Board of School Estimate

Log Out | Lost Password? | Topics | Search | Who's Online Contact | Register | My Profile | SO home | MOL home

Thread Originator Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post   Closed: New threads not accepted on this page

Author Message   Spitz Supporter Username: Doublea Post Number: 1683 Registered: 3-2003 Posted on Tuesday, April 11, 2006 - 9:17 am:        At last night's BOT meeting, Janis Zaveri, Co-President of the Community Relations Committee, explained the role that the CBAC had this year in advising the SO members on issues with the school budget. She explained several things that the BOE had said that just didn't stand up under scrutiny, in the way of purported cost savings. Janis did note that the school budget has doubled in the last seven years, with just a hundred additional students in the district over that period. The gist of her comments were that very little of the increase found its way into the classroom. I commend the CBAC for really getting involved this year. The problem I have is with the SO members of the BOSE. Where have you been in the seven years during which the school budget has doubled? The SO members have been enablers of the BOE in the games that have been played over the years, resulting in this. The SO members are the ones who basically went along with the BOE in not asking for more discipline in the budget process, and then saying they would approve anything the BOE wanted to put into a special question. The one ex- SO member of the BOE who tried to put some discipline into the budget process was criticized. Some members of the BOT even said that that individual was not good for the schools, when in fact he was trying to get the BOE and BOSE to do the job that they should have been doing. SOM is one of a handful of school districts in the state which have special questions in their budgets. SOM is one of a very few which provides that a BOSE votes on the budget rather than the voters. In the past, the South Orange members knew only one thing - we'll give you (the BOE) whatever you tell us you need. By doing this, the South Orange members showed absolutely no fiscal responsibility. Maybe they will demand more accountability in the future, rather than just writing blank checks.   SO1969 Citizen Username: Bklyn1969 Post Number: 267 Registered: 7-2004 Posted on Tuesday, April 11, 2006 - 10:29 am:        Have the school budgets really doubled? And they still have all that deferred maintenance? Where is the money going? What are the priorities? Wait, what am I talking about. I'm on Planet South Orange. While in the rest of the civilized universe, things like: well maintained: - roads - sidewalks - libraries - playgrounds - schools would be paramount priorities, here on Planet South Orange, it is okay to go into debt to: - finance a $16mm performing arts center. No other planet or moon in the galaxy has spent a comparable amount for such a project. - purchase a gift sculpture for $500,000. Again, there is no known comparable purchase by a municipal government. Anywhere. Period. I can't wait for PBS to do its special on what a great arts community SO is. Calabrese, DeVaris & Co. better hope that the camera is narrowly focused on the sculpture and the arts center, and doesn't shift to the blights that are: - Sayid's dirt patch - Beifus hole - shop rite crack joint It has reached the point where describing the shop rite location as looking like Newark or the South Bronx is both insulting to those communities and inaccurate - Newark and the South Bronx are improving much faster than South Orange Avenue.   Lucy Supporter Username: Lucy Post Number: 3410 Registered: 5-2005 Posted on Tuesday, April 11, 2006 - 10:33 am:        SO1969 you just nailed it!   MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 3860 Registered: 5-2001 Posted on Tuesday, April 11, 2006 - 10:39 am:        So1969, You also forgot to mention that while all of the above was going on Calabrese & Taylor (along with Steglitz & Theroux) voted to PAY THEMSELVES, plus also shifted the bulk of John Gross's salary to his TENURED position.   Lucy Supporter Username: Lucy Post Number: 3411 Registered: 5-2005 Posted on Tuesday, April 11, 2006 - 10:42 am:        Thanks MHD we should never forget that!   Spitz Supporter Username: Doublea Post Number: 1684 Registered: 3-2003 Posted on Tuesday, April 11, 2006 - 10:46 am:        SO1969 - Then you can understand how the South Orange members of the BOSE have in the past given the BOE a blank check, without asking for any accountability on the part of the BOE. As a result, the school administration with the help of the BOE has been able to play unbelievable games with the budget, and the SO members have been the enablers of the BOE. The response of Bill C. in school budgets as well as municipal budgets is that money is no object. When it comes to the schools, it's not the actual amount itself, but the fact that the SO members did not ask for any accountability that the money it had already approved was being used in the best possible manner.   mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 2731 Registered: 4-2002 Posted on Tuesday, April 11, 2006 - 3:06 pm:        Spitz: As I pointed out to Trustee Rosen last night, this year, the S. Orange representatives on the BOSE did not even bother to ask the trustees for their input or to even let us know how they planned to vote. He admitted that it was wrong but that does not change the outcome.   Spitz Supporter Username: Doublea Post Number: 1685 Registered: 3-2003 Posted on Tuesday, April 11, 2006 - 3:42 pm:        Mark - I know that you pointed this out last night. His reply that yes, things were a little mixed-up this year, was even more remarkable. I can't believe this is what was intended when the state gave the power to approve the school budget to three individuals from each of the towns. I'll repeat - the South Orange members have consistently given the BOE a blank check. I don't quite understand the rationale of our CBAC either. The rationale seemed to be, ok BOE, you haven't been honest with us, therefore we'll really show you and increase the amount we'll approve in the special question. I guess we really showed them.   mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 2732 Registered: 4-2002 Posted on Tuesday, April 11, 2006 - 3:51 pm:        I think it was two or three years ago when a couple of us asked the BOSE to vote against the BOE budget. We felt a message needed to be sent so that the BOSE could actually be part of the process. It is certainly very frustrating.   sac Supporter Username: Sac Post Number: 3358 Registered: 5-2001 Posted on Tuesday, April 11, 2006 - 4:07 pm:        re '... state gave the power to approve the school budget to three individuals from each of the towns' - It is my understanding that the BOSE process we have in M/SO is exactly what is invoked if/when voters vote down a school budget in all those other towns. So, in essence, it seems that the part we are missing here is the part where the voters "send a message", but otherwise it is as if we voted down our school budget every year. I'm happy to be corrected and/or have this explained more clearly, but that is what I have read and heard about this in past years. Not to negate any concerns that may exist about how the BOSE comes to their decisions, but I don't think that having the voters cast ballots regarding the budget would necessarily change anything.   Spitz Supporter Username: Doublea Post Number: 1686 Registered: 3-2003 Posted on Tuesday, April 11, 2006 - 4:19 pm:        sac - I'm not quite sure if that's how it works on special questions. It may in fact be as you explain it. The fact of the matter is that, as you probably know, there are only a handful of districts in N.J. which even have special questions to be voted on. SOM has consistently had them - they have become a standard part of the budget process. Someone who knows the exact number can correct me, but I don't think that there are more than 10 districts in the entire state which have special questions to be voted on, and probably 5 or 6 which are approved. And I don't know of any school district where after the voters have voted down a budget, it's gone to the municipal governing body and not only has the governing body approved the budget, but added more. I'm sure you recall that this is exactly what was done 2 or 3 years ago, when the 3 SO members and 1 Maplewood member kept piling things on to the special questions.