Below is the full text of the release given to School Board members just prior to the Monday, March 8th Board meeting. This document has been revised slightly since Monday:

TO: Harlem School Board Members

FROM: Harlem Federation of Teachers/Harlem Federation of Support Staff

DATE: March 8, 2010

The Harlem Federation of Teachers and the Harlem Federation of Support Staff STRONGLY OPPOSE any and all reductions to the numbers of paraeducators serving the students of the Harlem School District. Paraeducators play a VITAL role in the support of Harlem students and teachers, serving to provide additional resources and guidance for those students that deserve and need extra assistance and attention. The plan that the Harlem School District is proposing to adopt, with its significant reductions in the numbers of paraeducators working and assisting students and other staff, will only serve to DRASTICALLY DECREASE the quality and quantity of services provided to these students. In the end, the students will suffer as they will not be receiving the attention and assistance needed to succeed. The HFT and HFSS sincerely hope that the Harlem School Board would not support, under any circumstances, a staffing proposal that would clearly reduce and/or eliminate support services for Harlem students.

That being said, the Union feels there are some misleading "facts" and assumptions being presented to the Board in pushing this new instructional delivery system and recommendation:

• The underlying cost of professional development that "will be required to support the increased implementation of consulting teachers in the schools." Whether it takes place during the school day or not, there will be an unknown cost to the District (qualified speakers, collaboration and or professional development time paid according to contractual rates, etc.) in pursuing this initiative.
  
  
• There is a presumption that paraeducators are not, or have not been, qualified to provide exceptional support services to students and certified teachers. Highly-qualified status for paraprofessionals was instituted several years ago as a way to ensure paraprofessionals as an effective educational resource.
  
  
• In addition to highly qualified status, paraeducators receive yearly and continuous professional development in their skills and qualifications in providing educational services to students and staff. Such an investment in time and monies will have been wasted by such a decision to reduce their numbers.
  
  
• Several Harlem paraeducators are already certified teachers as well, and this expertise and skill set will be lost with the decision to replace these individuals.
  
  
• There is a misleading assumption that 18 certified teachers can provide the same or better service than 65 paraeducators because of their degree/training. When an individual does the math and examines the impact of these 18 teachers replacing 65 paraeducators, there is a clear workload issue. The additional teachers will not be working with the same teacher/student ratios that are provided under the current structure. How effective will that be? And at what cost to the student(s)?
  
  
• There is still plenty of research that needs to be done to assess the effectiveness of this model, and the proposal even admits to the fact that the District will need to "work through the concerns and demonstrate how the refined model can provide more focused and specialized support to classroom teachers." If this is true, wouldn't such a sweeping and District-wide initiative be potentially destructive without first testing and studying any changes on a much smaller and controlled scale?
  
  
• Finally, the proposal makes the assumption that qualified Special Education teachers will be available for hire to implement such an initiative. This assumption is being made at a time when the District has been unable to fill existing Special Education vacancies with properly certified teachers this school year and for several past ones as well. But now the District can fill those existing vacancies plus the ones that will be created by this initiative?
  

Again, the Union sincerely hopes the Harlem School Board reconsiders the proposed resolution regarding the elimination of such a large number of paraeducators. The Union strongly opposes this proposal and hopes the Harlem School Board will do the same.

Below is the full text of the Union's response to Monday evening's cuts. This letter was sent to Dr. Morris, Mr. Rosilez and School Board President Sandi Johnson the morning of March 10th:

TO: Dr. Julie Morris, Harlem Superintendent

FROM: Harlem Federation of Teachers and Harlem Federation of Support Staff

DATE: March 9, 2010

For the past few weeks as budget planning and staffing projections have been taking place by administration, you have expressed on more than one occasion to the Harlem staff that any proposals/recommendations would be communicated to the Union and staff well in advance of any final recommendation and Board decision. Based on your administrative actions starting with last Thursday and culminating with the Board meeting/action last night, nothing could have been further from the truth as the following clearly indicates:

• The Union was not informed of this recommendation to eliminate 65 paraeducators through this new special education model until the very last moment - approximately 10 minutes before this information was emailed to staff and when the agenda for the March 8th Board meeting was posted on March 4th.
  
  
• Mr. Rosilez, during the March 8th Board meeting, made the comment that this plan/recommendation has been in the works for at least this entire school year, and yet this was NEVER once mentioned during the committee work on Special Education workload. In fact, the Union agreed to a workload plan without the knowledge of these changes as well.
  
  
• Ms. Johnson, during the March 8th Board meeting, made the comment while asking the Board if there were any questions that the Board has had this information for well over a month. Again, the Union was NEVER once presented or alerted to this information prior to last Thursday, and the window by which the Union could discuss these proposed changes had already been closed before it was ever opened.
  
  
• Now information is being forwarded to the Union that the District is going to release ALL first year through third year probationary teachers. While the Union is always aware of the potential for some reduction-in-force on a grade level or program basis, such a general and wide-sweeping plan has again NEVER been brought to the attention of the Union or staff. In fact, Union leadership was told during one of the recent monthly Labor-Management meetings that there would NOT be a wholesale release of probationary teachers.
  
  
• Finally, representatives from the Union were invited to a special closed-session budget presentation with the School Board on February 1st, and absolutely NOTHING during this presentation by District administration hinted at the need for any drastic cuts in certified or support staff or that the administration was in any way considering such options.
  

The communication on these issues, or lack thereof, to the Union is completely unacceptable. Administration is clearly engaging in a decision-making process that is secretive, hoping to discreetly push things through the School Board for approval without the Union's ability to at least discuss alternatives and options. Any past communications and "promises" to the Union and staff about being forthright and honest about the District's planning process appear to have been disingenuous. At a time when both sides are making final preparations to begin bargaining new contracts for teacher and support staff, such behaviors by administration have seriously damaged the District's credibility in promoting any cooperative and trustworthy dialogue with the Union now and in the foreseeable future.