| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Guest
|
 Posted: Fri, Apr 2 2010, 6:41 pm EDT Post subject: Re: SCHOOOL BUDGET 3.26 CENT TAX RATE INCREASE |
 |
|
| Guest wrote: | | Guest 2 wrote: | I don't get the "peer review" concept.
The TC has not relationship to the BOE. Why do you imply they are "peers" -- again -- it's like having a lawyer review your surgeon's work.
They are both well respected, and smart -- but one's expertise has nothing to do with the other.
The budget has been formulated by the Superintendent -- "reviewed" questioned and poked at by the BOE -- sent to the state Department of Education (DOE) for review and now it is being presented to the voters for a yes or no vote.
Either you think it needs change -- then vote no -- or you think it is ok --- vote yes. The TC has NOTHING to do with it. If we vote no the TC has to look at it and ask for cuts -- because that is what the majority of NO votes means -- it means CUT -- it does not mean REVIEW.
So if you want a cut -- vote NO -- if you think sufficient -- and dare I say too much -- has already been cut -- vote YES.
Get over this "REVIEW" option -- it does not exist! |
The Cranbury school budget needs to be CUT more, I'm voting NO because not enough was cut. |
That is the ONLY reason to vote no. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri, Apr 2 2010, 9:32 pm EDT Post subject: Re: SCHOOOL BUDGET 3.26 CENT TAX RATE INCREASE |
|
|
| Vote No |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest 2
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri, Apr 2 2010, 10:21 pm EDT Post subject: Re: SCHOOOL BUDGET 3.26 CENT TAX RATE INCREASE |
|
|
Ok then. How much more should be cut? Where? You've done your homework -- what fluff is there in the programs offered our students that you think is superfluous, unnecessary?
Or do you simply think that any increase, no matter what the reason is too much?
If milk costs more than I want to spend, then the baby should go hungry. Is that your frame of mind? Because to reason that any increase is "bad" is to imply that you wouldn't pay for a necessity if you thought it cost more than it cost you yesterday.
Guess what -- the world doesn't work that way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
candor
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri, Apr 2 2010, 11:22 pm EDT Post subject: Re: SCHOOOL BUDGET 3.26 CENT TAX RATE INCREASE |
|
|
I am glad to see we are getting some candor on this thread. Yes means "don't cut more". No means "cut more".
I plan to vote Yes because it seems to me that a lot of folks have worked hard to make the necessary sacrifices in a reasonable way. However, I am open minded about the possibility of voting No, if someone can explain what additional cuts could and should be made. So far, I've heard that administrative raises should be eliminated or cut (which I agree with) and some people think the teachers should forego a raise completely, as opposed to 2% (which I disagree with). Any other suggestions? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri, Apr 2 2010, 11:26 pm EDT Post subject: Re: SCHOOOL BUDGET 3.26 CENT TAX RATE INCREASE |
|
|
| candor wrote: | I am glad to see we are getting some candor on this thread. Yes means "don't cut more". No means "cut more".
I plan to vote Yes because it seems to me that a lot of folks have worked hard to make the necessary sacrifices in a reasonable way. However, I am open minded about the possibility of voting No, if someone can explain what additional cuts could and should be made. So far, I've heard that administrative raises should be eliminated or cut (which I agree with) and some people think the teachers should forego a raise completely, as opposed to 2% (which I disagree with). Any other suggestions? |
pay freeze for the teachers would save us money that along with 7% of our aid restored if we had a teachers pay freeze.
VOTE NO |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat, Apr 3 2010, 3:14 am EDT Post subject: Re: SCHOOOL BUDGET 3.26 CENT TAX RATE INCREASE |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | candor wrote: | I am glad to see we are getting some candor on this thread. Yes means "don't cut more". No means "cut more".
I plan to vote Yes because it seems to me that a lot of folks have worked hard to make the necessary sacrifices in a reasonable way. However, I am open minded about the possibility of voting No, if someone can explain what additional cuts could and should be made. So far, I've heard that administrative raises should be eliminated or cut (which I agree with) and some people think the teachers should forego a raise completely, as opposed to 2% (which I disagree with). Any other suggestions? |
pay freeze for the teachers would save us money that along with 7% of our aid restored if we had a teachers pay freeze.
We would not get back 7% of our aid. We would get back the medicaid/social security taxes that would have been paid by the state on the amount saved in raises to the teachers.
Also note that we are contractually obligated to give raises to the teachers and administrators -- voting no won't give anyone the power to break these contracts. The teachers gave back half their raises and their tuition reimbursement (which I would guess is more $$ than their raises) and some professional development. That is their share of this pain -- your share is to pony up some more tax $$. Why should the teachers bear the brunt of the whole problem?
VOTE NO |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat, Apr 3 2010, 3:15 am EDT Post subject: Re: SCHOOOL BUDGET 3.26 CENT TAX RATE INCREASE |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | Guest wrote: | | candor wrote: | I am glad to see we are getting some candor on this thread. Yes means "don't cut more". No means "cut more".
I plan to vote Yes because it seems to me that a lot of folks have worked hard to make the necessary sacrifices in a reasonable way. However, I am open minded about the possibility of voting No, if someone can explain what additional cuts could and should be made. So far, I've heard that administrative raises should be eliminated or cut (which I agree with) and some people think the teachers should forego a raise completely, as opposed to 2% (which I disagree with). Any other suggestions? |
pay freeze for the teachers would save us money that along with 7% of our aid restored if we had a teachers pay freeze.
We would not get back 7% of our aid. We would get back the medicaid/social security taxes that would have been paid by the state on the amount saved in raises to the teachers.
Also note that we are contractually obligated to give raises to the teachers and administrators -- voting no won't give anyone the power to break these contracts. The teachers gave back half their raises and their tuition reimbursement (which I would guess is more $$ than their raises) and some professional development. That is their share of this pain -- your share is to pony up some more tax $$. Why should the teachers bear the brunt of the whole problem?
VOTE NO |
|
OOPS -- I meant VOTE YES (it's late  ) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
