Faced with a budget gap of $2.6 million, the district will tap surplus for $1 million and make up the balance with vendor contract negotiations and another $1 million anticipated by June, Business Administrator Gary Ottmann said Tuesday.
At a hearing before adoption of the $189,643,334 budget for the 2016-17 school year, Ottmann said the $2.6 million increase reflected the school board's decision not to cut staff or health benefits. That decision had been announced at a March 15 board meeting attended by many members of the school staff union, the Plainfield Education Association. The union had urged members to come out in protest of staff and benefit cuts, which were listed among eight options to save money
On Tuesday, the board unanimously approved adoption of the budget, with a local school tax levy of $24,295,492 for 2016-17. Ottmann reminded voters to come out on April 19 between the hours of 2 to 9 p.m. to vote on the budget. Three school board seats are also up for election on April 19.
Before public comment, board member John Campbell asked Ottmann how much the election would cost. The board had taken action in November to move it back to April after four years of holding it in conjunction with the November general election. Opponents of the move pegged the cost at $115,000. Ottmann said Tuesday the April election would cost between $60,000 and $70,000, based on information from Union County officials.
In public comment, speakers protested placement of two downtown billboards, one for a slate of candidates including Board President Wilma Campbell next to another vaunting the district's acquisition of a state-owned school building for $1. Schools Superintendent Anna Belin-Pyles said the district has used the latter billboard "for promoting district activities" and Wilma Campbell said she paid for the campaign billboard.
School board candidate Carmencita Pile asked how the district could take credit for the acquisition "when it happened 15 years ago," but Belin-Pyles called it "an accomplishment that took place over the last year." She said of the juxtaposition to a campaign billboard, "I did not do that."
(See some background on the West Front Street "swing school" here.)
Among other comments:
- Blogger Dan Damon questioned Ottmann's statement that the district hoped to realize $620,000 in savings on contracts for such things as copy machines and other services. Ottmann said maybe he shouldn't have used the word "hope" and that the number of copy machines will be reduced.
- Candidate Dorien Hurtt questioned the move back to April elections as well as the board's action in splitting Ottmann's former title as board secretary/ business administrator and hiring a separate secretary, which he called "unprecedented" in the state.
"Guess who gets to pick the ballot drawing," Hurtt said.
He also questioned whether board attorney Lisa Fittipaldi's firm, DiFrancesco, Bateman, Kunzman, Davis, Lehrer & Flaum, P.C., has any ties to Lt. Gov. Kim Guadagno, who is featured on the district billboard.
His further questions were cut short when Wilma Campbell said, "Your time is up" and that public comment was not the "time to campaign."
- Speakers Terri Slaughter-Cabbell and Charisse Parker expressed frustrations with the board, Slaughter-Cabbell because her written questions to Campbell as board president were only answered after she contacted the county superintendent and then by Campbell to the county instead of Slaughter-Cabbell directly. Parker asked about district approval for PEA's use of Hubbard School for a candidates' forum on April 6. Belin-Pyles referred her to acting PEA President Eric Jones, but Jones said he had not yet received an answer.
Eight candidates are vying for three three-year board seats on April 19. See an election update here.
--Bernice
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
per the billboard.... I mean, you spend a lot of money to brag to people about how much money you were able to save ??
ReplyDeleteIf there is 1 student lacking 1 book in the entire school district then that billboard is beyond offensive.
From the Union County official I spoke with, the cost of the election is over $100,000.
ReplyDeleteWhat does the 60-70K cover?
Because this election covers ONLY Plainfield, we have to account for not only printing costs, and advertising costs, but personnel costs, and the costs to keep the schools open for extended hours as well as people on overtime (city personnel to count ballots - school personnel etc.)
Please incidate what the 60-70K covers.
Exactly Rob!
ReplyDeleteAnd they never said how much they paid for the campaign billboard or the so called "district" billboard.
If I am not mistaken the campaign billboard had FRED MOORE's name as the person who paid.
FIRE WILMA CAMPBELL! VOTE Tuesday, April 19 2:00pm to 9:00pm
BERNICE
ReplyDeleteWHEN IS THE NEXT RALLY FOR REID
Part 1,
ReplyDeleteLast night’s meeting was typical of this board president and the superintendent, sadly, transparency isn’t even in their vocabulary. It’s amazing how Mrs Campbell reminded Mr Hurtt that public comment wasn’t for campaigning. I’m sure we can all remember not to long ago her husband and son took every opportunity to walk up to the microphone at city council meetings to campaign for John Jr’s run for a 2nd ward council seat. Mr Hurtts’ privilege of the floor was extended by vote and he continued to question the board, actually the board president and superintended. Unfortunately, his questions and everyone else’s went unanswered. The more I see how Plainfield politics work the more astonish I am. It’s crazy that any of our elected official would believe that they don’t have to respond to public concerns and questions. Do they actually believe that they’re not responsible to the very people that elected them?
Unfortunately, for far to long we allow this type of leadership in our community. We blindly elect people simply because they ask or because of name recognition. Once in office these same people proceed with their own self-serving agenda which to often has no benefit to the people they were elected to represent. As a result, we have no one to blame but ourselves. Once elected it is our responsibility to hold them accountable and their actions transparent.
The fact is, we have a tendency to become passive when it concerns politics and our elected officials. Most of us think we are too intelligent or above showing anger in public. At all cost we must not lose our cool in fear of others labeling us troublemakers or being negative. This is evident in our past history in Plainfield and this country in general. We allow our elected official to believe they’re above reproach in their representation of us because we’re afraid of ‘rocking the boat’ and challenging the status quo. We get within our own circles and complain how high taxes are and how poorly our children are being educated, but we never seem to get angry enough to provoke change. It’s almost like we have to be pushed to our limit where ‘anger’ is an emotion needed in order to get some change going.
John Campbell made it his personal agenda to point out moving the election to April is only costing the district $60- $70 thousand, even if that’s a legitimate figure, it’s still to much. Five dollars would be too much especially when our children lack basic supplies like books. The Campbell’s idea that the move was necessary to keep politics out of the school board election just doesn’t cut mustard or ring true. The fact the whole process is done by election makes it political and their fair of losing control is evident.
Part 2
ReplyDeleteAnother fact is, Wilma Cambpell set a new precedent by having Ottmann's former title as board secretary/ business administrator split into two positions and then hiring a separate secretary, who by-the-way, is now responsible for picking the numbers and the format the school board candidates will appear on the voting ballot in April. If there was any one thing that needed to be investigated, it’s this. No one can convince me that just by chance Wilma and her running mates were picked as numbers 1,2,3 on the ballot. As nice as you might believe Wilma Campbell may be, because of my personal experience with her over the years I’m convinced this is not a coincidence.
I don’t want anyone to think this comment is meant to be a personal attack on Wilma Campbell or that I have a personal ax to grind, I don’t. As far as I know we’re friends. This isn’t about the person it’s about our children their education and future, it’s about our teaching staff and community. It’s about a reminder to the voting public that the people we elect work for US, and not their personal agenda of who they can get a job or grant contacts for quid pro quo’s.
Twelve plus years of serving a community that has become disenchanted and embittered because of the lack of improvements and transparency in our schools is a direct reflection on the people we elected. We should all be angry enough to provoke the change that is so desperately needed for the future success of our children and our city.
A failing, or below average school district without a doubt, is a failing city.
They say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing expecting different results. To re-elect a 12 year incumbent would be insane.
Vote 4/19/16 for our school staff, children, parents and all residents of Plainfield.
RCH.
The move of the BOE election to April is a colossal waste of money regardless of what revised figures are now being thrown about. Since the very first announcement of this move I have failed to see any fundamental reason why this move was necessary and the fact that this is not addressed by the Board is disheartening. The rationale now sounds like the revised figures are a bargain and any criticism of the BOE decision should just go away. Another sad state of affairs.
ReplyDeleteWell said Peter.
ReplyDelete