New Page 1

< Union Schools!! >

< Messages posted to thread: >

< From Date >

< Really Angry 22-Sep-99 >

< Curious 23-Sep-99 >

< Insider 23-Sep-99 >

< To insider 23-Sep-99 >

< Parent 23-Sep-99 >

< hal 23-Sep-99 >

< 24-Sep-99 >

< AJ 25-Sep-99 >

< FREELANCER 25-Sep-99 >

< 25-Sep-99 >

< hal 25-Sep-99 >

< 25-Sep-99 >

< 26-Sep-99 >

< 27-Sep-99 >

< Another Taxpayer 28-Sep-99 >

< resident 28-Sep-99 >

< 28-Sep-99 >

< Parent 29-Sep-99 >

< J 29-Sep-99 >

< Subject: RE: Union Schools!! >
< From: >Really Angry
< Date: 22-Sep-99 >

Did anyone see the BOE meeting Tuesday evening? Did you hear that Central Office 12 month employees get $200 extra each month to make up for the cost using their own personsl cars for school business.

Lets see, thats $200 x 12 or $2400 a year for each of them. How many are there 8, 10, 12? So maybe we are talking about $24000 a year. This is all on top of their six figure salaries. WOW! How did the Board agree to this?

How many miles each month do you have to drive your car for it to cost you $200. The IRS allows about 30 cents a mile. that means for the Board to get its monies worth each one of them have to drive their car over 660 miles each month for school business. Where do they go?

I'm not a fan of the UTEA but this must really p_ _ s them off. Hey Jackie K. Be carefull. The central office 12 monthers are proof that you don'd need a union.

< Subject: RE: Union Schools!! >
< From: >Curious
< Date: 23-Sep-99 >

I wonder if anyone shares my curiousity on the following item which really perplexes the hell out of me? Assuming that the Democrats as led by Mr.Cryan and others "control" both the BOE and the Township Committee,why is it that the town runs so smoothly and with increasing efficiency and improving conditions with and within the community, while the BOE continues its downward spiral with declining test scores,labor problems,behavioral and social problems among the students,and a prevailing attitude of dissatisfaction and mistrust among parents. Virtually everyone I know who has moved out of Union over the past several years has done so because of a poor opinion of our public schools.If the leaders and elected officials of our two governing bodies are coming out of the same pool,why is one group so successful while the other continues to fail miserably? There must be some logical explanation for this.

< Subject: RE: Union Schools!! >
< From: >Insider
< Date: 23-Sep-99 >

That's easy: one group's 'trigger man' is Bradley and the other is stuck with Jabukowski.

< Subject: RE: Union Schools!! >
< From: >To insider
< Date: 23-Sep-99 >

Wrong answer! Bradley hasn't been here long enough to have any effect on the differences between the BOE and the other Township departments. Maybe you should give some credit to the people that work in and run the various departments instead of the correct political answer.

< Subject: RE: Union Schools!! >
< From: >Parent
< Date: 23-Sep-99 >

Get real!! Declining test scores aren't Dr. J's fault or even the teacher's fault. It's the kids' fault themselves and the parent's fault as well. My kid's test scores aren't declining! That's not because I have smart kids. It's because they are raised as I was in the fifties: homework and studying completed, very little television, insistence on reading books, fresh air, family meals(when possible) and in bed at 8:30. I'm not worried. I abhor ythe "labor" problems in the school district and despise my kids being used as pawns in the negotiations, but if the whining teachers don't want to have open house or do bulletin boards or assign homework I don't really care anymore. My kids will achieve without them

< Subject: RE: Union Schools!! >
< From: >hal
< Date: 23-Sep-99 >

curious dont kid yourself or try to blow smoke, the town is not running as smooth as you want everyone to think.there are problems in the finance,public works,rec and tax depts,$110,000 and another $120,000 possibe in the lawyers fees in the giocona case so far,car crashes with town cars on sundays,3 straight years of township taxes increasing(2.39,2.79,and this year3.15),late payment to the bd of ed, another 80,000 in interest that the town and the bd of ed lost.More employees on the job which frank denied even though our auditors did not agree with him and published in the newspapers the true number.mike m our union center expert filling up the old 5&10 with a furniture store where you could buy a bedroom set complete for 99 dollars and then replace it with a 99 cents store.give us a break

< Subject: RE: Union Schools!! >
< From: >hal
< Date: 23-Sep-99 >

curious dont kid yourself or try to blow smoke, the town is not running as smooth as you want everyone to think.there are problems in the finance,public works,rec and tax depts,$110,000 and another $120,000 possibe in the lawyers fees in the giocona case so far,car crashes with town cars on sundays,3 straight years of township taxes increasing(2.39,2.79,and this year3.15),late payment to the bd of ed, another 80,000 in interest that the town and the bd of ed lost.More employees on the job which frank denied even though our auditors did not agree with him and published in the newspapers the true number.mike m our union center expert filling up the old 5&10 with a furniture store where you could buy a bedroom set complete for 99 dollars and then replace it with a 99 cents store.give us a break

< Subject: RE: Union Schools!! >
< From: >hal
< Date: 23-Sep-99 >

curious dont kid yourself or try to blow smoke, the town is not running as smooth as you want everyone to think.there are problems in the finance,public works,rec and tax depts,$110,000 and another $120,000 possibe in the lawyers fees in the giocona case so far,car crashes with town cars on sundays,3 straight years of township taxes increasing(2.39,2.79,and this year3.15),late payment to the bd of ed, another 80,000 in interest that the town and the bd of ed lost.More employees on the job which frank denied even though our auditors did not agree with him and published in the newspapers the true number.mike m our union center expert filling up the old 5&10 with a furniture store where you could buy a bedroom set complete for 99 dollars and then replace it with a 99 cents store.give us a break

< Subject: RE: Union Schools!! >
< From: >
< Date: 24-Sep-99 >

What a bunch of phonies! Where are you taxpayer, taxpayer2, AJ, Smitty, etc. The fact that you don't care about the post above referring to the $200.00 a day given to Central Office administrators for use of their cars, proves you are phony shills for the board.

Give the big boys $200 per month but still continue to pay less per pupil than ANY OTHER SCHOOL SYSTEM IN THE COUNTY. Not an exageration. Check the Union Leader.

< Subject: RE: Union Schools!! >
< From: >AJ
< Date: 25-Sep-99 >

By not being able to respond immediately to all the posts that are made, give me a break. But thank you for focusing my attention on it. Sadly I was not present at the meeting to hear this firsthand. I did read it last night but did not have time to reply nor to think about it. My initial impression was that it seemed excessive to the point of ridiculous.

If this figure is true I would agree that it is wasteful and in my opinion corrupt. I agree with the thought that $200 a month is excessive in the fact that they probably only utilize their vehicles for that much a year compared to what they are alleged to get monthly. Did anyone question this when it was brought up, asked what the justification was?

The six figure salaries you mention, are you sure? Is this public knowledge that can be confirmed? They are a union too correct? Maybe before their contract (in limbo) is resolved we should bring some questions to the BOE's attention. The car allowance being foremost. The least we could do. If there are any other suggestions please post them. Waste, greed is not tolerable regardless of what "side" you feel you are with. It all comes out of the same taxpayers pocket.

< Subject: RE: Union Schools!! >
< From: >FREELANCER
< Date: 25-Sep-99 >

Regardless of the usual uninformed banter and innuendo of the ubitiquos "hal",this town is on the move in an extremely positive and successful course while the schools and Board of Ed continue to fail in pitiful fashion. I agree with the above poster based on my own knowledge regarding the exodus of families from the community.Sad.We definitely need some dynamic individuals on the BOE.Are you listening,Mr.Cryan?

< Subject: RE: Union Schools!! >
< From: >
< Date: 25-Sep-99 >

Any administration members receiving the additional $200.00 for "expenses" are not members of the UTEA! They are administrative employees, i.e. Jakubowski, Abbey, Lombardi, Magliacano, Ramos, and any others who fit in that "category". I believe that the UTEA is on top of this matter! I heard that this is a monthly "espense" allowance!

< Subject: RE: Union Schools!! >
< From: >hal
< Date: 25-Sep-99 >

freelancer your having to many dreams.facts are facts.you must be following the wrong threads or your in the wrong town

< Subject: RE: Union Schools!! >
< From: >
< Date: 25-Sep-99 >

How come no one is talking about that whole barbara lombardi situation? And did anyone see Ted J's comment, "I'm allowed to do anything I want"?

< Subject: RE: Union Schools!! >
< From: >
< Date: 26-Sep-99 >

Good Question......what makes Lombardi such a big deal?

< Subject: RE: Union Schools!! >
< From: >
< Date: 27-Sep-99 >

What are the salaries of the people in the central office? Does anyone know or care to ask?

< Subject: RE: Union Schools!! >
< From: >
< Date: 27-Sep-99 >

Back to Barbara Lombardi for a minute. Does she have the job or not? And-better question-how much is she going to make?

< Subject: RE: Union Schools!! >
< From: >Another Taxpayer
< Date: 28-Sep-99 >

From what I know, the $200 per month is part of the central office administrators contract that has been in affect for many years. There are probably 6 or 7 people it pertains to. Mostly it can be justified, especially when you add up the travel time and add to it administrative and paperwork time taken to process, control and payout the .35/per mile. In some cases it may not be justified. but if you're covered by the contract, it's there. At least the BOE didn't buy cars for their administrators like the town did for all dept heads! There's where we should be complaining.

Go look at the BOE administrative costs per pupil in the county. Also the lowest.

I'm no shill nor entirely in love with the BOE, I just deal with facts and reality. For the most part I believe given what they have to work with, they are doing pretty well, with of course plenty of room for improvement. BTW, it is a proven fact that there is absolutely no correlation between BOE Members, administrators, or principals, and test scores.

< Subject: RE: Union Schools!! >
< From: >resident
< Date: 28-Sep-99 >

I'm not proud that we have the lowest cost per pupil in the county. It's embarassing.

< Subject: RE: Union Schools!! >
< From: >
< Date: 28-Sep-99 >

Should we spend more, so that we can say we're not the lowest in the county?

< Subject: RE: Union Schools!! >
< From: >
< Date: 28-Sep-99 >

Should we spend more, so that we can say we're not the lowest in the county?

Show me the money!

< Subject: RE: Union Schools!! >
< From: >Parent
< Date: 29-Sep-99 >

I absolutely can't believe what I'm reading!! Why should anyone be embarrassed about lowest cost per pupil? For God's sake, it's something to be proud of!! In every other aspect of life we try to keep costs down:manufactured goods, services, entertainment productions....EVERYTHING!!! So why in this instance should we be embarrassed for being prudent? By the way... I would like to see the screeching on these "THREADS" if the BOE were to go to YEAR ROUND SCHOOL as is being done in many other school districts throughout the world, country and now the state. One district I know of in Virginia went to this 25 years ago. The teachers don't work any more, they just have the 185 days stretched out to cover twelve months with several two week respites. If someone proposed that here I believe we'd have a revolution on our hands!

< Subject: RE: Union Schools!! >
< From: >J
< Date: 29-Sep-99 >

We were known for years and years to have the lowest cost per pupil rate, and WE WERE PROUD OF IT!!

What happened to that?? :)