Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 05-25-2010, 08:03 PM
 
Location: Hoboken
19,890 posts, read 18,722,751 times
Reputation: 3146

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by bababua View Post
Not sure what you would like me to say. Here is what I have proposed and you dont seem to like any of them

Salary freeze for all municipal employees who have not done so
Salary freeze for all state employees who have not done so
Raise the Gas Tax
"Millionaire Tax"
No more double dipping
Tenure for Superintendents so that we can lower their salaries 5 years
Tenure for teachers after 5 years

Crazy ideas!
Raising taxes is a non starter for reasons I have already explained. (by the way gas taxes are extremely regressive)

Double dipping is currently not allowed.

End double-dipping once and for all to save N.J.'s credibility | NJBIZ | Find Articles at BNET

Tenure is a bad idea as it entrenches poor teachers.

I am all for salary freezes.

 
Old 05-25-2010, 08:15 PM
 
1,931 posts, read 3,408,181 times
Reputation: 956
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby View Post
Raising taxes is a non starter for reasons I have already explained. (by the way gas taxes are extremely regressive)

Double dipping is currently not allowed.

End double-dipping once and for all to save N.J.'s credibility | NJBIZ | Find Articles at BNET

Tenure is a bad idea as it entrenches poor teachers.

I am all for salary freezes.
Good to hear you are only against the middle class. I am for a shared sacrifice. Sorry to hear you aren't Boohoo the rich are leaving, ok go ahead and leave. Make sure you take your wall street job with you to Idaho while you are at it.
If you really want to solve problems you pass the cost on to everyone and not just one group. I know this doesnt help the rich get richer but it would help the state. I am for solutions and not for helping my power base. We are all aware of who REp are for and we also know who Dems are for. I am for the state and not playing politics.
When did Reagan's trickle down economy finally get to the poor?
 
Old 05-25-2010, 08:17 PM
 
6,902 posts, read 7,526,234 times
Reputation: 2018
[quote=shorebaby;14337465]
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackandproud View Post


OK here you go your idea stinks and will wind up costing more.

http://www.innovations.harvard.edu/c...ments/9331.pdf


"[M]any of the case studies on consolidations in both the U.S. and Canada over the last 20 years have failed to find significant economies of scale for most municipal services. The findings from
]these and other studies have shown that costs for many services actually go up following large municipal consolidations" (p. 3) 1
"There is general agreement that consolidation has not reduced costs (as predicted by some reform advocates) and in fact, may have even increased total local expenditures…Gustely found that expenditures rose after the Dade county consolidation. Benton and Gamble came to the same conclusions in their study of Jacksonville. Erie and colleagues reviewed a range of consolidation efforts and concluded that "the net effect of restructuring is a per capita increase in service costs," which they attribute to an increase in average service levels." (p. 106)5 [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]"In recent years, economists have endorsed the fragmented, decentralized model. They have concluded that competition between numerous adjoining jurisdictions keeps total expenditures down in metropolitan areas. The multiplicity of local governments allows for contracting among jurisdictions for services when local elected officials determine buying from a neighbor is less costly than producing the service in-house. The end result is a "local public economy" — a quiltwork of service deliveries determined by decentralized elected officials who are responsive to their voters."6
"A review of 25 research studies conducted over the past two decades on "fragmentation" versus centralization in U.S. local governments suggests "local government systems which are fragmented and de-concentrated are generally associated with lower spending and greater efficiency." The power of bureaucracies grows the larger the centralized government becomes. This is evident in the difficulty locally elected officials have in privatizing municipal services in large cities. They are hemmed in by empire-building bureaucracies and government employee unions, which are stronger in the larger… municipalities."6 "

I know it is only Harvard but give it up already.

Oh and your grand original idea was reviewed in NJ 3 years ago.

Shared Services in New Jersey

"Professor Slack spoke convincingly about the reasons why consolidation should not be used to save money. She did however speak strongly in favor of consolidation to advance more rational transportation and land use planning on a regional scale. However, she warned the Joint Committee members that consolidation will not save any money: in reality it will probably cost more. If saving money is the Legislature’s intent, she advised that the Legislature should abandon the pursuit immediately. The Joint Committee did not heed her advice."

You can apologize any time now.

By the way it took me all of three minutes to find this. With all your harping about this one would have though you might have taken some time to see if you were even in the right ball park. What a disgrace!

Go back and read ALL of my posts. Why would I apologize? But considering you pulled the Harvard study, I thought I would go back and do some real research. There was actually a hearing and study performed 4 years ago and it was the recommendation that a pilot program should be performed by counties and not one automatic merge, due to the insufficient data. There are disputes from the distribution of services to the merging of district contracts.

So to sum it up, an analysis and hearing was performed in 2006, it is do-able, it was recommended that the consolidations should be on a regional county by county basis, there is NOT enough data for a cost saving analysis to be performed on a national level.

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/Propert...nal_report.pdf


My statement again and I will stick to it and actually post it again and add yet another question based on the recommendation. With all of the bullying that Christie has spewed the last couple of months? Why haven't they taken up these recommendations?

Found this writeup on Burlington county and the money shelled out to the school administrators alone.

" Burlington County has 39 school districts!! So let's figure the average Super makes $150K, maybe an assistant at $100K, and a Business Administrator at $90K. That's approx. $13 million and some of these Supers have districts with just 2-3 schools."

"The average salary for a superintendent in New Jersey is $154,409, about $9,000 above the national average but below that of other states in the region, according a 2008 report commissioned by the New Jersey Association of School Administrators (NJASA).
That figure has risen in recent years as the job's demands have intensified with increased regulation under state and federal programs like No Child Left Behind, said NJASA executive director Richard Bozza.
"It's not a New Jersey-specific issue. We don't want to create a situation where we're making this an undesirable place for educators to work," he said. "Because of the depths of this recession, public service is going to be very closely monitored in the years ahead."
But the fact that more than 60 school administrators, primarily superintendents, make well in excess of $200,000 a year has become fodder for critics, especially considering Gov. Christie's salary of $175,000.
The debate over administrative pay recently played out in Cinnaminson, where a proposed $25,000 increase to the superintendent's salary drew protest from taxpayers and virtually assured the failure of the school budget, said Mayor Anthony Minniti.
"Cinnaminson as a community is fiercely loyal to its school district."

N.J. taxpayers question school administrators' pay | Philadelphia Inquirer | 05/25/2010 (http://www.philly.com/philly/education/20100525_N_J__taxpayers_question_school_administra tors__pay.html - broken link)




Corzine signed into law merger of smaller school districts in 2009. I thought this was illegal?

Corzine signs bill for school-less small school districts to merge with larger ones | - NJ.com

NO IT IS NOT ILLEGAL AS YOU INCORRECTLY STATED. You can apologize now for making an incorrect, baseless, wrong and nonfactual statement.


And finally as recently as April 2010, NJ Assembly is actually taking the intiative on the multiple adminstrators.

During the sound bites, did Christie provide you with what we as tax payers pay to the non-union school administrators,

"Chivukula noted the Office of the State Auditor in 2006 estimated it costs taxpayers about $553 million statewide for the salary and benefits for superintendents, assistant superintendents, school business administrators and information technology coordinators
Under the legislation, if voters approved a county administrative school district, a county school board would be established and a chief school administrator would be appointed by the governor, and they would be responsible for supervising county district operations.
A board of school estimate would develop a county administrative school district budget and would determine the amount of school taxes necessary for the operation of the district.


There are two bills currently proposed.

One bill (A-2622) would ask voters in November 2011 whether to establish a county administrative school district to centralize public school governance and operations at the county level.
The other bill (A-2623) would provide a governance structure for counties in which voters approve establishing a county administrative school district.

So Back to your statement that its Illegal to consolidate? Where is it written again?
 
Old 05-25-2010, 08:17 PM
 
Location: Hoboken
19,890 posts, read 18,722,751 times
Reputation: 3146
Quote:
Originally Posted by bababua View Post
Good to hear you are only against the middle class. I am for a shared sacrifice. Sorry to hear you aren't Boohoo the rich are leaving, ok go ahead and leave. Make sure you take your wall street job with you to Idaho while you are at it.
If you really want to solve problems you pass the cost on to everyone and not just one group. I know this doesnt help the rich get richer but it would help the state. I am for solutions and not for helping my power base. We are all aware of who REp are for and we also know who Dems are for. I am for the state and not playing politics.
When did Reagan's trickle down economy finally get to the poor?

See what I mean you simply can't engage these people on the merits of an issue. They simply can't defend their ideas.
 
Old 05-25-2010, 08:19 PM
 
6,902 posts, read 7,526,234 times
Reputation: 2018
[quote=shorebaby;14337813]
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackandproud View Post


Ok now that your nonsense has been thoroughly demolished I expect you to be on board with Christie's cuts.

I haven't made any nonsense statement. YOU however have. Where is the law that states, it is ILLEGAL TO MERGE DISTRICTS AND OR CONTRACTS. NO MATTER HOW MUCH YOU ATTEMPT TO DEFLECT, YOU STILL HAVE NOT BACKED UP THIS STATEMENT.
 
Old 05-25-2010, 08:20 PM
 
6,902 posts, read 7,526,234 times
Reputation: 2018
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby View Post
I wish I could rep you again, this has been fun and hopefully instructive (drawing out the weak arguments of the left). I enjoy demolishing lefty silliness.

BACK up your claim that it is illegal to consolidate districts and contracts. Still waiting.
 
Old 05-25-2010, 08:22 PM
 
Location: Hoboken
19,890 posts, read 18,722,751 times
Reputation: 3146
[quote=blackandproud;14338777]
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby View Post


Go back and read ALL of my posts. Why would I apologize? But considering you pulled the Harvard study, I thought I would go back and do some real research. There was actually a hearing and study performed 4 years ago and it was the recommendation that a pilot program should be performed by counties and not one automatic merge, due to the insufficient data. There are disputes from the distribution of services to the merging of district contracts.

So to sum it up, an analysis and hearing was performed in 2006, it is do-able, it was recommended that the consolidations should be on a regional county by county basis, there is NOT enough data for a cost saving analysis to be performed on a national level.

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/Propert...nal_report.pdf


My statement again and I will stick to it and actually post it again and add yet another question based on the recommendation. With all of the bullying that Christie has spewed the last couple of months? Why haven't they taken up these recommendations?

Found this writeup on Burlington county and the money shelled out to the school administrators alone.

" Burlington County has 39 school districts!! So let's figure the average Super makes $150K, maybe an assistant at $100K, and a Business Administrator at $90K. That's approx. $13 million and some of these Supers have districts with just 2-3 schools."

"The average salary for a superintendent in New Jersey is $154,409, about $9,000 above the national average but below that of other states in the region, according a 2008 report commissioned by the New Jersey Association of School Administrators (NJASA).
That figure has risen in recent years as the job's demands have intensified with increased regulation under state and federal programs like No Child Left Behind, said NJASA executive director Richard Bozza.
"It's not a New Jersey-specific issue. We don't want to create a situation where we're making this an undesirable place for educators to work," he said. "Because of the depths of this recession, public service is going to be very closely monitored in the years ahead."
But the fact that more than 60 school administrators, primarily superintendents, make well in excess of $200,000 a year has become fodder for critics, especially considering Gov. Christie's salary of $175,000.
The debate over administrative pay recently played out in Cinnaminson, where a proposed $25,000 increase to the superintendent's salary drew protest from taxpayers and virtually assured the failure of the school budget, said Mayor Anthony Minniti.
"Cinnaminson as a community is fiercely loyal to its school district."

N.J. taxpayers question school administrators' pay | Philadelphia Inquirer | 05/25/2010 (http://www.philly.com/philly/education/20100525_N_J__taxpayers_question_school_administra tors__pay.html - broken link)




Corzine signed into law merger of smaller school districts in 2009. I thought this was illegal?

Corzine signs bill for school-less small school districts to merge with larger ones | - NJ.com

NO IT IS NOT ILLEGAL AS YOU INCORRECTLY STATED. You can apologize now for making an incorrect, baseless, wrong and nonfactual statement.


And finally as recently as April 2010, NJ Assembly is actually taking the intiative on the multiple adminstrators.

During the sound bites, did Christie provide you with what we as tax payers pay to the non-union school administrators,

"Chivukula noted the Office of the State Auditor in 2006 estimated it costs taxpayers about $553 million statewide for the salary and benefits for superintendents, assistant superintendents, school business administrators and information technology coordinators
Under the legislation, if voters approved a county administrative school district, a county school board would be established and a chief school administrator would be appointed by the governor, and they would be responsible for supervising county district operations.
A board of school estimate would develop a county administrative school district budget and would determine the amount of school taxes necessary for the operation of the district.


There are two bills currently proposed.

One bill (A-2622) would ask voters in November 2011 whether to establish a county administrative school district to centralize public school governance and operations at the county level.
The other bill (A-2623) would provide a governance structure for counties in which voters approve establishing a county administrative school district.

So Back to your statement that its Illegal to consolidate? Where is it written again?

This is pathetic. I have pointed out in that consolidation will actually cost more money yet this loon want to push ahead. You can't make this stuff up!

This from the NJ discussion you claim didn't happen.

"“Harmonization of wages” is the effect of bringing together employees of different jurisdictions who have been compensated at varying levels but now work for the same entity doing the same job. The wages always rise to that of the highest paid worker.
Similarly, the “harmonization of services” is the effect of bringing together service recipients of different jurisdictions who have received differing services levels. In the consolidated government those who have receive once per week garbage collection will not accept continuing once per week collection when other residents are receiving twice per week collection. Therefore, service levels for all municipalities rise to that of the highest level provided to any of the consolidated municipalities.
In effect, the harmonization of wages and service eliminated any savings gained through achieving economies of scale. Actually, overall costs often rise as the result of this endeavor.
Professor Yinger appeared before both committees. Essentially, he testified that his study of school mergers indicates there is an optimal size for a school district, not an individual school. He found that as the size of school district increased from less than 3,000 pupils, economies of scale improved. However, as the size of the school district exceeded 4,000 pupils, diseconomies of scale occurred. He therefore concluded that the optimal size of a school district was between 3,000 and 4,000 pupils."

These people are impervious to reason.

I don't know why I am wasting my time but here is more.

"When analyzing solutions, I like to do the math. And the math suggests that meaningful savings—of 5 or 10 percent of the municipal budget —are not likely to come from shared services. Even sharing most towns’ most expensive service—police—does not yield meaningful tax relief. The math is just not promising."

By the way it must be illegal to mandate consolidation now if they have to pass a law to allow it.
 
Old 05-25-2010, 08:27 PM
 
1,931 posts, read 3,408,181 times
Reputation: 956
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby View Post
See what I mean you simply can't engage these people on the merits of an issue. They simply can't defend their ideas.
Not sure what you mean by "these people" Listen you have opinions that I dont agree with. If you dont like that tough. I dont need to defend my opinions because they are mine. YOu have your own opinons and thats your right. The fact that you think your right is funny because again thats your opinion. Its all based on opinions. Sorry you are a right winger. Again I am a bleeding heart liberal. Embrace what you are.
 
Old 05-25-2010, 08:28 PM
 
1,931 posts, read 3,408,181 times
Reputation: 956
[quote=shorebaby;14338857]
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackandproud View Post


This is pathetic. I have pointed out in that consolidation will actually cost more money yet this loon want to push ahead. You can't make this stuff up!

This from the NJ discussion you claim didn't happen.

"“Harmonization of wages” is the effect of bringing together employees of different jurisdictions who have been compensated at varying levels but now work for the same entity doing the same job. The wages always rise to that of the highest paid worker.
Similarly, the “harmonization of services” is the effect of bringing together service recipients of different jurisdictions who have received differing services levels. In the consolidated government those who have receive once per week garbage collection will not accept continuing once per week collection when other residents are receiving twice per week collection. Therefore, service levels for all municipalities rise to that of the highest level provided to any of the consolidated municipalities.
In effect, the harmonization of wages and service eliminated any savings gained through achieving economies of scale. Actually, overall costs often rise as the result of this endeavor.
Professor Yinger appeared before both committees. Essentially, he testified that his study of school mergers indicates there is an optimal size for a school district, not an individual school. He found that as the size of school district increased from less than 3,000 pupils, economies of scale improved. However, as the size of the school district exceeded 4,000 pupils, diseconomies of scale occurred. He therefore concluded that the optimal size of a school district was between 3,000 and 4,000 pupils."

These people are impervious to reason.

I don't know why I am wasting my time but here is more.

"When analyzing solutions, I like to do the math. And the math suggests that meaningful savings—of 5 or 10 percent of the municipal budget —are not likely to come from shared services. Even sharing most towns’ most expensive service—police—does not yield meaningful tax relief. The math is just not promising."

By the way it must be illegal to mandate consolidation now if they have to pass a law to allow it.
Loon? Do I sense the computer tough guy? Look out!!
 
Old 05-25-2010, 08:29 PM
 
6,902 posts, read 7,526,234 times
Reputation: 2018
[quote=shorebaby;14338857]
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackandproud View Post


This is pathetic. I have pointed out in that consolidation will actually cost more money yet this loon want to push ahead. You can't make this stuff up!

This from the NJ discussion you claim didn't happen.

"“Harmonization of wages” is the effect of bringing together employees of different jurisdictions who have been compensated at varying levels but now work for the same entity doing the same job. The wages always rise to that of the highest paid worker.
Similarly, the “harmonization of services” is the effect of bringing together service recipients of different jurisdictions who have received differing services levels. In the consolidated government those who have receive once per week garbage collection will not accept continuing once per week collection when other residents are receiving twice per week collection. Therefore, service levels for all municipalities rise to that of the highest level provided to any of the consolidated municipalities.
In effect, the harmonization of wages and service eliminated any savings gained through achieving economies of scale. Actually, overall costs often rise as the result of this endeavor.
Professor Yinger appeared before both committees. Essentially, he testified that his study of school mergers indicates there is an optimal size for a school district, not an individual school. He found that as the size of school district increased from less than 3,000 pupils, economies of scale improved. However, as the size of the school district exceeded 4,000 pupils, diseconomies of scale occurred. He therefore concluded that the optimal size of a school district was between 3,000 and 4,000 pupils."

These people are impervious to reason.

Now who resort to name calling in order to deflect from a statement ONCE AGAIN YOU HAVE NOT BACKED UP. WHERE IS IT WRITTEN THAT IT IS ILLEGAL AS YOU CLAIMED TO CONSOLIDATE DISTRICTS? How is it that Corzine was able just in 2009 to do WHAT YOU CLAIMED IS ILLEGAL? How is it that there are two bills proposed for something YOU CLAIMED WAS ILLEGAL? How is it that the Education Commisoner is looking to work with the counties to merge services for something YOU CLAIMED IS ILLEGAL? Your still depending on talking points and have not read any of the RECENT write up's on this very same subject, you know the one YOU CLAIMED WAS ILLEGAL?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:14 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top