Love, and Marriage

For some reason I hear the Frank Sinatra song playing in my head . . . 

When Wharton and Mine Hill first began talking about sharing administrative services, there were two things we did a lot of --

• talk to each other
• share our plans with the public

The boards met regularly through appointed committees, as well as public joint board meetings.  And before anything was decided, we took our plan to the public and let there be every opportunity to ask questions and let us know if we were forgetting anything.  Regular communications between boards via committee continued throughout the relationship as long as I was on the board, as recently as 2009.

Now we are to believe that as recently as last night - when the board heard from a member of the public that the shared arrangement should continue - that the board still has not decided whether or not to seek a shared superintendent between the districts.

If your best friends tell you suddenly they are getting a divorce, you would probably ask why?  Well, what if they told you "because we stopped talking to each other."  Now, would that be a reason?  Wouldn't you want to ask Why did you stop talking to each other? When this board finally says publicly that they won't continue to share, and you ask "When did the two boards last talk to each other?" the answer will be not for the past two years (actually it may be closer to three).

Somebody took their hand off the wheel; there is a void of leadership.  And like a marriage I'm sure there is blame to be shared by both parties - I have no reason to believe Mine Hill is any better than we have been.  But there is need for intervention, for "marriage therapy," if you will.  As a private citizen I have requested that intervention, and encourage you to do so as well.  Feel free to use any part of the correspondence below. The fax number for Commissioner Cerf's office is (609) 777-4099.

Paul Breda

6 Potter Lane

Wharton, NJ 07885

(973) 366-2845

paul.breda@hotmail.com

December 3, 2012

Mr. Chris Cerf
Commissioner
New Jersey Department of Education

100 River View Plaza
P.O. Box 500
Trenton, NJ 08625

Dear Mr. Cerf;

Seven years ago, the neighboring communities of Wharton and Mine Hill embarked on a relationship to share administrative services. Now, as the districts are faced with selecting a new superintendent of schools, it is critical that no less than the authority of the Department of Education be engaged to ensure that the districts are motivated to maintain this mutually-beneficial relationship.

I served the community of Mine Hill as a school board member from 2000 to 2009, and was president of the board that launched this shared relationship with the Wharton Board. Having moved to Wharton in 2009, this past election I was voted on the Wharton Board of Ed and will begin my term in January 2013.

Our greatest achievement during my time as a board member was the consolidation of administrative services – initially superintendent, business administrator, and child study team – between Mine Hill and Wharton. This shared superintendent arrangement makes sense from both a financial and an educational perspective. Both are “Choice” districts – Mine Hill is a single-school PK-6, and Wharton is K-8 – that are geographically adjacent and socio-economically similar. The benefits of sharing a superintendent multiply exponentially, the reduced cost being only one. For less that the compensation costs of even the smallest NJ districts, both are able to afford the experience-level of a more senior administrator. Further economies of scale are gained by having one shared chief executive identify and implement other effective, vital educational services and programs. In effect, the two districts are able to function in many ways as one K-8 district.

At the same time this relationship requires highly-effective, determined leadership, both by the respective boards and the shared chief school administrator. I am writing because it appears that this type of leadership is lacking; the districts do not intend to continue this shared arrangement beyond the 2012-2013 school year.

I am requesting your department's intercession, and time is of the essence as the current interim superintendent is limited to serve only until June 30, 2013. Your Department will ultimately approve the resulting contract, and by providing departmental guidance now, wasted time and effort can be avoided. The Department of Education should direct that the initial search be for candidates who are up to the challenge of managing two districts, and that the best candidate be hired for that purpose (going further, I believe the law allows you to permanently implement this shared superintendent arrangement between the two districts).

A lack of leadership and political will notwithstanding, I would challenge anyone to demonstrate that the sharing of a Chief School Administrator between the districts has presented any hardships that can't be overcome. I thank you, Mr. Cerf, for your attention in this matter.

Sincerely,

Paul Breda