It was just three weeks before Christmas. The school and finance boards went toe-to-toe on the proposed education budget for next year. The finance board wanted a $1 million cut, and the school board stood its ground.
Eventually the school board got its way and the cut was voted down.
Guess which Fairfield County town it was?
Hint: It doesn’t possess the hubris to call itself the Gateway to New England.
Click here for Article
There is a reason Westport has the No. 1 school district in the state (according to a ranking of the most recent statewide test scores) and boasts of the No. 1 high school, Staples, which recently won a silver medal from US News in its annual ranking of the best high schools in the nation. Connecticut Magazine also rated Staples the No. 1 high school in the state.
Last year, Staples students packed the RTM meeting in Westport when it cut the current budget.
Elliott Landon, the legendary superintendent in Westport for the last 12 years, is no passive, get-along, shuffling wallflower. In the last two years, his proposed school budgets called for increases of 7.3 percent and 6.75 percent – in the face of severe declines in tax revenues. Landon is clear-minded about what his role is. He was not hired to build Westport a second-rate school system. He was not hired to worry about the declining tax base. (Greenwich, on the other hand, has had six superintendents in those same 12 years)
When Westport builds its school budget, it starts with the superintendent determining what he needs to give the town the best education for its children.
When Greenwich builds its school budget, it starts with the Board of Estimation and Taxation setting “guidelines” for all departments and schools are no exceptions.
I would like to use this opportunity to aver and reaffirm the truism by which we Connecticut homeowners have come to adopt – that there is a direct relationship between the reputation of the public school system and our property values.
While Greenwich has suffered a decine in its property revenues, so has every other municipality. But Greenwich stands alone in allowing its public schools to suffer a rapid decline over the last 10 years. And this will be reflected in home prices eventually.
Westport spends more than 70 percent of its overall budget on schools. Greenwich, on the other hand, spends 35 percent.
I cannot imagine any school board member in Greenwich publicly taking on the BET.
I cannot imagine GHS students packing an RTM meeting other than protesting some cut in a sports program.
Any politician in Greenwich who challenges the accepted practice of capping annual tax increases to 3.5 percent – NO MATTER WHAT THE NEED – risks total annihilation at the polls. Even Lin Lavery, who slung more mud than an old tractor, never dared to violate the sanctity of the mill rate altar that ultimately defines everything that is Greenwich.
None of this would have mattered as long as the schools maintained its facade of giving the town a reasonably acceptable school system. But it all begin to unravel during the Nancy Weissler era when the triple whammy of Betty Sternberg (the million dollar superintendent) collided with the fastest growing non-English speaking student population in the town’s history, along with a a desire to cut costs. In any other Fairfield County town, the Weissler board would have been thrown out just for the Sternberg hire. Add to that the palpable decline in test scores and every other objective measure of academic achievement in which Greenwich schools took a nose dive in rankings, and we have the makings of a disaster.
Since our school board and BET are accountable to very few people, it’s almost impossible to change this pattern of governance.
And there are other structural reasons for this. Greenwich has 35,000 registered voters – 13,000 Republicans, 12,500 independents and 9,500 Democrats. Yet, the first selectman was elected by only 8,800 voters. Moreoever, there are only 8,960 students in the public school system, with nearly a quarter of the student population attending private schools.
That is not to say you can’t get a good education in Greenwich. My son did. But it took proactive intervention by his parents as well as private tutoring. In essence, we – like many parents – subsidize the Greenwich schools.
Today, a caretaker superintendent Sid Freund – a good guy but not visionary and certainly not a boat rocker – is proposing a 4.1 percent budget increase, slightly more than the BET guideline, for next year. I think this is mostly a PR-induced budget. The challenges are so profound that a 4.1 percent increase will only prevent us from sliding more.
Greenwich needs a serious discussion on the future of its schools, and it’s not likely to come from the usual suspects. But where are the parents? The PTAs? The students? The Townies who run Greenwich are happy to have GHS contend for the FCIAC football title every year; the parents of private school students are not predisposed to spending tax dollars on the public schools; and the growing hispanic population in Greenwich have no respresentation whatsoever.
The penurious citizens who took to the polls to vote in the same cast of characters to guarantee that their mill rate will remain the lowest in the state will also suffer the absolute decline in the value of their real estate when the Greenwich brand loses its resonance as its schools fail to deliver on its promise.
Like the Mendoza line in baseball, no active participant in the game wants to fall below that fault line.
The Weissler Penalty put Greenwich below the Mendoza line in education, and the Weissler Penalty will more than eat up the misbegotten savings from keeping our mill rate artificially low.
A day of reckoning is coming. When the economy recovers, and people wonder why Greenwich is not bouncing back like its customary self, we will look at 10 years of neglect of our schools and wonder why we didn’t do the right thing at the time.









