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.
Did I suggest redistricting was illegal? I am merely pointing out that during the redistricting process we had BOE members that lied... isn't that what Marce is being accused of?
You'd have a better argument if you were talking about integrity... there is a long way to go to get to fraud (and it's not going to happen).
To be clear, are we now back to the double dipping issue or are we stuck on the purpose of the trip? Just trying to keep up.
.
There isn't a long way to go. We were there the moment there was a signature.
To be clear, are we now back to the double dipping issue or are we stuck on the purpose of the trip? Just trying to keep up.
.
Unless a BOE member is attending a BOE meeting or is representing the BOE officially at an event, they should not be billing the taxpayers for reimbursement. One should not be reimbursed for mileage relating to attending soccer games and the Ireland presentation and 3rd grade biographies presentations at one's child's school or for mileage relating to volunteering for Special Olympics, IEP surrogate meetings, or EOG test proctoring.
Last edited by BubbaHelms; 11-22-2014 at 05:23 PM..
Looks like the docs have mysteriously disappeared... so I have to ask, is that round trip? We have a lot of reading comprehension problems in this thread so I just need to clarify if we also have math problems as well.
.
My apologies, read it wrong from my phone (didn't click any links just looked at what Sunshine posted). Saw it said two different distances so initially thought it was referring to one there and one back.
Looks like the docs have mysteriously disappeared... so I have to ask, is that round trip? We have a lot of reading comprehension problems in this thread so I just need to clarify if we also have math problems as well.
.
Mileage indicated was mostly round trip. There appear to be some A to B to C to A trips and those don't appear to be round trip. She just doesn't use the same mileage all the time for the same trip for some reason. For the soccer game she told UCPS the mileage was 372 miles and she told the state it was 377 miles. Same thing for repetive trips within the county. Some times the trip to SRES is 5 miles while other times it is 8 miles. It is quite strange in today's world of Google Maps.
Your math question caused me to go back and look at my math. I was actually wrong, hard to believe, because I wrongly assumed that UCPS would have kept mileage reimbursement constant. Mileage actually went from $0.51 in early 2011 to $0.555 in mid 2011 to $0.565 in 2013 to $0.56 in 2014. The state meanwhile has stayed constant at $0.25. So the actual payment to Savage for attending the soccer game was $319.43 not $298.97 as originally stated. So she got $210.18 from UCPS and $109.25 from the state. It is also interesting to note that the detailed state form notes the purpose of the trip was "Early College Meeting" and not "NCHSAA State Championsip" as noted on the handwritten form.
It is the only athletic event I found that Savage asked UCPS for reimbursement. No love for other Marvin State Champs/Runners-up like the swimmers, runners or lax players let alone other schools in her district.
We need some of that crack investigative reporting from David Sentendrey at Charlotte Fox TV Channel 46 to get to the bottom of this...
Last edited by SunshineCJ; 11-22-2014 at 05:47 PM..
It really amazes me that some people are trying to justify Marce’s actions based on the magnitude. I could possibly see 1 occurrence as a mistake - but given the multiple occurrences this was clearly a scam. Anyone who went to this effort to deliberately profit from their role would welcome other opportunities (and most likely has). I would love to see her tax returns - she most likely submits the milage there as well.
I would still like to learn more about the other occurrence Yercheck mentioned.
There isn't a long way to go. We were there the moment there was a signature.
What local BOE policy was violated by signing the expense reports? What law was broken?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmyd1
It really amazes me that some people are trying to justify Marce’s actions based on the magnitude. I could possibly see 1 occurrence as a mistake - but given the multiple occurrences this was clearly a scam. Anyone who went to this effort to deliberately profit from their role would welcome other opportunities (and most likely has). I would love to see her tax returns - she most likely submits the milage there as well.
I would still like to learn more about the other occurrence Yercheck mentioned.
I don't think there is anyway to defend Marce's expense reports. Like many here have stated, I agree that at a minimum there was some violation of public trust... but, given the facts as presented, I'm having a hard time making the leap to a criminal action at the local level. State board, maybe. Local board, no.
I don't see her actions any more egregious than the lies told during the recent redistricting.
Looks like the docs have mysteriously disappeared... so I have to ask, is that round trip? We have a lot of reading comprehension problems in this thread so I just need to clarify if we also have math problems as well.
.
Certain this a dig to me...
Your issues with the BOE "lies" have consistently been about the ballot box. Things said in meetings, emails, interviews, etc are not a fair comparison to what Savage is being accused of... She's taking tax payer money inappropriately when her base argues every red cent the board spends. It's plain disingenuous to state what she did was OK because she didn't violate a specific written local policy. Anyone who has ever submitted an expense report knows what she did is wrong on so many levels. Hundreds of dollars to go watch a MR championship soccer game? I'd get fired for that even if it was $1.
what has any of the board members do in regards to facilities? please, i would love to hear your take on how Savage did nothing while the others made some vast gains in facility planning….really don't think you want to go down that road….concerning her opportunities to do something about redistricting, your claim is she should have went community by community and called for an amendment for each and every one of the affected communities in her district, is that your expectation? What i find humorous, is in your analysis, you basically compare her to a doormat, yet in the last election, she totally dismantled her competition, it wasn't close. I guess she is giving out a better impression than you are receiving
The BOE created a proposal to address facilities and passed it. You may not agree with it, but it happened. Savage offered nothing in that facilities planning except to recuse herself from the facilities committee because she was afraid she might get redistricted and throw a childish fit walking out when it really counted. So she left a position where she could have actually made a difference voluntarily and didn't fulfill her responsibility to even vote in the end.
No she shouldn't have gone community by community and the fact that you suggest she should have shows you fall into the failed thought process of both Savage and Hodges during the entire process. It should never have been all or nothing - there were obvious small changes that made sense that should have been fought for instead of trying to stop everything. Pigg (grandfathering) and Guzman (Millbridge) got something done. She didn't even try to offer something that could have been voted on.
So sure she was elected by the clueless district 6, but she will continue to be a doormat because she won't get anything done facilities wise. CAPS are their own worst enemy in this regard.
What local BOE policy was violated by signing the expense reports? What law was broken?
I don't think there is anyway to defend Marce's expense reports. Like many here have stated, I agree that at a minimum there was some violation of public trust... but, given the facts as presented, I'm having a hard time making the leap to a criminal action at the local level. State board, maybe. Local board, no.
I don't see her actions any more egregious than the lies told during the recent redistricting.
.
Criminal action or not - It is time for Marce to move on. I would say the same to any other BOE member that behaved in this manner (even those i supported in the past). It is really sad that she would be in a position that she needed to steal from the UC school system.
Last edited by jimmyd1; 11-23-2014 at 05:59 PM..
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.
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.
