To the Editors of the Crimson:

I strongly believe that citizens armed with the facts will make wise decisions. My past campaign newsletters, which reported facts and clarified issues, reflected this belief. Since I am not seeking re-election, I have no campaign literature this year, but recent actions of the present School Committee make me so anxious about the fiscal future of our school system that I must alert the citizen/taxpayers of this city. The "last straw" occurred at the most recent School Committee meeting.

At that meeting, all junior custodians working for the school department were upgraded--all 45 of them. This gave them a 3.2% increase in pay on top of the 6% raise already in their contract. Why were they upgraded? Because all of the senior custodians were upgraded. Why were they upgraded? Because one senior custodian had been recommended for upgrading by the Superintendent. But, the School Committee wanted to be "fair," so it upgraded all 14 senior custodians without a recommendation. This action gave all senior custodians a 6% increase on top of a 6% contracted pay raise. Fairness is not at issue. The School Committee was merely being generous with someone else's money--yours.

These action are just the latest in a whole series of fiscally irresponsible orders passed by a majority on the School Committee this term. In many cases, I was the only member casting a vote in opposition. They have

1) Abolished the in-house promotional exam for clerks, one designed by representatives of the clerk's own union. Why? Because some politically well-connected clerks didn't pass it and complained to the School Committee. As a result, 16 were promoted who only passed the general Civil Service Exam, which has no typing or stenography test.

2) Failed to pass balanced budgets for the past two years; they added many items to the Superintendent's recommended budget (based on the bottom line figure from the City Manager), but neglected to approve offsetting the reductions by cuts in other areas. Thus bloated, the budget was lopsided by $400,000 last year and almost $1.5 million this year.

3) Completely used up a $1.5 million debt stabilization fund to pay for these unbalanced budgets. That fund was supposed to be a reserve for when the costs of our debt service payments for school renovations peak in three years, and was designed to avoid massive layoffs and program cuts at that time.

4) Approved contract terms for various groups and individuals that are outrageously expensive and not based on performance, accountability, or educational benefits for our children:

a) The Teachers' Contract, which provides for 6% raises, plus yearly increments for coursework, plus--for the first time ever--longevity pay, i.e. bonuses for staying in the system longer, at the same time we are offering "early out" retirement bonuses.

b) 4- to 6-year contracts to three Assistant Superintendents fifteen months before expiration, without the Superintendent's recommendation and despite his previous recommendation that two of the positions were unnecessary: this costs approximately $700,000 and also additionally insures that no minority will hold any of these high level positions in the near future.

c) raised some individual administrators' salaries up to 15%, without recommendation from the Superintendent, or proper evaluation or job assessment.

d) just last week, approved contracts for managers of the business operations, ignoring the Superintendent's recommendations. The result: because one position received a $3000 salary increase (on top of the 6% raise), two other positions were also increased, by $3000 and $1500.

e) What group will get salary increases this week? Come to our next meeting and see for yourself?

5) Gave the "early out" retirement incentive bonus to people already retired, one as long as 5 years; misused the "early out" by giving it to everyone who left, instead of only to those whose departure would create positions for teachers whose classrooms were closed by declining enrollment.

6) Continued to pay former administrators, who are now teachers, administrative level pay--some for as long as 6 years now.

The choice is clear, and it's up to you--the voter. Sara Mae Berman   Cambridge School Committee