|
Post by vincegatto on Mar 16, 2010 12:24:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by getreal on Mar 16, 2010 20:08:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by vincegatto on Mar 16, 2010 20:37:53 GMT -5
You want to explain what "retirement pay" is and when he is able to collect that $67583 per year. Because the link you put up states "retirement Pay", not "retirement fund". In addition to not being able to add, apparently, you can't read either.
|
|
|
Post by stevemcgarrett on Mar 18, 2010 6:57:31 GMT -5
You want to explain what "retirement pay" is and when he is able to collect that $67583 per year. Because the link you put up states "retirement Pay", not "retirement fund". In addition to not being able to add, apparently, you can't read either. Maybe he/she would have received a better education if his teachers worked in a gulag for minimum wage.
|
|
|
Post by getreal on Mar 18, 2010 22:36:24 GMT -5
Maybe he/she would have received a better education if his teachers worked in a gulag for minimum wage. who is talking about teachers? keep up. if u two mental midgets think small town school admins deserve more than the state governor keep throwing your tax money at them. vg was proved wrong and now resorts to name calling. mature.
|
|
|
Post by stevemcgarrett on Mar 19, 2010 6:55:19 GMT -5
Maybe he/she would have received a better education if his teachers worked in a gulag for minimum wage. who is talking about teachers? keep up. if u two mental midgets think small town school admins deserve more than the state governor keep throwing your tax money at them. vg was proved wrong and now resorts to name calling. mature. Perhaps it is the structure of the system in this state, and not individual administrators? Did you consider that? I think the bigger issue is the ridiculous amount of school districts that need to be supported. Frankly, a superintendent running something the size of anything but the smallest district would be making MORE in private industry, so you might want to keep a little reality in mind. Consolidation and less administrative overhead are key. Of course, to get that you'll have the teacher's unions fighting you, and the politicians in their pocket running for cover. OR, you can continue to refuse to look beyond your town for the real issues, and insist that if we just cut a few salaries and bought less paperclips we'd be 'all good.' PS - I'd have to say your writing style and method of trying to make a point higlight you as the mental midget. In fact, I just realized my response has too many words and probably went whooshing right over your head. That's okay though, the thinkers here will understand.
|
|
|
Post by vincegatto on Mar 19, 2010 8:25:59 GMT -5
who is talking about teachers? keep up. if u two mental midgets think small town school admins deserve more than the state governor keep throwing your tax money at them. vg was proved wrong and now resorts to name calling. mature. Perhaps it is the structure of the system in this state, and not individual administrators? Did you consider that? I think the bigger issue is the ridiculous amount of school districts that need to be supported. Frankly, a superintendent running something the size of anything but the smallest district would be making MORE in private industry, so you might want to keep a little reality in mind. Consolidation and less administrative overhead are key. Of course, to get that you'll have the teacher's unions fighting you, and the politicians in their pocket running for cover. OR, you can continue to refuse to look beyond your town for the real issues, and insist that if we just cut a few salaries and bought less paperclips we'd be 'all good.' PS - I'd have to say your writing style and method of trying to make a point higlight you as the mental midget. In fact, I just realized my response has too many words and probably went whooshing right over your head. That's okay though, the thinkers here will understand. The bottom line is that Getreal has still failed to prove that the Superintendent is collecting a $70,000 a year State retirement pension while still working or that Audubon spends more for administrators than the State average - which were Getreal's original accusations.
|
|
|
Post by vincegatto on Mar 19, 2010 16:00:33 GMT -5
Maybe he/she would have received a better education if his teachers worked in a gulag for minimum wage. who is talking about teachers? keep up. if u two mental midgets think small town school admins deserve more than the state governor keep throwing your tax money at them. vg was proved wrong and now resorts to name calling. mature. Did someone call you a name? I didn't call you a name - what name did you think I called you. Don't be a such a crybaby, nobody called you a name. We are civil on this board! We just ask people to prove what the say here.
|
|
|
Post by Bubbles on Mar 19, 2010 20:29:54 GMT -5
Interesting choice of words; "accusations" has such a strong neg connotations -- if they're true, is it wrong?
Recapping, GetReal stated that the Aud superintendent receives compensation in the amount of a salary of 170,000 and a 70,000 contribution by the board into his personal retirement fund. She provided a link that clearly proved such. Throw in a car, phone, computer and other misc sundries and his total compensation is around 250,000; and with a generous vacation, pension, and health package. That appears to be factual and really not that unordinary in NJ. Why some can't follow or choose to ignore this and deflect it into a personal issue with her is interesting.
Now we can all have opinions as to whether a superintendent running a small mediocre school system warrants such pay -- really. . . . more than the state governor himself?! -- but if discussing taxes and wild spending it is certainly fair to look into the check and balances of a system that passes such a bill onto taxpayers. The state has recognized this and has partially attempted to get a handle on such wild education spending and protect taxpayers by establishing county executive superintendents. Local boards, although well intentioned, are unable to control spending other peoples money. Most boards are simply involved residents with little time for actual day-to-day running of schools; for all intent letting the administrators handle details including virtually setting their own compensation packages. . . . perhaps a solution is to make the superintendent's positions state employees and take the compensation issue off the local board’s plate.
Although they should be compensated, as to whether these individuals could be pulling in these kind of packages on the outside is, in my opinion ludicrous.
|
|
|
Post by vincegatto on Mar 19, 2010 21:12:26 GMT -5
Interesting choice of words; "accusations" has such a strong neg connotations -- if they're true, is it wrong? Recapping, GetReal stated that the Aud superintendent receives compensation in the amount of a salary of 170,000 and a 70,000 contribution by the board into his personal retirement fund. She provided a link that clearly proved such. Throw in a car, phone, computer and other misc sundries and his total compensation is around 250,000; and with a generous vacation, pension, and health package. That appears to be factual and really not that unordinary in NJ. Why some can't follow or choose to ignore this and deflect it into a personal issue with her is interesting. Now we can all have opinions as to whether a superintendent running a small mediocre school system warrants such pay -- really. . . . more than the state governor himself?! -- but if discussing taxes and wild spending it is certainly fair to look into the check and balances of a system that passes such a bill onto taxpayers. The state has recognized this and has partially attempted to get a handle on such wild education spending and protect taxpayers by establishing county executive superintendents. Local boards, although well intentioned, are unable to control spending other peoples money. Most boards are simply involved residents with little time for actual day-to-day running of schools; for all intent letting the administrators handle details including virtually setting their own compensation packages. . . . perhaps a solution is to make the superintendent's positions state employees and take the compensation issue off the local board’s plate. Although they should be compensated, as to whether these individuals could be pulling in these kind of packages on the outside is, in my opinion ludicrous. Did you ever hear the term "shill". How do you know that Getreal is a "she"? There is no gender shown for "guests". I think that you are shilling for Getreal. Nonetheless, if you can provide some facts to back up what you just said, I will be happy to listen. Otherwise, you have just repeated accusations that have already been expressed by Getreal and appear to be trying to come off as a neutral third party that agrees with "her". en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shill
|
|
Interested OldTimer
Guest
|
Post by Interested OldTimer on Mar 19, 2010 21:17:35 GMT -5
I think Bubbles was at the former place, and presented info that was not challenged?
|
|
|
Post by Bubbles on Mar 19, 2010 22:16:56 GMT -5
shill site: www.state.nj.us/education/finance/fp/ufb/Really. It took all of about 20 seconds to verify GetReal's info. Why do some feel the need to attack facts and poke the presenter? One can have his own opinion; not his own facts. Given the state of the NJ budget you'd think some 300 guys running around duplicating each other's efforts while sucking up $250K of taxpayer dollars each would be one place for a fair discussion to save some taxpayer money.
|
|
|
Post by Bubbles on Mar 19, 2010 22:19:25 GMT -5
I think Bubbles was at the former place, and presented info that was not challenged? put on some big boy pants, step up and challenge.
|
|
|
Post by vincegatto on Mar 19, 2010 23:25:36 GMT -5
shill site: www.state.nj.us/education/finance/fp/ufb/Really. It took all of about 20 seconds to verify GetReal's info. Why do some feel the need to attack facts and poke the presenter? One can have his own opinion; not his own facts. Given the state of the NJ budget you'd think some 300 guys running around duplicating each other's efforts while sucking up $250K of taxpayer dollars each would be one place for a fair discussion to save some taxpayer money. I read the information regarding your link previously. It still did not help me understand what the "retirement pay" represented. If you want to make a case you need to clearly define "retirement pay" - what it represents, when he gets it, if he gets that every year,etc. Since the data that Getreal presented shows it as " Post-employment retirement pay"(Click on his name for details) php.app.com/appendixc/details.php?recordID=751It looks like you guys are complaining about the amount of a pension or buyout for unused sick time he receives when he retires, not some extra amount he gets now and it appears to be a one time deal. Let's try to get the facts straight. Read the comments. It appears to be funds he accrued as a teacher/principal over 30 years prior to his appointment as Superintendent. Comes out to be about $2,000 per year. Sorry I can't be more factual, but you guys are showing me nothing that makes it clear either.
|
|
|
Post by pissant on Mar 27, 2010 11:52:17 GMT -5
|
|