Jim Dincuff accused his “board members” of “breaching confidentiality.”

8 Board Members Hung Out to Dry

But Dincuff gave no names, thereby impugning the integrity of all eight members of the board.

He made reference first to one board member, then to two board members, accusing them of ethical violations and of “disturbing” him. But Dincuff offered no evidence or supporting documentation, even though he referred to specific mystery documents in his accusations.

Dincuff stated that board attorney Vito Gagliardi “advised me to make a statement in public tonight,” suggesting that Gagliardi approved the accusations and instructed Dincuff not to name names.

Ethics complaints are usually handled entirely in closed session, to protect the identities of the accused until formal charges are made and judgment is rendered by the state ethics commission. It is not clear why Dincuff chose to indict his entire board, or what his evidence is because he didn’t provide any.

Dincuff’s confusing statement is approximately five minutes long:

Public Threats, Intimidation, and a Gutless Assault on Reputations

In his statement, Dincuff attacked people personally — but carefully avoided getting sued for slander by not naming names. Is that what attorney Vito Gagliardi coached Dincuff to do?

Gagliardi was not present at the meeting. In fact, the school board only very rarely has an attorney present, claiming it’s not worth spending the money. (The Clinton Township council, with less than half the budget of the board, almost never conducts a meeting without an attorney present — to ensure the law is followed. This protects both the public and township officials.)

Was Gagliardi present in the “executive session” where Dincuff took the board members, presumably for a private rubber-hosing that he’d never have to defend in public?

Dincuff delivered a carefully orchestrated public attack. He stated he had written the statement that afternoon, yet did not update the agenda to include it — a mistake that will come back to haunt him.

• Dincuff accused, but withheld names.
• Dincuff threatened to demand resignations of two board members — and said this was approved by the attorney.
• Dincuff delivered no evidence.
• Dincuff took the matter to closed session to hide his actions.
• Dincuff ensured that all board members — but not the public — would know which individuals stood accused.

Through these carefully orchestrated steps — worked out in cooperation with attorney Vito Gagliardi, whose absence speaks volumes about how illegitimate Dincuff’s attack was — Dincuff protected himself from a slander suit while impugning the integrity and reputations of all his board members — and a member of the public.

Into The Back Room

Worse, in a sick Machiavellian twist, Dincuff adjourned his attack on his board members into closed session, which wraps a cloak of confidentiality on everything discussed. In so doing, Dincuff protected himself. Board members are now led to believe that they cannot publicly defend themselves from the secret accusations, or they will be guilty of what Dincuff has already accused two of them — violation of confidentiality. Dincuff’s witch hunt has been adjourned into a dark room — and the minutes of that closed meeting will not be made public until Dincuff and Gagliardi decide the matter is resolved.

Or so Dincuff believes. More on that later.

The problem is that Dincuff’s attack on his own board is wholly a collection of bureaucratic doublespeak with no basis in fact. It’s an attempt to distract the public from Dincuff’s bloated budget and his total disregard not only of his written promises to cut taxes — but of the 100% protests from citizens who demanded answers and tax relief at the most recent two board meetings about the budget.

But as he intended, Dincuff’s witch hunt took the story about his failure to keep his promises off the front page.

The Un-elected Member of The Community

Dincuff refers to an “unelected member of the community” — but mentions no name — and cites “an e-mail exchange between the unelected member of the community and the Department of Education.”

Events leading up to the March 29 meeting clearly suggest that the “unelected member of the community” that Dincuff did not name is the editor of ExMayor.com.

Dincuff’s problem is that the e-mail that he refers to — the offending e-mail I sent to the New Jersey State Department of Education — the e-mail he did not produce — reveals that Dincuff’s speech is empty innuendo.

Next:

We’ll take a look at the e-mail, and you can decide what Jim Dincuff is up to. The evidence will suggest that Dincuff’s motive is to hide his failure to live up to his promises to cut school taxes, and to hide his disturbing record of spending millions of dollars never approved by voters to expand school operations.

While our school population is down dramatically.

And while Dincuff is spending 14% more this year than last year to educate each pupil.

: :

Clinton Township board of education meeting to approve the budget
March 29, 2012, 7:30pm

A key issue raised by the public about the board’s increased budget is why the board has not returned state aid it has received to taxpayers, to lower the school tax levy. During public comment, several people asked the board to explain the details of the budget. Some members of the public criticized the board for not being in possession of the numbers; for example, costs to operate the physical plant, and costs of salaries and benefits.

One of the key questions: Where is $2.8 million of extra state aid the district has been awarded for 2011-2012 and 2012-2013? Each time, the board thanked the individual for the question and moved on.

Where is the extra $2.8 million?

Finally, one resident insisted on an answer about the extra state aid.

Board member Mark Kaplan, chair of the finance committee, answered. These are selected quotations from the comments he made:

“I can’t explain every line item in the budget.”

“It’s very confusing.”

“It’s impossible to understand.”

The purpose of the meeting was to explain the budget to interested residents.

Asked to explain exactly where the state aid was spent, or what specific line items it was allocated to, Kaplan said:

“I don’t have all of them.”

“I’ll go through the big ones.”

Then Kaplan reported on various items:

“…a quarter million dollars…”
“…about a hundred thousand dollars…”
“…about a hundred thousand dollars…”
“….about a hundred seventeen thousand dollars…”
“…to the tune of about $22,000…”
“…some architectural and engineering fees of about $40,000…”
“…about $300,000…
“…a few items of five or ten thousand dollars…”
“…around 1.1 million dollars…”

Not once did Kaplan report an exact number from the budget he and the board were being questioned about — the budget he and the board were about to vote to approve and send to the State Department of Education.

Why didn’t Kaplan report the exact whereabouts of the $2.8 million of extra money?

Kaplan admitted:

“It’s impossible to understand.”

Your Tax Relief: They spent it

A few minutes earlier, Kaplan admitted that the board had already spent well over $1 million of the state aid — aid it never reported in the budget approved by voters last year — on recurring salaries for new staff members, and on long-term, recurring expenses that the district would have to pay year after year — knowing that the State did not guarantee future aid.

It’s gone.

Exactly how much did they spend? What did the school district spend it on? The head of the finance committee said:

“I can’t explain every line item in the budget. It’s very confusing. It’s impossible to understand.”

The purpose of the meeting was to approve a new $24,451,895 school tax levy for 2012-2013.

Taxpayers attended the last-minute emergency meeting to find out exactly where their money was going to be spent.

Lies, lies, all lies

In an August 30, 2011 letter to the editor, board president Jim Dincuff promised taxpayers almost a quarter million of state aid would be used to lower their taxes.

He said the school administration team was going over the tax relief funds sent to Clinton Township by Governor Christie in July, in order to:

“…enable the district to offer better than flat taxes again [for 2012-2013], and allow us to use $247,310 to reduce the local tax levy.” [Emphasis added] — Hunterdon Democrat

Lies.

Superintendent Kevin Carroll promised over half a million dollars of that state aid would be used to lower taxes:

“Even with [school choice] costs taken into consideration, the net will be over half a million dollars — and will reduce the tax burden on Clinton Township citizens.” — Superintendent Kevin Caroll, CTSD wiki, January 17, 2012

Lies.

At the March 26 public hearing on the school budget, Dincuff suggested lowering the tax levy by the amount he promised, but mysteriously said he would take most of it out of the school district’s surplus and debt accounts — not out of the state aid received.

Now we know why.

They spent it all.

They just don’t know where, or exactly how much.

Clinton Township taxpayers could have had $2.8 million in tax relief — extra state aid — money above and beyond what the school board said it needed in the budget voters approved last year — aid sent to them by Governor Christie to lighten their loads.

Why didn’t Governor Christie just give the money directly to taxpayers as a rebate, rather than let the Clinton Township school board get its hands on it first?

: :

Last night at the Clinton Township school board’s formal public hearing for the 2012-2013 budget, in the face of unanimous public opposition to what was described as “over-spending,” the board decided to not approve the budget.

Following a motion by member Rachel McLaughlin, seconded by Marc Freda, the board voted unanimously to put off action. In the ensuing discussion, the board members agreed to set a date for the third week of April (specifically after spring break) for a follow-up meeting. They would continue to review and reduce the budget by at least the $247,310 that board president Jim Dincuff promised last summer to return to taxpayers.

On the table, however, is also the $2.8 million of state aid delivered to the BOE for tax relief.

Less than 24 hours later, the board of education published this announcement on its website:

March Madness

In an insane example of March Madness, the BOE is now foregoing the detailed budget review and discussion that board members were told they’d be permitted to do — and they will rush to a vote on Thursday evening to approve the budget.

The board of education president, Jim Dincuff, has the power on his own to schedule special meetings.

It seems the BOE is telling the public — Who cares about your public comments?

Here we go again — More lies

In an August 30, 2011 letter to the editor, Dincuff said the administration team was going over the tax relief funds sent to Clinton Township by Governor Christie in July, in order to:

“…enable the district to offer better than flat taxes again [for 2012-2013], and allow us to use $247,310 to reduce the local tax levy.” [Emphasis added]
— Hunterdon Democrat

A few months later, Dincuff added the $247,310 to the budget to be spent in the 2012-2013 school year… Who cares what I promised you?

: :

There was no vote on the Clinton Township school budget tonight as planned, nor will the budget be delivered to the county superintendent as planned by the end of the week.

It turns out — according to the board of education’s (BOE) own financial statements — that this year the BOE spent over $1.164M more than voters approved last year, and took in almost $1.5M more revenue than the BOE said it needed for its 2011-12 budget. An additional increase of $1.3M in state aid is expected for next year — totalling over $2.8M in extra cash in the BOE’s coffers.

None of the funds were slated as tax relief for burdened property taxpayers. A dishonest budget was exposed, and the months-long budget jig under the direction of school board president Jim Dincuff was up. After several budget meetings with virtually no one in the audience, the public showed up, and the bright light of scrutiny was focused on a handful of key numbers.

Board member Mark Kaplan (“I don’t know what what tax relief means”) didn’t have a word to say, no defense of his “finance committee’s” decision to deliver a dishonest budget, no denials of the excessive spending and extra state-aid cash in the till.

Why hasn’t state aid been used to CUT the proposed tax levy by $2.8M?

One resident pointed out that Tewksbury, whose enrollment is down like CTSD’s, has cut its school budget from $14.7M to $11.8M in just two years.  Why has’t CTSD cut at least $3M — or more? Why is CTSD’s spending even higher?

Tewksbury has now set the standard. If the CTSD BOE is to demonstrate fiscal responsibility, without looking like the BOE is literally stealing tax relief from taxpayers, it must cut its budget dramatically.

No answers were given about what the extra $1.164M was spent on — but the audience tonight was much larger than usual, and the residents weren’t happy. Many demanded that a surprise $1.5M in state aid — that was not accounted for in the budget voters approved — be cut from the proposed tax levy immediately.

Surprise! There’s plenty of time to keep working on this budget!

BOE president Jim Dincuff and the board were also informed by a resident that, because they moved elections to November and eliminated school budget elections, there is no deadline to deliver this budget. County superintendent Jeff Scott was cited as the source of this information.

At the beginning of the meeting, Dincuff nonetheless tried to get business adminsitrator Anthony Del Sordi to cite a deadline for submission of the budget. But Del Sordi, an interim business administrator with no long-term ties to the district, sidestepped the question and only confirmed that the public hearing deadline is March 30.

Busted Again: Dincuff caves

Board president Dincuff finally had to face the questions he deflected on February 17.

Caught unable to explain over-spending that was never approved by voters, and with extra state aid that he decided to keep and spend rather than use to lower taxes, Dincuff caved.

A motion was made and approved to delay budget submission well into April, so the board can start doing what it should have done months ago: Start cutting line items for which it has earmarked money that must be used to cut the tax levy.

Board members appeared stunned at the revelations of spending in excess of the current budget, and about the extra state aid.

Where to from here? More public scrutiny.

Following the meeting, the residents who turned out for this meeting expressed alarm at the budget the board planned to vote to approve tonight. Members of the audience said there are lots of questions for the board to answer now — and according to some, they will be bringing more of their neighbors to the next board meeting.

It seems some of the board members themselves will be asking a lot of questions about this budget. Where did over a million dollars go? Why wasn’t $1.5M in extra state aide earmarked for tax reductions?

And why did Dincuff — who promised last summer to give $247,310 back to taxpayers — keep that money in the budget to be spent? Why did it take a crowd of angry residents to get him to suggest taking it out of the budget?

Dincuff then tried to focus the board on finding ways to cut the $247,310 — implying that’s all they should cut. He seems to still be pretending he can keep the other $2.5M of state aid that the board never had in its budget to begin with.

Members of the audience stated after the meeting that they will be back — and their goal is cuts of $2 million – $3 million. Some felt Tewskbury has set a reasonable bar that CTSD must meet.

Still gaming the system

Former school board member Grace Hoefig spoke during public comment, and suggested that rather than cut all the excess cash and use it for tax relief, the board should prepare a public relations drive to “explain” why it needs to keep the extra funds.

Dincuff applauded the idea and some other board members seemed to view this as a fresh way to keep gaming the system of school property tax relief. Why give money back to taxpayers, if you can have a good go at explaining why money you never said you needed is actually necessary? It seems clear where the district’s public relations “spins” were coming from for many years.

Still hiding money

The board has been hiding money again. And now the public knows. This budget has a long way to go… Will it attract the attention of the governor’s office?

Board member Maria Grant did not suggest an online survey to find out how much money taxpayers would like to see cut from the budget. Clinton Township councilman Harmen Vos sat at the back of the auditorium. It is unknown how he got to the meeting.

: :