Now they are saying that the incoming kindergarten class is beyond expected numbers. Well no sh*t. How is that our problem? Why should we pay for it? Its not like more older people are leaving and new, young families with lots of children are moving in, this was purposely done by adding at least 1000 units to the city and telling us it will be young young, single commuting professionals who will rent. In actuality, there is a lot of welfare families, and there are young families who want to buy but there isn’t enough for sale prompting bidding wars making it too expensive. A lot of these people will end up buying elsewhere. But the city officials will convince them to vote yes because it’s for their children’s futures.
This year this 320 kindergarteners. Last year there was 321. After mandatory preregistration there is 308 registered to begin next school year. How exactly is this more? Typically, by the end of the summer net of 10-15 drop off as they go to other schools or move. I believe superintendent conceded this point . The demographic study said we would be getting 345 in FY 20. Nothing remotely close to that expected for FY 20.
A member of the school committee stated the other night at the meeting that it is above last year’s trend.
Whatever the numbers are it’s obvioisky more than this system can handle.
Last spring they said the incoming kindergarten class would be 340. It ended at 320 per October 1st foundation budget. Next kindergarten class It’s currently 308 after preregistration . Where exactly is the higher trend?
Actually, the increase is most certainly people cashing in on the high prices and selling their homes to young families- there has been a ton of real estate turnover in the last 5 years. The 809 apartments added in the last 10 years have a total of 82 students enrolled in school across all grades. The cost to educate those kids based on the per pupil spending is $964k but the apartments generate $1.8 million in revenue for the City. The existance of those apartments is actually one reason we have survived so long without needing an override:
It is interesting you cite that blog post from the mayor, as it contains a pure falsehood right from the get-go:
From her blog => "During that same time period, we have seen the number of students in our schools increase, and some people have asked whether the two are related. I asked our Planning Department to look into it, and they studied school enrollment data provided by the School Department. The answer is simple: The new apartment complexes are not driving the increase. Only 82 students, or 2.1% of the total enrollment in the Melrose Public Schools live in these four complexes"
So enrollment has increased about 260 over this period. The relevant stat is obviously 82/260 or 32%, not 82/3950 (2.1%). Thus if you were to offer say just five reasons why enrollment has increased, the one that came in at 32% would be at least 2nd and more likely 1st. So her statement "The answer is simple, the new complexes are not driving the increase" is completely false. As I've noted before, either this is a complete lie or she doesn't know the relevant metric - neither paints a good picture.
As to the second half of her blog, the tax revenue impact is true in a vacuum, but if at some point the increase causes you to build $5M modulars and then request addition override funds, the incremental cost of these students is much more than $11,773 per.
I pointed this out to the mayor's office when I met with them (and PDR). They agreed that the first part was not true. I asked them to remove it, it is still up today.
Ironically, I have seen a large number of social posts referring to this particular blog post as part of the "abundance of transparency" coming from the administration. Must be nice to just print something and have so many people take it at face value.
Just because you don’t like the stats doesn’t mean they are false. She correctly cited that the 2.1% was the ratio of so-called “complex students” to the total enrollment. It is what it is....you may not like it but it is truthful and transparent.
Further, your comment:
“So enrollment has increased about 260 over this period. The relevant stat is obviously 82/260 or 32%, not 82/3950 (2.1%). Thus if you were to offer say just five reasons why enrollment has increased, the one that came in at 32% would be at least 2nd and more likely 1st. So her statement "The answer is simple, the new complexes are not driving the increase" is completely false.”
Even using your math and emphasis, the “complex students” account for 32% of the new enrollment...which leaves 68% that are not complex students. I would find you disingenuous to state that something that comprises a 1/3 of the outcome is the “driver”. You just want to jump to any potential cut of the data that tries to infer that Gail is being dishonest.
Not your best argument, Jim. Better get a different slant.
I agree with the comparison (should be 82/360) but that still means the majority of the increase is NOT from the apartments but rather from increased children in homes across the City. Even with the override costs added to the per capita student spend it is not anywhere near the amount being brought in annually by the apartments (whose contribution would, of course, also go up with an Override). Attributing the apartments as the reason for the modular classroom is an unreasonable leap. Those buildings have 90+ kindergarteners in them which is more kids than all students in all grades from the new buildings. But even IF true, the excess contributions from the buildings would cover those modulars within less than a decade (even with interest).
I also don’t really understand the point of this argument which I have seen tossed around before ...people are “mad” at the City for allowing this public transportation accessible growth (during a time of extreme pressure for new housing in the Boston metro) and so they want to “punish” the City by leaving the City so underfunded that our schools and municipal services suffer? This negatively impacts ALL residents of the City not just the government officials that you seek to blame. Regardless of whether or not it was a great idea, those buildings are here, these students need to be educated, and we as a community are facing a major problem.
I didn't say it was "the" driver, I said if you were to offer just a small list (5) of possible drivers it would have to be in the top 2. If you think citing the 2.1% instead of the 32% and implying it is a non-factor isn't misleading then we just don't agree. Jeez - even they agreed the first comment in the blog was bunk.
Check the Facts - I'm glad you agree on the correct stat. The primary point of my post was to point out the how using the wrong stat makes the first part of the blog post junk and is misleading. I don't know why they don't remove it - perhaps because they are defensive about the people you reference. I for one am not mad and would not be voting out of spite, I don't think that's productive.
My other math related point was to note that the incremental cost is not simply 11,773. I would agree that it does not reach a point where they taxes don't cover the associated students.
Citing incorrect stats is becoming an almost everyday occurrence with the Mayor. Take this gem, for example:
"Contributing to our shortfall this year is a significant increase in health insurance rates, which stayed flat last year, as well as proposed state aid that is less than half of what we received last fiscal year."
Pure bunk. The City "anticipated" a 1.5% increase in state aid. The actual increase was .7% ($76,000.00), which was less than half of the "anticipated" increase. She states that total state aid fell more than 50%, and unless you take the time to look it up yourself, you'd never know she was "wrong".
As for the so-called "significant" increase in health insurance rates, it came in at around 3%. That's anything but "significant".
It's hard for me to believe the Mayor and CFO are that stupid. I am therefore left with the conclusion that the phony figures are deliberate.
Mayor Infurna, go away.
Of course it is an oversimplification- meant to combat someone’s earlier unreasonable assertion that the apartments are to blame for the school problem and somehow not the responsibility of the residents to address. I am sure there are some marginal additional costs to the City from these additional residents (although I suspect the City has not added many non-school positions in the last decade as a result of them) that erode some of the positive budget contribution. As you say it would be a complex calculation to determine the full impact- and one that is of little value since these buildings are already here and voting on an override motivated by spite (even if they were budget negative) is senseless.
interesting to note that when you attempt to use the override calculator on the city's web site it does not work.
So the Melrose Community FB Group page is allowing comments about college kids getting absentee ballots to vote! I thought all comments about the override were to be shut off Interesting! Picking and choosing I guess
It’ll be even simpler if you don’t have to. Just vote no!
If the schools are as cash strapped as one Melrose claims, the money for those glossy mailers, buttons, hats should have been donated to the schools if the one Melrose members were sincere. I've ordered supplies like this for work and the items the one Melrose chose are the ones that cost extra money. Might sound like a petty point but it speaks to the much larger issue. FISCAL IRRESPONSIBILITY.
Whatever the amount was spent on this peripheral nonsense could have gone to the schools. I saw something in MCG about "sharing textbooks". A quick calculation shows me that if 5K was spent on these promo materials and textbooks are $60 each,MPS could have 83 additional text books.
We choose not to pay for the Override because we are worried about our job security, the long term impact of Trump’s tax cuts, predictions about a recession in 2020 by renowned economists, the volatile stock market, the costs of bonded fire and police stations coming to Melrose soon, the doubling of our health insurance payments, the lack of transparency in Melrose government, the cost of water and sewer mismanagement, installing an Illegitimate Mayor without an election, the scare tactics used to justify the Override, the fact that the Chair of the SC is a convicted felon who scammed seniors and never made restitution, the way One Melrose runs their YES Campaign and because we know too many stories behind the “story”. We are voting NO and telling all our family and friends to do the same.
The main message I’m sending Is that we are worried about long term family finances. The dysfunction in both local and national politics is why we CANNOT AFFORD risking more tax dollars decided by politicians who have proven themselves to be untrustworthy in the past. So many lies have come from Trump and Illegitimate (Trumpette) Gail that we will not risk our futures on their incompetent leadership or support their policies. Telling everyone we know to Vote No !
@Forensic Audit Who are you to say that everyone in Melrose can afford an extra $50 a month? That they could find $50 if their lives depended on it?
This is not a life or death situation. The appalling selfishness that you show is sickening. Let's see. We have a teacher making 80K complaining it's not enough, the library remaining closed for 3 hours on Sunday and some kindergarteners who might not have what their entitled parents feel is the optimal student teacher ratio.
There is a real world out here. One where people can barely afford the basics and can't afford anything extra.
If you and your one Melrose friends are well off, please take up a private collection and donate it to the schools. $100 a month each. The $50 you want to pay and $50 for your neighbor who can't.
The reason you don't see many administration supporters posting here is because every time they do try to pass on the administration's propaganda, they are totally and thoroughly debunked with facts they can't dispute.
The administration is scared to death of this site, both now, and in it's prior incarnation. Why else do you think Dolan banned access to it, a practice that continues to this day?
This is the only place where voters can get even a portion of the truth. They certainly can't get it from city officials, who continue to mislead, obfuscate, and outright lie about all things fiscal. Melrose is a house of cards. The sooner that house of cards collapses, the sooner we can get a mulligan and fix the mess we've allowed to happen.
What's wrong with you? How many times are you going to post this?
The 30k could have gone to the schools.
Tracey Cruickshank posted this on Melrose Community Page:
"As a former School Committee member and School Building Committee member, I am committed to making sure our good schools not only to stay that way, but also improve."
This is a direct quote from the website of Melrose Alderman-at-Large, Monica Medeiros and yet I believe it's been months since we've heard her comment on the issue of the Override.
She is currently the Aldermanic liaison to the school committee according to this past week's Melrose Free Press. Shouldn't she have an opinion on the state of our city as related to the state of our schools? Ms. Medeiros also claims on her website that she believes in transparency, yet what have we heard from her regarding the issue of the Override? In the fall, Ms. Medeiros said she didn't have all the facts, all the numbers, but clearly that isn't the case currently. The facts are out there and the numbers are clear. Let's hear from the rest of our city leaders. Mayor Infurna, Mike Zwirko, Jen Lemmerman, Manisha Bewtra, Frank Wright, Kate Lipper-Garabedian and Peter Mortimer have all been transparent. Time to step up Monica Medeiros.April 2 2019 Tuesday .Plaese go vote yes or no.
The water and sewer rates have to be approved every year - increase, decrease or no change. And they are sent to the board of alderman every year in late April for a vote in May. Every single year. This is not unsusual. This has nothing to do with the timing of an override vote. Nothing to see here. #fakenews
Btw- is repeating the same debunked post on multiple threads meant to stoke false anger considered trolling and worthy of deleting/banning, as you have done with the Stephens auto posts, MM moderators??
The my have a whole mess of people holding yes signs near city hall right now. Everything they do makes me want to vote no harder.
Vote early and vote often!!
People’s finances are very uncertain. The most incompetent, unstable and vindictive “leader” of our country released his budget for the next fiscal year.
Cuts in Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, the EPA and the Education Departments will lose the most. The deficit will soar for another decade due to the irresponsible tax cuts benefiting the rich. Middle class folks need to conservative about their savings and spending. MUST vote NO.