Click here to report offensive or inappropriate posts.
Show up and write letters to protest this travesty:
The administration wrings its hands complaining that it doesn't have enough money to fund basics, like enough kindergarten teachers, and while it has known all along it has $48,000 for administrative raises ("a pot of money for Superintendent to give raises"), and who knows how many other "pots" in her cupboard and the mayor's! Disgraceful! And just like last year, Taymore will not disclose to whom or why these raises to six-figure administrators should be given.
from the Rolling Agenda for Tuesday night, June 9, School Committee Meeting:
"Approv non-union raises 15 FF Vote to approve pot of money for Superintendent to give raises"
Annual Review of Non-Union Employees
Melrose Public Schools Superintendent’s Office
Each year when setting the budget, the School Committee approves funding in anticipation of contractual obligations, including salary increases for all staff. Those funds are included in both individual salary lines and in the contractual obligations line. It is the Superintendent’s responsibility to evaluate non-union staff yearly. Based on the results of each non-union employee’s annual review, I determine the FY16 salaries for those employees. Of the 20 non- union staff, three administrators’ salaries are paid by either revolving funds (fee based programs for Heather Josephson and Donna Rosso) or through a grant (METCO grant for Doreen Ward).
We have in the FY16 budget $48,000 available for increases. We will continue to follow the city
Salary Table regarding salary ranges for the individual positions. The non-union employees include the following staff:
Margaret Adams Assistant Superintendent for Teaching and Learning
Patti White-Lambright Assistant Superintendent for Pupil Personnel Services
Jay Picone Director of Finance and Administrative Affairs
Mary Ellen Cobbs Principal, Horace Mann School
Brent Conway Principal, MVMMS
Jenny Corduck Principal, Hoover School
Marianne Farrell Principal, Melrose High School
Mary Beth Maranto Principal, Roosevelt School
John Maynard Principal, Winthrop School
Rick D’Angelo Coordinator of General and Special Education Transportation
Nate Atwater System Administrator
Judy Chan Coordinator of Systems Software
Jimmy Ho Help Desk Technician
Frank Sorrenti Network Manager
Diane Hogan Executive Assistant to the Superintendent of Schools
Donna Keohane Assistant to the Director of Finance/Administrative Affairs for
Payroll and Personnel
Christine LeDuc Assistant to the Director of Finance and Administrative Affairs
Heather Josephson Director, Education Stations
Donna Rosso Director, Franklin Early Childhood Center
Doreen Ward METCO Director
Thanks for pointing this out. This is a reason why we need an override! We need the type of school budget that prooey funds teachers salaries, admin salaries, has enough teachers to maintain adequate class sizes and still have money for textbooks and other programs and materials that support our curriculum. You are right, we need an override! So happy this board is coming around in support!
Go back to listening to your "Angels Sing" or have "Uncle Dave" buy you a cup of coffee at Jitters
This is a perfect example of how "disingenuous" the administrators are when they claim a need for an Override, to quote that Grover woman in her grossly inappropriate statement attacking Mrs. K recently. These shameless administrators have no trouble demanding substantial raises on top of already inflated six-figure salaries, and their boss, has no trouble whatsoever demanding another gross increase above her grossly inappropriate salary (something around $180,000 by now--when Joe Casey retired just 3 years ago w/ 7 years in the system at $149,900 and most thought that was too much for someone with no doctorate and poor management skills!). It's disingenuous for the School Committee and the superintendent to claim there is insufficient money to pay for Kindergarten paraprofessionals, or any of the other claimed needs, while at the same time they know they will get the thumbs-up by this bunch for some sort of large increase on top of inflated salaries (for individuals who absolutely cannot claim a successful performance record in this district!). This is one big scam, and Melrose apparently has a lot of very gullible young parents. Fortunately, Melrose also has a large population of more thoughtful individuals who tend to vote reliably who should be able to see through those who are truly "disingenuous" and who will understand that this Override is about further plumping of these already bloated administrator salaries and not at all about serving the students or the community.
Quite frankly - anyone who votes for this override is either nuts or ignorant- take your choice!
It is the height (or rather, depth) of cynicism for this mayor and school administration to call for an override (on top of a big pile of Bonds), claiming severe need of schools while at the same time they knew they would be divvying up their "pot" of gold for administration raises this very month. They got down to business unveiling the schools pity party and got all those simpering MEFoundation mothers in on the plan. (The adding in of 2 more police officer positions was also another cynical ploy to make it seem like this wasn't just about funding a slush fund for the schools, which Monica Medeiros successfully debunked when she asked the question of Chief Lyle last week in which he answered that he did not ask for 2 more police officers.) The outright cynicism of the whole thing is really quite remarkable. They really think we are all chumps! Not all of us!
Someone who does not understand the basics of life on earth. Confused easily.
This pot of money for raises is an absolute disgrace!! The biggest class of kindergarteners coming next fall and at the end of this school year they are cutting kindergarten para positions. Many parents have no clue that this is happening. Twenty five plus kids in every classroom next year with no para, but let's give more raises and bonuses! Every teacher from K on up has to teach to the test. Let's see what those scores look like next year! Back to teaching whole group instead of teaching to the children's individual needs! This pot of money could pay for 2-3 para positions. Unbelievable!!!
The School Committee barged ahead and voted that Pot of $48,000 Taymore requested for Administrative Raises. Their arrogance is unmitigated. This is a shameful bunch indeed. And to think they and the Aldermen presume this community will vote to support their override request, in addition to that enormous heap of bonds the mayor put forward. They believe they don't have to account for any of this. Dolan and Taymore want these things, ergo they should have them. No accountability, no transparency, just hands out for our wallets and third finger up at any who dare to question them. They have no shame, they have no class, and they most certainly do not have the students' best interests at heart. Shame shame shame.
Show up Thursday night and protest this disgrace before the Board of Aldermen vote to put it on the ballot! Demonstrate that Melrose still has some heart and integrity, please!
Bozo the clown we all know you are not voting for the override. Big deal. I'm voting for it...we cancel each other out.
I guarantee you will not show up at the meeting tonight to protest the alderman's vote to put an override on the ballot (and let the community decide what it wants to do.) Chicken Little. If you clowns really believed the garbage you spew you would want it on the ballot so you and the rest of the Bozo's can send it down in flames...but the reality is you are afraid it will pass. Round up all the bozo's and bring em down in the little clown car for the meeting tonight, yawn...it will never happen. Yellow streaks running down your backs can be seen from miles away.
Nice try..Clown Patrol....but the final outcome of any vote on an override will be "NO"! And you fully realize it! No one in the right mind - and there are still an ovewhleming number of people of these people who live in Melrose - will vote for this override. The Mayor and Superintendent Taymore lack credibility and have not demonstrated the need - and sadly a "slide presentation" doesn't justify it.
If they were serious about this override attempt, they would have convened a special committee of stakeholders to properly evalute the need and obtain community input to rationalize and document thiir request,as do other communities who ask for overrides. Instead they chose - as they usually do - to plan this in their secretive, behind closed doors, personal cabals, and expect the public to be gullible enough to accept their request.
Their override request will go down in defeat because the school leadership has lost their credibility with the public.
MFD, there's no point in arguing with Vuvu aka ClownPatrol aka any number of other things. It only fuels the raging illiterate craziness of this poster.
Cowards. No shows. Enough said.
Hey...Clown Patrol.....didn't you see me talk at the meeting tonight! What a zero you are!
Clown Patrol...aptly named, as he/she represents the clowns on school committee (not CKK of course), and school administration. I can see the
mini-school bus now, packed with these clowns on their override tour to nowhere, with the MEF moms not far behind, waving their "vote Yes" banners. Ouch.[:-|]
Last night's BOA meeting included an order that demonstrated perfectly why the "school budget" does not anywhere near accurately reflect the actual cost to the taxpayers of "running" the schools. An order came before the board for a transfer of some 27000 odd dollars to IT. Mr Pazos explained that the majority of that was to cover school internet costs. You won't see that in the school budget, nor will you see lots of other things, like health care cost. The schools are bleeding this city dry, using approximately 70% of the cities available revenue. Absolutely unconscionable.
Oh, so the last time it was "over 70%" - now it is "approximately 70%" - either way from the last discussion I do recall that the last time we went through this little exercise in hyperbole, you were about $15 million dollars short in justifying your assertion.
How about this - from the DOE website, it says that the Melrose general allocation to the overall school budget is $36,435,239 - which is way more than the budgeted amount of the school budget that year so it probably includes all of the extras that you talk about. That year, the City of Melrose budget was $68 million. So that is about 53% of the budget. That is about in line with other communities.
This is where I am getting my math -
You show me your backup. Again, I'd like to see you list out $49 million in city budget allocations for the schools to come up with the 70% of the $70,000,000 school budget.
Just ask anyone at City Hall/mayor's office, etc. The full allocation is between $47-49 million, once benefits and DPW cityside expenses are folded in. This is factual and not worthy of back-and-forth. The DESE site referenced doesn't include the full picture of what the school district expends, only what the School Committee approves for the segmented "school budget."
Yeah blah blah blah. You show me the facts behind your 70% statement and I will believe it then. Or go get someone from the Mayor's office to go through the budget on this board to add up the $49 million dollars (or more, since you said "at least 70%." 'Til then it is just a bunch of hyperbole and conjecture. But it makes for a great story if you are trying to discredit the schools.
The schools discredit themselves just fine without any help from others. You "not again" are a fool in a city full of them.
Yes, that is total expenditures. Please note the definitions:
General Fund Appropriations: Amounts voted by town meetings or city councils to support the school budget, coming primarily from a combination of property taxes and Chapter 70 state aid.
Grants, Revolving and Other Funds: Non-appropriated revenue sources from federal, state and private grants; tuition, school lunch, athletic funds, and other targeted local receipts.
Total Expenditures: Spending from all funding sources on all school functions except capital items (school construction, purchase of buildings, etc.)
For Melrose it is general fund:
Grants, revolving and other funds: $9,385,301
Total Expenditures $45,820,540
So thanks for proving my point. Melrose puts $35,535,239 into the pot. Which again is a little over 50% of the budget.
As I suspected you would, you just proved the opposite.
"Total Expenditures: Spending from all funding sources on all school functions except capital items (school construction, purchase of buildings, etc.)" - $45,820,540.00
That's correct. It does not include the cost of bond obligations or debt service. It also does not include the $5,000,000.00 just approved for the makeover at the HS.
So add those and others to the $45,820,540.00 you've already mentioned, and it pushes the total amount of revenue spent by or on the schools far in excess of 70%. Thanks for the help. Now go tell the Mayor you blew it.
That number includes over $11 million dollars in state aid (including chapter 70 funding) that is not part of the Melrose budget.
Expenditures means expenditures.
State aid, grants, cityside funding do not apply to the EXPENDITURES figure. A budget includes both expenditures and revenue.
The schools now spend around $47 million dollars total in Melrose (the DESE figures are not current and do not include the vastly increased teacher salaries now in place after the teacher's contract approved last year).
So why does the actual definition include chapter 70 aid? If the expenditures don't come from the city budget it doesn't matter how high they are. And chapter 70 aid does not.
If the state funding of ch. 70 is diminished by the legislature, the programs and services that it helps to fund do not disappear. The cost would need to be made up by the cities and towns in order to maintain things at the current levels.
Saw a car in front of me that had a MEF sticker and then a thumbs up sticker for the override. That was fast !
All on the same bumper sticker?? Is this permissible under IRS rules?
I think the message is clear, the MEF supports the override. Sounds like they are in violation...