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.
I hope you are aware that the real power is with the school board, not the superintendent's office. If you want influence, run for the school board. At the very least, attend the school board meetings, not this silly meeting created for people "concerned" about increased taxes. School board meetings are open to the public. I read in the newspaper that the public attending the school board meeting overwhelmingly supported an increase in taxes to prevent music and arts from being cut. If your group of elderly anti-tax residents were there, maybe the vote would have gone differently.
Those empty nesters sure benefited from the school district when they had children, while the previous aged population paid taxes.
Regarding your first statement, our grass roots effort is well aware that the power lies in the school board and that is the reason we attended last Monday's meeting and presented our signed petition to the SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS.
This is also not a group of "elderly" anti- tax residents. Our group consists of a wide range of ages included parents whose children attend the schools in Pine Richland.
Empty nesters are certainly one category of tax payers. You seem to over look those tax npayers who never had a child in the system? There is certainly no concession for these folks.
Yes, you are correct in that our group is concerned about increased taxes. We are particularly concerned with our taxes being increased due to unnecessary spending. Allow me to give you an example:
During the 2011/12 school year, there was a total of 59 "EXTERNAL EMPLOYEES" whose salaries were paid by we tax payers for a total amount of $192,484 ! This excessive expenditure went to positions such as:
House manager for the high school musical
Costume manager for the high school musical
Fencing club sponsor
Forensics 2nd assistant sponsor at PRHS
Costume manager for the high school musical
And the list goes on !!!
The real substance of Ms. Bucci's communique reflected how the unfunded pension liability will affect future years costs. The only conclusion one can draw from reading that is .....TAXES, TAXES, and MORE TAXES.
According to our understanding, these phys ed courses were incremental and contributed to the 4% increase. The core phys ed requirements were left intact.
Yes, you are correct in that our group is concerned about increased taxes. We are particularly concerned with our taxes being increased due to unnecessary spending. Allow me to give you an example:
During the 2011/12 school year, there was a total of 59 "EXTERNAL EMPLOYEES" whose salaries were paid by we tax payers for a total amount of $192,484 ! This excessive expenditure went to positions such as:
House manager for the high school musical
Costume manager for the high school musical
Fencing club sponsor
Forensics 2nd assistant sponsor at PRHS
Costume manager for the high school musical
And the list goes on !!!
$192,484 divided by 59 = $3,701.61 That's not very high or wasteful.
Or will those childness residents step in and volunteer to perform these duties for charity instead?
Quote:
Originally Posted by southeastlady
The real substance of Ms. Bucci's communique reflected how the unfunded pension liability will affect future years costs. The only conclusion one can draw from reading that is .....TAXES, TAXES, and MORE TAXES.
You should blame those taxes on that silly football stadium. That's why taxes are being raised.
$192,484 divided by 59 = $3,701.61 That's not very high or wasteful.
Or will those childness residents step in and volunteer to perform these duties for charity instead?
You should blame those taxes on that silly football stadium. That's why taxes are being raised.
Breaking down these external salaries per employee does make it look as if it could possibly be as you put it, "not very high or wasteful". You need to be aware of the total picture here. These 59 people are not salaried teachers in the district. However, if you combine their salaries and the total salaries of all salaried teachers receiving supplemental pay from the taxpayers, the total expenditure to taxpayers for the 2011/12 schoold year was $563,649. I wonder if you find this "high or wasteful".
What you do not understand is that the high school stadium was built many years ago with capital dollars which are now sunk. I believe this was funded with a bond or it should have been. The only costs that remain for that white elephant are ongoing maintenance and operational costs. This is not the case for the supplemental salary for these teachers and the 59 external employers. Might I add that there are 17 coaches for the football program. The total supplemental income from tax payer dollars for these 17 coaches is $87,226.
You actually have a good idea in asking these "seniors" to volunteer for some of these positions that cost tax payers $563,649 last year. Or at the very least make these external positions known to the public so that some of these seniors can apply for them. This would supplement their fixed incomes and hopefully keep them in their homes during these difficult economic times. Or yes, let's let these "childless residents" step in and volunteer. Better yet, let's give them a rebate on their school taxes for their time spent volunteering for the district.
There are many creative ways to cut back and/or stop this needless spending. Our group is hard at work as we continue to grow in size.
Can we please keep these discussions on a higher plane and avoid name calling? These good people and their peaceful assembly are in no way "silly". These are concerned citizens who are going broke.
Breaking down these external salaries per employee does make it look as if it could possibly be as you put it, "not very high or wasteful". You need to be aware of the total picture here. These 59 people are not salaried teachers in the district. However, if you combine their salaries and the total salaries of all salaried teachers receiving supplemental pay from the taxpayers, the total expenditure to taxpayers for the 2011/12 schoold year was $563,649. I wonder if you find this "high or wasteful".
What you do not understand is that the high school stadium was built many years ago with capital dollars which are now sunk. I believe this was funded with a bond or it should have been. The only costs that remain for that white elephant are ongoing maintenance and operational costs. This is not the case for the supplemental salary for these teachers and the 59 external employers. Might I add that there are 17 coaches for the football program. The total supplemental income from tax payer dollars for these 17 coaches is $87,226.
That's only $5,130 per football coach. Considering the fact that they work almost every single evening and many weekends, I consider it very reasonable. You can't get people to give up their evenings for much less money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by southeastlady
You actually have a good idea in asking these "seniors" to volunteer for some of these positions that cost tax payers $563,649 last year. Or at the very least make these external positions known to the public so that some of these seniors can apply for them. This would supplement their fixed incomes and hopefully keep them in their homes during these difficult economic times. Or yes, let's let these "childless residents" step in and volunteer. Better yet, let's give them a rebate on their school taxes for their time spent volunteering for the district.
Seniors? I said "childless residents." You made a point of correcting me that not all childless residents are seniors. I think it's very reasonable to allow the residents on fixed incomes to have these part time jobs as long as they are qualified to do them. You might also run into the problem of the additional income interfering with their benefits though if they are impoverished and relying on social service programs like food stamps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by southeastlady
There are many creative ways to cut back and/or stop this needless spending. Our group is hard at work as we continue to grow in size.
The problem is that your idea of needless doesn't match the entire population. Many people consider extracurricular activities to be an important part of the education experience.
Quote:
Originally Posted by southeastlady
Can we please keep these discussions on a higher plane and avoid name calling? These good people and their peaceful assembly are in no way "silly".
I never said the people are silly. I said the sports stadium and the meeting are silly. The people are simply misguided IMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by southeastlady
These are concerned citizens who are going broke.
Maybe it's time for them to sell their house and move to a surrounding county where property taxes are lower. That's what we're doing now that our nest is empty. That's what many people do after retirement. And the people going broke can get a nice profit for their Pine Richland houses becasue property values are fairly high there. So maybe it's time to consider that the school district isn't the only entity that needs to be financially responsible.
That's only $5,130 per football coach. Considering the fact that they work almost every single evening and many weekends, I consider it very reasonable. You can't get people to give up their evenings for much less money.
Seniors? I said "childless residents." You made a point of correcting me that not all childless residents are seniors. I think it's very reasonable to allow the residents on fixed incomes to have these part time jobs as long as they are qualified to do them. You might also run into the problem of the additional income interfering with their benefits though if they are impoverished and relying on social service programs like food stamps.
The problem is that your idea of needless doesn't match the entire population. Many people consider extracurricular activities to be an important part of the education experience.
I never said the people are silly. I said the sports stadium and the meeting are silly. The people are simply misguided IMO.
Maybe it's time for them to sell their house and move to a surrounding county where property taxes are lower. That's what we're doing now that our nest is empty. That's what many people do after retirement. And the people going broke can get a nice profit for their Pine Richland houses becasue property values are fairly high there. So maybe it's time to consider that the school district isn't the only entity that needs to be financially responsible.
Sorry to see that you seem to fit into the category of bloggers who spend their time on line to debate issues they are unfamiliar with and without facts to back up their arguments.
If indeed and infact if you own a home in Pine Richland, you may be rudely surprised when you go to put your home on the market to realize that you are placed at a competitive disadvantage to discount your market price and your ultimate selling price because of the high tax structure in Allegheny County and Pine Richland school district.
Further, you may be again surprised when next year the school Board is required to maintain revenue neutrality under the goofy county reappraisal system whereby your taxes escalate if the reappraisal is higher than 30%.
When this kicks in, many people will wake up to our cause.
Generally speaking, property values are highest in places that have good schools. People are willing to pay for strong academics and a good variety of extra - curricular activities. That's not to say that waste and unnecessary expenditures shouldn't be eliminated, but getting rid of good programs could cause home values to drop over time.
Generally speaking, property values are highest in places that have good schools. People are willing to pay for strong academics and a good variety of extra - curricular activities. That's not to say that waste and unnecessary expenditures shouldn't be eliminated, but getting rid of good programs could cause home values to drop over time.
Since you are located in the San Francisco Bay area, it would be impossible for you to understand what increases or decreases home values in this area.
Hopefully, you were simply giving your generalized opinion on real estate values which you certainly have the right to do.
The school system is one critera that newcomers look at when relocating to the northern suburbs of Pittsburgh, Pa. If the school taxes and property taxes continue to escalate in this specific area, there will be a detrimental effect upon all of our property values. This is one of the reasons we have formed this resident's grass roots effort....to have an impact on school tax increases in order to maintain our property values.
I say instead of griping and whining that a football coach makes an extra 5 grand for tons of work or a musical director is paid the equivalent of probably 75 cents an hour for the time put in to the job, if you really want to ward off increased property taxes, speak with our illustrious goverrnor who seems hell-bent on slashing education budgets to the point that districts have no choice but to raise taxes or cut programs to the detriment of school aged children and their families. That would be a much better use of time and energy for your little group and it could help kids and families all over the state.
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.
