Jump to content

school budget cuts


Guest Guest 100
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest Guest 100

I have a question. Maybe Mr. Mangin will at least answer I know the school budget failed (again). How much did the mayor and council cut from that budget? And how much the year before? Since they all keep saying the highest part of taxes is the schools, well then how much did the mayor and council cut when they had a chance to lower it? (several chances since the school budget has failed many times). I know it can not be an unreasonable amount, but with the President of the Bd. of Ed. being the mayor's confidential aide, it just seems like a conflict of interest, if not at least an unethical one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Check and balance
I have a question. Maybe Mr. Mangin will at  least answer  I know the school budget failed (again).  How much did the mayor and council cut from that budget?  And how much the year before? Since they all keep saying the highest part of taxes is the schools, well then how much did the mayor and council cut when they had a chance to lower it? (several chances since the school budget has failed many times).  I know it can not be an unreasonable amount, but with the President of the Bd. of Ed. being the mayor's confidential aide, it just seems like a conflict of interest, if not at least an unethical one.

Well if you would like to know how much was cut you should have gone to the last BOE meeting. Now keep in mind how much money is spent on sports, fields and big paying jobs within the system. Well the board in all it's financial wisdom took the bull by the horns and cut the school aids hours in half and made them part timers and took away their benefits. Yes! and one of these Board members that voted for this fiscal savings is a part timer her self and collects benifits in her position. How unfair, God forbid they should ask for give backs so all could keep some. You know, Democrats keep talking about the haves and have nots. I ask you who is increasing the number of have nots.Start thinking, the bill is in the mail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
Still wondering...Mr. Mangin can you help out on this answer?

About $800,000. The usual token cut. It's been about the same for the past several years. I don't know why they even have a vote on the budget. A technicality I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest 1
Well if you would like to know how much was cut you should have gone to the last BOE meeting. Now keep in mind how much money is spent on sports, fields and big paying jobs within the system. Well the board in all it's financial wisdom took the bull by the horns and cut the school aids hours in half and made them part timers and took away their benefits. Yes! and one of these Board members that voted for this fiscal savings is a part timer her self and collects benifits in her position. How unfair, God forbid they should ask for give backs so all could keep some. You know,  Democrats keep talking about the haves and have nots. I ask you who is increasing the number of have nots.Start thinking, the bill is in the mail.

This can't be true. I hope Mr. Mangin will give us the real story on the failed budget and the continued lack of real cuts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest

When did Mr. Mangin become Kearny's "Grand Pooba"? Why do you look to him for answers? Do a little research, go to a Town Council or BOE meeting and stop asking other know-nothings what's going on. Or is it all really a waste of time and you just want to believe what you already believe? It seems that everybody's got an opinion, yet I wonder how many of those opinions are actually based on facts and not a lot of b.s. being put out there by people with very questionable motives. By the way, where's Bert these days? On vacation or under observation?

This can't be true.  I hope Mr. Mangin will give us the real story on the failed budget and the continued lack of real cuts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest A. Realist
When did Mr. Mangin become Kearny's "Grand Pooba"?  Why do you look to him for answers?  Do a little research, go to a Town Council or BOE meeting and stop asking other know-nothings what's going on.  Or is it all really a waste of time and you just want to believe what you already believe? It seems that everybody's got an opinion, yet I wonder how many of those opinions are actually based on facts and not a lot of b.s. being put out there  by people with very questionable motives.  By the way, where's Bert these days?  On vacation or under observation?

You must be a carpenter, 'cause you hit the nail right on the head!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest 100
When did Mr. Mangin become Kearny's "Grand Pooba"?  Why do you look to him for answers?  Do a little research, go to a Town Council or BOE meeting and stop asking other know-nothings what's going on.  Or is it all really a waste of time and you just want to believe what you already believe? It seems that everybody's got an opinion, yet I wonder how many of those opinions are actually based on facts and not a lot of b.s. being put out there  by people with very questionable motives.  By the way, where's Bert these days?  On vacation or under observation?

The simple answer is that he's the only one that will reply. The elected officials will not reply or share information with the public and the public should not have to attend meetings to find out public information from the elected officials who are paid to attend those meetings. Some of us work one and two jobs to pay the taxes in this town. A request for imformation is not an opinion and does not seem unreasonable or questionably motivated. If you know the answer, by all means, please reply. Meanwhile, whose Bert?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The  simple answer is that he's the only one that will reply. The elected officials will not reply or share information with the public and the public should not have to attend meetings to find out public information from the elected officials who are paid to attend those meetings.  Some of us work one and two jobs to pay the taxes in this town.  A request for imformation is not an opinion and does not seem unreasonable or questionably motivated.  If you know the answer, by all means, please reply.  Meanwhile, whose Bert?

Bert is the ex principal of washington school. The boe refused his tenur last year and now he is on another witch hunt lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Curious

Who says the public should not have to attend meetings to find out public information? Do you really think it is the responsibility of an elected official to come on here and answer your questions? If you're working 1 or 2 jobs to pay the taxes in this town, how come you have the time to visit here? While you're on the internet you might try reading a newspaper on-line. THAT'S where you get information, not from an ex-politician in town who, believe me, has his own agenda.

The  simple answer is that he's the only one that will reply. The elected officials will not reply or share information with the public and the public should not have to attend meetings to find out public information from the elected officials who are paid to attend those meetings.  Some of us work one and two jobs to pay the taxes in this town.  A request for imformation is not an opinion and does not seem unreasonable or questionably motivated.  If you know the answer, by all means, please reply.  Meanwhile, whose Bert?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a question. Maybe Mr. Mangin will at  least answer  I know the school budget failed (again).  How much did the mayor and council cut from that budget?  And how much the year before? Since they all keep saying the highest part of taxes is the schools, well then how much did the mayor and council cut when they had a chance to lower it? (several chances since the school budget has failed many times).  I know it can not be an unreasonable amount, but with the President of the Bd. of Ed. being the mayor's confidential aide, it just seems like a conflict of interest, if not at least an unethical one.

The budget that was defeated this past April was reduced by another $810,000 by the Mayor and Town Council. Last year the Council trimmed $686,000.

In my opinion the Town Council did their job, although I still believe if you take the time to really look you can find places to make very substantial cuts. In my first year on the Council, I worked with the Town Auditor and we checked every single line item. In the end we found over $3,000,000 in potential cuts. Of that total the Mayor and Council reduced the budget by $1.8 million. The BOE appealed and about $200,000 was restored. Still, that $1.6 million reduction stands as the only attempt the Mayor and Town Council ever made to really act on the will of the people and CUT the school budget the way it should be cut.

The Town Council's $810,000 cut included recommendations to use $450,000 of surplus money as revenue and cuts to various teacher salary accounts by the remaining $360,000. The Board of Education doesn't have to follow the Town Council's recommended cuts, they can cut other accounts - as they did by going after the full-time aides. The aides have no union representation which made them an easy target.

I think the Board of Education took a complete cowardly approach. They should have enacted the Town Council's recommended cuts to the teacher salary accounts instead of taking out the politically weak teacher's aides. Every year we hear the same old song and dance about "bare bones budget," yada, yada, yada. Bull. The salary accounts are so drastically over-appropriated that it's absolutely ridiculous. All you have to do is sit down with a roster of teachers and a salary guide and you will see how ficticous the budgets for salary accounts are. I'm not saying the teachers are over-paid (ask me and I'll give my opinion of that). I'm saying that the BOE simply accepts the administrators' figures without question. If they ever took the time to really look they could cut this budget the way taxpayers demand. I dare any Board of Education member, past or present to challenge me on this (either anonymously or signed, I don't care). I'll show you how much money is wasted on unnecessary over-expenditures.

The annual vote on schoold budgets has become the annual joke. School administrators simply budget much more than they need. The voters turn it down. The Town Council cuts. And the Board of Ed ends up exactly where they wanted to be in the first place.

What a waste.

Jim Mangin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, Jim, you believe that the BOE members WANTED to cut the benefits of the full-time aides all along?  I have a hard time beleiving that.

JW

Joe,

That's not really what I said, but to answer your question - yes, I do believe the BOE wanted to cut the full-time aides all along.

In April 2004 the BOE voted to grant a $1/hour increase to the aides that would be completing the 3 year Early Childhood Development training. This would be the first pay increase for any aide since about 1999.

The full-time aides complained stating that when they agreed to waive their right to benefits in 1992 they would receive a salary guide instead. Then they would know when they were getting their next increase. With no salary increase for the last 6 or 7 years, they took their concerns to the BOE. At the June 2004 BOE meeting they were told the salary guide would be in place by Sept. Not only did they not get the salary guide, they got no pay increase either.

This past spring, the full-time aides again asked for a salary guide or they would demand their benefits. The BOE responded with a $.50/hour increase and no salary guide. So, the full-time aides pursued their demand for benefits and the BOE desperately looked for a way out. Instead of taking the Town Council's recommendation of salary cuts, they cut the full-time aides instead.

Jim Mangin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joe,

That's not really what I said, but to answer your question - yes, I do believe the BOE wanted to cut the full-time aides all along.

In April 2004 the BOE voted to grant a $1/hour increase to the aides that would be completing the 3 year Early Childhood Development training. This would be the first pay increase for any aide since about 1999.

The full-time aides complained stating that when they agreed to waive their right to benefits in 1992 they would receive a salary guide instead. Then they would know when they were getting their next increase. With no salary increase for the last 6 or 7 years, they took their concerns to the BOE. At the June 2004 BOE meeting they were told the salary guide would be in place by Sept. Not only did they not get the salary guide, they got no pay increase either.

This past spring, the full-time aides again asked for a salary guide or they would demand their benefits. The BOE responded with a $.50/hour increase and no salary guide. So, the full-time aides pursued their demand for benefits and the BOE desperately looked for a way out. Instead of taking the Town Council's recommendation of salary cuts, they cut the full-time aides instead.

Jim Mangin

I know all of this Jim. But, do think the BOE members WANTED to cut the aide's benefits? If you were a BOE member what would your stance have been regarding the aides full-time status and their benefits? I'm pretty sure I know the answer, but now, do you really think the current BOE members are so far on the other end of the morality scale than you?

JW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Second Guesser
Joe,

That's not really what I said, but to answer your question - yes, I do believe the BOE wanted to cut the full-time aides all along.

In April 2004 the BOE voted to grant a $1/hour increase to the aides that would be completing the 3 year Early Childhood Development training. This would be the first pay increase for any aide since about 1999.

The full-time aides complained stating that when they agreed to waive their right to benefits in 1992 they would receive a salary guide instead. Then they would know when they were getting their next increase. With no salary increase for the last 6 or 7 years, they took their concerns to the BOE. At the June 2004 BOE meeting they were told the salary guide would be in place by Sept. Not only did they not get the salary guide, they got no pay increase either.

This past spring, the full-time aides again asked for a salary guide or they would demand their benefits. The BOE responded with a $.50/hour increase and no salary guide. So, the full-time aides pursued their demand for benefits and the BOE desperately looked for a way out. Instead of taking the Town Council's recommendation of salary cuts, they cut the full-time aides instead.

Jim Mangin

It's a shame that Mr. Mangin didn't have this much to say when he was a member of the BOE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know all of this Jim.  But, do think the BOE members WANTED to cut the aide's benefits?  If you were a BOE member what would your stance have been regarding the aides full-time status and their benefits?  I'm pretty sure I know the answer, but now, do you really think the current BOE members are so far on the other end of the morality scale than you?

JW

Joe,

Yes, I do think the BOE wanted to cut the aides' benefits. I think the BOE didn't like being threatened by group with no union representation. And that made them an easy target.

If I was still a BOE member my course of action would've been to honor the 1992 agreement and provide the aides (all aides - part-time and full-time) with a salary guide. I think all employees deserve to know when their next increase is coming. It gives an employee some sense of worth. No salary increase and no salary guide lead to no motivation. I believe the issue the aides have with Mary Torres is because even she (as a part-timer) has a salary guide and benefits.

Besides honoring the 1992 agreement, I would've taken it one step further and codified the waiver of benefits and the salary guide into a written agreement. This way everyone is on the same page.

I personally know most of the aides involved (as I'm sure you do). And I'm conviced that they would have gladly accepted a salary guide in exchange for a waiver of their benefits. I still believe this whole issue can be resolved and everyone satisfied if the BOE just gives the aides a salary guide.

That's what I would've done and I really believe it would be the right thing to do. What the BOE did was, in my opinion, amoral and unethical. It's no wonder the BOE dodged this issue for over a year - another amoral and unethical tactic. But hey, that's just my opinion.

Jim Mangin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest fed up with realist
Why don't you just go walk ** ***** ** * *****.

KOTW Note: The above post was edited for content.

Something is really wrong with you. You put everyone down and we know why. Its so you feel better about yourself you have alot of mental problems that should be addressed. ASAP

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...