Search This Blog

Wednesday, May 8, 2013

STAN STARTS SHEPARDING

I want to be a good one. My mission as your next school committee member will be to tend the fiscal flock. Consider me just a humble (please don't choke) servant who doesn't want to mismanage your money/ Let's start with the KINDERGARTEN CATASTROPHE.

First off,  I think I was wrong. I believe I said it was $480,000. No it's $580,000. The sad thing is the fixes will be temporary but the costs are PERMANENT.

By choosing to move the youngest, littlest, and most fragile of our students we are going to be spending a lot of money retrofitting bathrooms that we wouldn't have to if we put in older kids. Yea, it's the kindergarten kids that we have too many of but we could free up the same amount of classroom space by moving less kids thereby still reducing class size.

We all know BUSING COST BUCKS  If we move fewer, we spend less. Simple math for my simple mind. BUT.....

then again......why even move at all.

Hey, what's you talking about ?

Well if we rented space to fix this temporary problem that looks like it may be permanent, I'm sure it would buy us a little time at a much cheaper price which would allows us time to come up with a more thought out plan that would better solve our dilemma. We could save transportation costs altogether.

Don't forget we are about to come to the tax payers to pay for a BOND to finance construction of a new school we desperately need. We can't expect their support if we can't show a past of prudent purchases.

Of course moving forward with the current plan would allow us to create at least one more six figure job that everyone will pay for and only one will get.

The creation of a new princiPAL.

9 comments:

  1. Speaking of princiPALS,did you notice the top paid ones are the ones who showed their support of Latham at the public hearing last year?I blame the school committee for the raises that were given out.The super doesn't have the power to give out raises to her supporters.It's the school committee who has to vote and approve raises and they did,so shame on them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm the one asking for your vote and ALL the school committee members didn't VOTE for these raises!

      Delete
    2. All the members may not have voted for them,but the majority must have because they were approved and given out.Do you know which members did not vote for them?

      Delete
    3. Donna Coppola, Rick Starbard, and I think Maria Carrasco voted no/ The only reason I am not sure about Maria is because there have been a few different votes.

      Delete
  2. I recall that the discussion was that the superintendent CAN give raises without a vote by School Committee. Rick was upset that the raises were not mentioned in the budget and the super said she doesn't need to. The School Committee only is in charge of super's salary.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is not true!The school committee is responsible for approving the budget and if the raises were not in the budget they approved,then the super does not have authority to give them. The school committee MUST HAVE approved these raises at some point,in order for them to have been given.Shame on our school committee!

      Delete
  3. Starbard told Mayor Judith Flanagan Kennedy and other committee members that a Fiscal Year 2013 proposed school budget posted on the school website should have been updated to reflect committee action on salaries.

    Committee members unanimously voted Thursday to adjust the budget to reflect pay raises they voted to give Latham and school principals in June.

    They approved a $25,000 pay hike for Latham in June that, Starbard said, boosts the superintendent’s salary to $191,000. They also approved in June $117,000 in principals’ raises outlined in the 2013 online budget, including $34,000 in raises divided among new Aborn, Ingalls and Washington school principals.

    The committee voted 6-1 with member Donna Coppola opposed to pass the budget. See Item August 3

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://www.itemlive.com/articles/2012/08/03/news/news10.txthttp://www.itemlive.com/articles/2012/08/03/news/news10.txthttp://www.itemlive.com/articles/2012/08/03/news/news10.txthttp://www.itemlive.com/articles/2012/08/03/news/news10.txt

      Delete