I’m sure you recall how the Supreme Court removed me from the CSC stating that when the town leased the school building to Chariho (for $1) that I had to sit on two sides of a contract, thus an inherent conflict was present and I had to go. Today’s ProJo reports on some related activity.
July 10, 2009
81 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Chariho School Parents' Forum 
You cant be serious in wanting to hold the “Smith Hill Boys” to the same standard as the rest of us…….(sarcasm)
Comment by RS — July 10, 2009 @ 10:39 pm |
I wish I was shocked, but I’m used to it now. One could easily argue BF’s situation was comparable, except that he had no potential for personal gain.
Comment by Gene Daniell — July 11, 2009 @ 7:41 am |
……and he’s obviously not part of the “establishment”
Comment by RS — July 11, 2009 @ 8:16 am |
Maureen McKenna was a Town Solicitor in Westerly, Frank Williams was a Town Solicitor in Hopkinton and they knew or should have known in lawyer speak the gravity of voting on Felkners removal. What were they bought for and their influence on others. Is that part of someone’s line item
(NEA?).
Comment by horace — July 11, 2009 @ 4:08 pm |
ZZZZZZZZZ………..
Comment by last i checked — July 11, 2009 @ 8:28 pm |
You people are amazing. The state courts rule and you still think you know better. What a joke. GET OVER IT! FELKENR LOST. All it proves is this big mouth didn’t know what he was talking about and neither do the 3 or 4 of you that look up to him.
NEXT
Comment by WOW — July 13, 2009 @ 12:23 pm |
Your missing the point – I acknoledge the court’s decision – now we ask they they apply the same rules to everyone else. You agree don’t you?
Comment by Editor — July 13, 2009 @ 12:36 pm |
Why would I want the court to be fair and impartial. As long as I get my way then I’ll save my complaints until the court rules against me…..fairness…no way, only give those who oppose the “system” a lashing, the “good ole boys” can continue. Trying to apply reason to children only results in tantrums, as witnessed above.
Comment by RS — July 13, 2009 @ 1:25 pm |
……..and the court also ruled the CSC violated the open meetings law. What laws did they rule the voters and Mr. Felkner violated?
Thought so………….none. So who broke the law. The Chariho School Committee and the lackies they protect, who can’t even teach at better than a 1/3 proficiency rate. Go on defend that record.
Comment by RS — July 13, 2009 @ 1:17 pm |
Hey WOW …
The way RI chooses to define elected office conflicts doesn’t mesh with our sister states, MA, CT, & NH (at minimum) would allow this. They also prohibet close relatives from serving on the boards where their family works.
Seems the teacher/SC memmber’s argument is a lot like Bill’s, so if wasn’t good enough for him, why her?
Comment by Gene Daniell — July 13, 2009 @ 2:03 pm |
NO RS they didn’t rule they violated the open meetings law. It was my understanding it was held if Felkner had won ( which he didn’t) in the supreme court then the superior court would have heard the OMA violation. Since he was wrong from the begining he was wrong on the OMA from what I ahve seen you also sent in a complaint and it was denied because of the same findings so why are you here saying they violated anything. These documents can be found on the internet also but should be easy for you as you received a copy.
Comment by WOW — July 13, 2009 @ 4:31 pm |
Check your facts…..the Superior Court ruled there was an OMA vioaltion, hence the reason for the dog and pony show at the next school committee meeting(a repeat of the vote to ouster).
Comment by RS — July 13, 2009 @ 4:43 pm |
Gene I am not saying she is different. All I am saying it gets old hearing the same old thing. FELKNER did that to boost his own ego. Well he finally lost one. RS is pissed because Chariho SC stood up to him and the courts ruled in their favor. Read the laws how you will. I am not judge or lawyer. But I would ahve to say they can interpert better then you, me Felkner and RS; can’t help it if you don’t like the ruling but it is what it is.
Comment by WOW — July 13, 2009 @ 4:35 pm |
True, I m pissed…..pissed my tax dollars are spent on a 2-bit education system spearheaded by the RINEA and it lackies which gives the taxpayers in return a 1/3 proficient passing rate which still goes undefended. Would you not be mad if everything you spent money on was only 1/3 complete, finished, or delivered.
Of course its indefensible………
Comment by RS — July 13, 2009 @ 4:46 pm |
They did not rule on the OMA violation but the Supreme Court did say it was a violation – thats why they had to go back and do it again.
Comment by Editor — July 13, 2009 @ 4:39 pm |
…of course the AG’s office said one could spend their hard earned cash on an attorney if they wanted to seek resolution on the OMA violation(which the AG’s office said occured)in court.
This allows a politician(AG) to maintain his lack of credibilty with the unions in the state so his run for Governor will have a chance(aka…corruption).
Comment by RS — July 13, 2009 @ 4:49 pm |
No the superior court had them go back and do it again, and then held it over for the State Supreme court to make a decision. Once they decided that he could not hold both offices there was no reason to continue down the path for an OMA violation. Now unless court documents lie. You guys can’t even get this right and the two of you were the ones fighting it and complaining aobut it, maybe that is why you lost. Because you had no idea what you were doing in the first place. I am just going off what I read from the rulings, you can try to twist it anyway you want. Either way it is in the past, they rulled, you lost, move on.
Comment by WOW — July 14, 2009 @ 10:06 am |
All I can say is keep the blinders on….or maybe you are a product of a 2/3 non proficient education.
Comment by RS — July 14, 2009 @ 11:13 am |
Better yet, want to prove everyone wrong, donate the money to me to have a court hearing and when I lose, you will have all the bragging rights in the world and instead of a putz, you will be “The Man”.
Let me know and I’ll give you the address for the check……….
Otherwise I’ll pay for your membership to the following club: Windbags International.
windbag
Noun
Slang: a person who talks a lot but says little of interest
Comment by RS — July 14, 2009 @ 11:33 am |
WOW … you really need to learn to read better, you have it WRONG again.
Their were several issues in play all related to BF’s expulsion. As part of the legal wrangling was process and who had to spend the money to defend the position. The CSC took the route to force BF to prove his way on versus the CSC prove him off. Note that the RISC did not rule as the legalities of how BF was removed as it was moot. Justice Williams quote that it was “a gutsy call” to act as they did doesn’t give one the sense of “logical easy to make decision”.
In superior court, Judge Thompson “vacated” the CSC expulsion due to OMA violations. The CSC then went back and re-did their original vote.
BF’s attorney’s had also asked the superior court to impose a restraining order to prevent the CSC from removing BF as they did not have the statuatory right to do so. This would have required the CSC to petition the AG to bring a Quo Warranto action for BF’s removal to the RISC. Before the superior court could act on this, the AG weighed it that the situation was clearly Quo Warranto and regardless of how it was achieved the resolution was solely the juristiction of the RISC. At which time, Judge Thompson dismissed BF’s petition based on lack of jurisdiction, this DID NOT include the OMA violation.
The reality being that once the RISC decided the main issue, for all practical purposes the OMA violation was moot. In the sense that BF would have had to pay to push it further as the AG declined to pursue. This does not mean the CSC acted correctly, or that when viewed in a larger context it demonstated their disregard for due process.
The truth of our legal system is that you have to have money to be treated fairly.
Comment by Gene Daniell — July 14, 2009 @ 10:25 am |
Now for this idea that laws are always right … it is clearly garbage, how many examples do you want? Dred Scott, Jim Crow laws, etc.
The common sense situation here is what is an ethically appropriate degree of interconnection to allow?
We all do have to deal with the realities of the size of RI, we are small, the degree of separation in this state is small, we all know each other. NH had this problem a few years back when a SC justice was getting divorced. They ended up bringing a judge in from VT and a lawyer for the wife from MA.
My view is that dual office is much less offensive than members serving where family in on staff. In regards to the EWG SC member who is a teacher, what would people say if a chemical company exec from CT on the coastal resources cmte board? How about a health care exec from MA on a RI healthcare board?
The teacher contracts are so intertwined that you can’t separate them, the idea that you can teach in one district but be on the SC of another is ok, but BF’s dual office holding is not?
Please, be real. Let’s use common sense.
Comment by Gene Daniell — July 14, 2009 @ 10:37 am |
Agendas and common sense don’t cohabitate…..sorry ain’t gonna happen, hence the two post directed toward my OMA violation by WOW were false.
Comment by RS — July 14, 2009 @ 11:16 am |
Gene, Gene you need to stop drinkin the juice. However you see it or however you want to hear it. Bill Felkner was removed because the attorney for the SC made the right call and out smarted Felkner and his attorney. Also, Felkner didn’t pay for his attorney he just paid for filings, which all of you Felkner lovers I believe paid for. You probably donated more then he paid but I guess you can call it gas money…..ask the editor,cr or Felkner all in the same. You are correct about Judge Thompson, but I think if you look further, she dismissed the removal from the committee because of jurisdiction not the OMA. The OMA could have been fought if the Supreme court had ruled in favor of Felkner, then because he had a right to sit there that night, according to law, there would have been a violation. SINCE he should not have sat there that night, but removed himself when asked, because he resigned from the SC the night he took TC, the OMA violation didn’t occur. The SC committee should not have had to remove him. I know I am wrong, this isn’t the way you see it, they didn’t say that, whatever it is over and he no longer holds this positon. He was proved wrong and kudos for the SC to take a stand and finally prove that he doesn’t know all like you want to make him out to.
As for where and how people sit on boards is not for me to decide. All I am saying is that Felkenr tried and lost, move on.
I will say this, you and RS are all for Felkner sitting on both boards right? RIGHT! How would you feel if it were Mr. DAy that was doing the same thing? You are from Richmond right Gene? How aobut Bob Petit in Hopkinton, what do you have to say about that RS? I know you guys don’t like these two represenatives, you think they are all for the school and statis-quo. How would you fell if it were these two running for dual offices?
Comment by WOW — July 14, 2009 @ 1:07 pm |
If the people voted for them to hold both offices, so be it. If I disagreed, then it is up to me to spend my time getting someone else elected to the position in the next election.
It is not right to cower secretly and concoct a plan to circumvent the electoral process, and you wonder why the CSC is not look at favorable by those who have dignity, respect, and loyalty.
Still can’t defend the 2/3 non proficient rate at Chariho…….you and the rest of the lackies keep up the good work, stand proud and keep the faith.
BTW…..Mr. Felkner doesn’t need support from others, he stand under his own guise. Too bad the lackies don’t have an equal amount of spine, without each other you are pathetic group of invertebrates. If it weren’t for the fact our children are misguided(being kind here) by the failed effort called Chariho education, the only attention the supporters of CSC could garner would be when the paper in the bottom of the bird cage was changed.
Comment by RS — July 14, 2009 @ 1:25 pm |
Lois is correct, but the contract wasn’t in official negotations – Tom and Bill DeLibero were unofficially feeling it out and would ask for consensus on items from the council. “Consensus” is defined as a unanamous or general agreement. we weren’t unanamous. But “consensus” are not released to the public as are actual “votes” thats why you don’t hear about them. And we seal all minutes so you won’t be able to ever read them.
And Tom has publicly said he is reversing his vote on the 30 day rule to release the contract. So he is open about it. We have had the conversation a few times and he feels the public elects representatives to ‘represent’ them – the additional transparency just muddles the process (which I think is Lois’ point too). While everyone knows I disagree, I think the police pension is a perfect example. I really don’t think everyone on the town council from 1998 to 2009 were in the union’s pocket. But someone got this legislation floated and the rest went along with it. I think they went along with it because they didn’t know what they were signing. Who actually does the math anymore to see what it will cost in the long run, how that compares to other towns and the nation, etc… But if we had an open process I bet there would be someone out there who would provide that research. Tom is right that we elect people to represent us, but I think transparency would bring them the added help they need to do the job right.
And for Wow, You don’t have to guess, just ask – or check the financial disclosure forms at the Sect of State. total filing fees were $710, donations paid $520, I paid the balance.
Comment by Editor — July 14, 2009 @ 1:43 pm |
Yeh but by guessing doubt can be cast without actually proving the accusation…….the facts on the other hand tend to get in the way of most agnedas. Nice try though.
Comment by RS — July 14, 2009 @ 2:08 pm |
Yes, Judge Thompson dismissed based on jurisdiction, that’s what I said, learn to read.
Fundamentally, my issue with the BF case was not the merits of dual office holding, it was the due process he was afforded. At the time, there was no RISC decision or statute that prevented him from serving both. The proper course of action for the CSC was through the AG.
In Richmond and Charlestown, dual office holding is prohibeted by the town’s charter. That’s a decision the town’s folk made. Hopkinton’s was no so clear, in fact the town soliciter sided with Felkner.
I grew up as one of the few democrats in NH when the Republicans dominated politics from the ~1890s through 2006, now it seems to be a blue state. The point being, it sucks to be in the minority, but things will change and if you do treat your political adversaries fairly it will come to bite you some day, ask the republicans in NH, not so fun now.
I’m a life long democrat, probably seem eye-to-eye with Felkner on very few issues, certainly transparency, and I like to see value for my tax dollars. That doesn’t mean I’m a small gov’t guy, it means tax dollars need to be spent wisely and you can’t tax the heck out of the little guy, especially to fund big benefit packages for others.
There are other state employees that deserve some better pay, try being a social worker for DCYF, they’ve got a really tough job for low pay.
The bucket of money is finite, as much as I would love to pay police, fire, teachers, dpw workers, etc, a big pile of money, we don’t have it. The mfg jobs that used to fund it are in China … like it or not, the state still has to balance the check book.
Comment by Gene Daniell — July 14, 2009 @ 1:47 pm |
Notice how the topic continually goes to BF lost, and the larger issue of conflict of interest which the post is about gets pushed aside………this is in the playbook under “When you can’t argue on merit or fact…then deflect the issue.” This is the same tactics used when the question “Why does Chariho only teach 1/3 of its students at a proficient level?”
Comment by RS — July 14, 2009 @ 2:16 pm |
My mind is starting to dull conversing with WOW, gonna go take a swim with my toddler and reinforce my faith in the intellect of the human species.
Comment by RS — July 14, 2009 @ 2:18 pm |
Gene the town solictitor was the first to say something about the incompatibility law. All she agreed with was that the Hopkinton Charter was a mess and needs to be looked at to make things more clear. There was enough to keep him from holding both offices that was the first point made by the supreme court. I think she asked Felkners lawyer why he client should hold both offices when the charter as she reads it says he “CAN NOT”. Sorry you can change it, read it, make it sound all nice and sweet, but when it comes down to it I will take a Supreme Court Judges opinion of law over yours,RS and Felkners any day of the week and twice on Sunday.
I agree Gene with your last post and I have no problems with transparency. But whne you make things transparent make it correct not what you think the numbers are or should be and more then once the transparency train has had wrong numbers posted on there. And I don’t want to hear that is what was reported because I checked on a few myself and he they were told the numbers were wrong. Make everything transparent, not pick and choose what you want and don’t want. That is what I see happening now. Everyone jumped on this transprency band wagon, problem is now just because it is reported doesnt mean that is the true numbers, figures or information; it just proves that you have to check eith different places to get the true facts. It seems to me everyone is getting better at covering their steps now. Is this true Mr. Felkner? Is it now harder to find the true facts, figures and information? Are they just getting better at hiding things? Misleading?
Comment by WOW — July 14, 2009 @ 3:31 pm |
Once again it is easier to deflect without facts than to deabate the issue…..if errors exist point them out.
Comment by RS — July 14, 2009 @ 4:23 pm |
I am not aware of any inaccurate information on the Transparency Train. We did have the monthly check register from Warwick that had to be taken down for a while because they supplied it with student names. Once they were redacted it went back up.
So I am not aware of inaccurate data on that site – if there is, it came from the town and if you could tell us what it is, we will get it replaced.
The US Dept of Ed had employee numbers that were all overthe place – maybe that’s what you mean. That’s because there was no standard on how to report the number of each classification of employee – some said councilors were support personell, some said they were administrators. So we are doing the tally from the payroll and classifying them ourselves – they might not like our classifications but they will be uniform.
Comment by Editor — July 14, 2009 @ 3:41 pm |
But just because you classify them doesn’t mean that is correct. That is what I am talking about, so you will report on a web site information that is not correct but it is ok because it is uniform? I think the site is great, i think the information should be out there for people to see, I think if people were that interested thay could also contact their towns or schools for the information. What I don’t think is right is to put information out there that is not begin reported correctly just so you can say it is out there.
How does it help to say for example…..
xyz school has 10 guidance councilors when they only have 4? but since we report it uniform it is all good. I think this is cause for trouble and misinformation. If this is correct what you say about the Dept. of Ed. isn’t there a way to hold them more accountable? Plastering this all over the papers should wake up people. What are we paying for if the Dept. of Ed. asks for numbers and then screws these numbers up. What are the people that are entereing these numbers getting paid for? Aren’t they suppose to verify this information?
Comment by WOW — July 14, 2009 @ 4:10 pm |
How is it not correct? If we say guidance counselors are in the “student support” section, then as long as every school is classified the same then its accurate. You can now count the guidance counselors.
Am I not being clear or is wow intentionally not getting it.
Comment by Editor — July 14, 2009 @ 9:58 pm |
The latest attack poodle of the NEA……and these are the ones responsible for teaching our children.
Comment by RS — July 14, 2009 @ 10:12 pm |
It the same old BS, they all complained when you posted the data as presented, so you logically break it out consistently and all of a sudden that’s “massaging data”.
The same game was played on Carney and Vecchio … When they proposed specific cuts, they were told to let the supt do his job. When the cuts didn’t come, they asked for another $250k, to which they were ridiculed as irresponsible for not coming with specific cuts.
There’s no point trying to passivate those with an agenda.
Comment by Gene Daniell — July 14, 2009 @ 11:32 pm |
Standard union SOP…..deflect the real issue so we don’t have to explain our position…..just like the unexplained proficiency rate at Chariho—where your child receives the most expensive third world education the NEA can squeeze out of the taxpayers. Bravo.
Personally I would be embarrsed to be associated with such an institution. I once worked for a company and would not tell people what I did because the customer relations were so terrible it was embarrasing. Come to think of it I never see anyone proclaiming to be a proud educator of our children, I guess even scoundrels can be embarrased into obscurity. Except when they pool together to disrupt SC meetings(EP), and show they are predators, preying on those who have given them a very nice standard of living and now wish to choke the life out of the taxpayers.
Comment by RS — July 15, 2009 @ 8:46 am |
I wonder why nobody brings up the point the Ethics commission said it was ok for BF to serve. So should the RISC review all the EC cases and rule on which ones violate the law or just turn a blind eye because it is popular. I think the ethics commission in RI is an empty suit.
Comment by RS — July 15, 2009 @ 8:39 am |
RS what the hell does the ethics commision have to do with it. It is not unethical to sit on both. It would be unethical to vote on certain things, ie. vouchers, 1904 building. Like it or not that comes from the ethics commission.
Bill I get what you are saying. But I go back to the fact that it is your interpertaion of support. Who falls under support and who doesn’t? Do you break it down to say that there is 5 councilors or just say they are in support areas?
From what I saw of Carney and Vecchio, they had a chance to cut eralier and didn’t then when it came to the end they changed their tune. Kind of like Felkner, he sat at town workshops. They worked on the budget and just before the vote he comes out against it?????Lets make ourselves look good. COME ON you have numerous meetings befroe hand to cut positions and make your case. If you wait until the very end then come out with huge cuts it is all for your own ego.
Besides look back the SC came out with the MOE explanation from RIDE and they told them they were at that point….
Comment by WOW — July 15, 2009 @ 9:15 am |
WOW,
Mrs. Carney and Mr. Vecchio were only elected in November. Almost immediately they were handed the budget to start digesting it. And guess what, they didn’t wait until the end to make motions to cut positions and reduce the budget in other areas. They did make motions and were shot down by Billy “I’ve lost my mind” Day, Andy “uh uh uh Potbelly” Poluski and Little “Long fingers in Barry’s pocket” Andy and the like. Go back and read the minutes, you’ll see for yourself. One more time, someone throws out acqusations without knowing all the facts. Kind of reduces their arguements to pure BS.
Comment by CharihoParent — July 15, 2009 @ 9:34 am |
Sorry CP, I don’t believe WOW has the ability to read, or its a comprehension issue.
Comment by RS — July 15, 2009 @ 9:46 am
DUH……its what this post is about, did you even read the projo article referenced in the post?
of course not………it’s not on your agenda.
Comment by RS — July 15, 2009 @ 9:44 am |
Don’t know which workshops you went to, Deb and Rich were consistently looking for savings.
Comment by Gene Daniell — July 15, 2009 @ 9:27 am |
NO Chariho parent you should go back and look at things. they were in agreement with how the budget was until the last meeting then they started to shoot out the cuts. of 250 thousand. LOL of Gene you are so against Chariho and the education you go wtih blinders on. It has been very interesting to hear some of these comments trust me. Now if you all want transparency maybe you should start with the truth and stop stretching the truth……..like the name says WOW!
Comment by WOW — July 15, 2009 @ 9:41 am |
WOW in your mind, but in your post the message deliverd is DUH: see below for definition and get an adult to help you understand the meaning.
Main Entry:duh
Pronunciation:\ˈdə, usually with prolonged ə\
Function:interjection
Date:1966
1 —used to express actual or feigned ignorance or stupidity
2 —used derisively to indicate that something just stated is all too obvious or self-evident
Comment by RS — July 15, 2009 @ 9:48 am |
Only a WOW would be against education, what most of us have an issue with is the waste and abuse carried out by Chariho at the taxpayers expense with only a 1/3 proficiency rate…..how do you explain Chariho being in the top 3rd of costs and salaries, and the product we receive for our money in the bottom 3rd. So this makes those of us who choose to hold the system accountable the true supporters. The lackies are just in it for the $$$. Hence your constant protection of the system….and the NEA. All of your post offer a critical, incorrect, and unsubstantiated view of why you don’t want the facts to come out…….self preservation. A person who does a job well doesn’t need artificial protection in the form of union, they earn on their merit. Those who have no merit are the biggest supporters of their union, and the loudest voice against those who attempt to seek accountability……you have been VERY, VERY LOUD.
Comment by RS — July 15, 2009 @ 10:03 am |
WOW,
On this one I know for a fact that you are dead wrong. They did NOT wait until the last meeting. In fact, during the workshop phase of the budget process, she asked to cut out at least one if not more of the psychologist. I can recall her also asking for other cuts as well. I know this for fact! Don’t you even attempt to bend the truth on this one. You are so wrong it’ unbelievable.
Comment by CharihoParent — July 15, 2009 @ 10:59 am |
you know RS we might not agree but do you really have to resort to child play. If someone doesn’t agree with you they are stupid, duh,ignorant?
This is how I see it and that is how you see it. So that makes you smart and me stupid? Not sure I follow your reasoning.
Comment by WOW — July 15, 2009 @ 10:05 am |
It’s not a difference of opinion, when you have documentation stating a ruling or fact, and you choose to only use parts of the document to try and prove an innacurate point, as you have done so many times.
Time to wakeup, it’s not just me that has tried to bring this point out to you, it appears to be every poster, I just see through the agenda laden post and call it what it is. Funny how you comment on hte trivial aspects of my post and neglect the “real” issues. So lets get back to defending the 2/3 non proificient rate at Chariho.
Comment by RS — July 15, 2009 @ 10:58 am |
PS…I failed sensitivity training, I leave that pansy minded garbage to those who have the comfort of knowing they can tiptoe around the issues, in my line of work you make decisions, act upon them and get the job done, otherwise people can die, there is no time for touchy, feely, concensus decision making. Sorry this is the reality in some sectors of the “real world”…the classroom might afford this luxury.
I apologize if I have hurt your feelings, this was not my intent.
Comment by RS — July 15, 2009 @ 11:06 am |
There is no defense for it and WOW knows it. WOW’s thought process is to just ignore that one little tid-bit of fact and instead flood the blog with nothing but half-truths and lies.
Comment by CharihoParent — July 15, 2009 @ 11:01 am |
Hi!
Not every public official has the same time,energy,intellect,priorities, or motives among other things, in what they do or handle something. Assuming all are provided with the same information they use it differently with rare exceptions.
The real concern is this and I have stated this before: We have 26 town council members and Chariho School Committee members in the Chariho region.Why so many of them ignore or don’t ask questions about pertitnent matters or side with those who have legitimate concerns? George Abbott often in the minority degreed in social work a former social worker with the state, has a professional background with troubled youngsters; Georgia Ure, a former teacher, current businesswoman, Hopkinton’s first Recreation Director; and Deb Carney, former Charlestown Town Council President; are out of the majority with their school committee peers but have a solid background. Lastly, Richard Vecchio new to the political scene has done great and has shown his potential.
Regards,
Scott
Comment by Scott Bill Hirst — July 15, 2009 @ 11:03 am |
Lets see the document or ruling…..lets see the proof of the 2/3. Show it RS
Comment by WOW — July 15, 2009 @ 11:06 am |
It’s already been posted here, I slready have 3 children and don’t have any extra time for another…do a search for information instead of spending your time typing useless factoids.
Comment by RS — July 15, 2009 @ 11:07 am |
Just to show how easy it is and to get you started……
Comment by RS — July 15, 2009 @ 11:11 am |
Try this site, and show me the great scores and rankings for Chairho, I can’t seem to find them.
http://www.ride.ri.gov/
Comment by RS — July 15, 2009 @ 11:13 am |
Scott as I have stated this is how you feel. Not everyone agrees with them, but because you agree with them they are great? A lot of us feel that there isn’t that much wronog at our schools. But we are ignorant because we don’t agree with your thoughts?
And then you want me to believe that your way is the best way? You had your chance Scott and look what you did to the town when you were an official. Then you come here and put down others?
George, Georgia, Deb, Rick they are all great as long as the continue to see it your way, as soon as they don’t you will tear into them to, not becasue they are wrong but becasue they didn’t do as you wanted them too.
Tom Buck is a great for instance, he could do no wrong. now he is getting torn into becasue of contracts. The previous town councils gave away the store, now you want this guy to get it back in one contract. Don’t think it will happen and that to me doesn’t mean he doesn’t know what he is doing, it just means that the police are not going to give in to all your demands like it or not. But it is easy for us to sit here and cut down the councilors and committee people. I think he has done a good job he has a hugh task ahead of him, I wish him the best.
Comment by WOW — July 15, 2009 @ 11:17 am |
If anyone can look at the ratings for our schools in the Chariho District and think there isn’t much wrong they need to open their eyes and see that we are failing our kids. How can that be not much wrong with our schools?
Comment by CharihoParent — July 15, 2009 @ 1:27 pm |
…..and I would add, especially when the amount of money we spend on this education is accounted for. We should be receiving a gold plated stellar education.
Comment by RS — July 15, 2009 @ 2:58 pm
I beleive that chariho was a commended school school this year with significant improvement. i would like to know the % of our students that go on to college? Might not mean a lot to you but if they are going on to college then they must be getting some kind of education.
I am not saying all is perfect, but I am not going to sit here and make it sound like it is as bad as you either. I would like to know all that goes into these numbers you provide. Does RYSE get counted in? Do these other schools count in their special ed students?
Comment by WOW — July 15, 2009 @ 11:31 am |
All that information is out there, I just don’t have the time to collect for someone who refuses to accept what the result are.
Significant improvement is another touchy feely sord with little meaning, especially when the room for improvement is so great(66%)…..and the improvement was only a couple of % points.
Keep patting yourself on the backs, because we know the pat is for the way you are able to screw the taxpayers and laugh about, not the quality of education we receive for our hard earned dollars.
Comment by RS — July 15, 2009 @ 11:38 am |
A self starter would look for the data to disprove an argument or debate, lackies just keep the same old rhetoric going, show me, show me, show me……then they try and attack the information. The information we use is from the RI Department of Education, Do you honestly think they want to paint the districts in a negative light? The problem they faces is the test scores are the scores, and the rankings are what they are, of course they spin this by saying we need more money….I’ve never heard anyone yet defend the obscene amount of money already being spent with poor results to show. We may be on the juice my friend but the NEA lackies are on the crack pipe continuously.
Have another drag.Puff, Puff.
Comment by RS — July 15, 2009 @ 11:44 am |
Is a student going to college a good indicator of receiving a quality education?
Get real, this has nothing to do with the quality of education received without quantifying the universities and degree programs the students are enrolled in.
Comment by RS — July 15, 2009 @ 11:56 am |
Some help for the disbeliever: Notice the Chariho math percentage of proficiency is 29%.
Dang I gotta love that $12k/year education my kids won’t be getting.
Click to access necap-high.pdf
Comment by RS — July 15, 2009 @ 11:49 am |
Here some advance placement data for ya: Doesn’t look so good to me, but spin it baby!
Click to access ap.pdf
Comment by RS — July 15, 2009 @ 11:52 am |
NH gov signs school accountability bill
http://www.theunionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=AP%3A+NH+gov+signs+school+accountability+bill&articleId=1033d227-9d95-4f9f-b585-52d5e768f134
Is this possible in RI? There is a veto proof majority, so what would be the reason it can’t get done?
Are the RI lawmakers in the pocket of the NEA?
You decide.
Comment by RS — July 15, 2009 @ 12:03 pm |
RS you are a fool. no matter what or how good the students do or where they go to college or the grades they get matters. you are one of few that do notthing but complain. the school is getting better, the grades are coming up and unless you move out of the area you are stuck with what they do or move your children to a private school. but then again if you do that you can’t complain…..you give the numbers reported on these STATE sites all the hype in the workd when you feel it prvoes your point. but Mr. Felkner reported in an earlier post that the state numbers reported were incorrect; oh wait a minute not these numbers, thats right it works for your point….our students are getting a good education, can it get better? YES> and they are showing that. Most people in the district agree.
Comment by WOW — July 15, 2009 @ 4:11 pm |
Listen fascist, I pay my taxes so YES I do have a right and I also help to ensure others keep that right as well, contrary to the fact you and your invertebrate kind would like to strip these rights from those who dare disagree with you. Just shows what you are about, your motto is “if I can’t have my way, then I’ll abrogate the rights of those who won’t let me”…..a tactic you’re precious CSC and the NEA use to stifle debate and accountability. You’re the perfect type to support the lackies.
I knew you would take the data from the State Department of Education(not mine BF’s, or anyone elses) and disagree with it. I stand by my previous assessment…….DUH!
Comment by RS — July 15, 2009 @ 5:02 pm |
As much as this discussion has been so much fun, take a look at this article from NH:
http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090715/NEWS01/907150383&template=page2
One item that stunned me was the NH determined the adequate cost to teach students K-12 at $3500, (ex-special needs, ESL, or lots of poor children). I’m certainly not a proponent of our $13k+/child spend, but $3500 is really low …
Comment by Gene Daniell — July 15, 2009 @ 9:22 pm |
I beat you to the article up in post #36….
I thought the $13k+ sounded high so I went to the RI Dept of Education website to confirm and low and behold, they show the Chariho per pupil expenditure at $14,460, but hey whats a thousand here or there.
Click to access taxcharts.pdf
Comment by RS — July 15, 2009 @ 9:36 pm |
…..and it appears their NECAP scores are not much different than ours…..So the question is:
“What do the taxpayers of Chariho get for their money?”
Click to access summary.pdf
Comment by RS — July 15, 2009 @ 9:40 pm |
We get nothing. Our kids get shafted. People like WOW confuse the issue by ranting leftwards, sidewards, and backwards without ever really saying anything. Love Felkner or hate him, he has nothing to do with the terrible education kids receive at Chariho. Makes me want to puke to even think about it!
Comment by Never Changes — July 16, 2009 @ 1:03 am |
Hi!
I try to avoid personal attacks. I realize people do not have to agree with me. However that does not ecuse accountability for one’s actions.In examining our school district you need to look at all areas and not just the acedemic part.
Reminder:Ashaway Fire District Annual Meeting at Fire Station at 6:30 P.M., BTW.
Regards,
Scott
Comment by Scott Bill Hirst — July 16, 2009 @ 5:03 pm |
Sometimes SBH, you just gotta call them like they are……..
Comment by RS — July 16, 2009 @ 5:50 pm |
Apparently the US Dept of Ed has moved Mass to look at doubling charter schools:
http://www.boston.com/news/education/k_12/articles/2009/07/16/patrick_wants_more_students_to_go_to_charter_schools/
Comment by Gene Daniell — July 17, 2009 @ 12:17 am |
……and the reason he is doing it?
“The governor’s push comes as President Obama is threatening to withhold millions in federal stimulus dollars from states that hinder charter school growth.”
But hey who cares the reason, ineffective leaders need the the “2×4 to the head” approach. Lets keep our fingers crossed RI might benefit from similar moves as long as Lynch doesn’t get elected to the Gov’s office.
Comment by RS — July 17, 2009 @ 9:11 am |
Has anyone tried to access the state website (http://www.rilin.state.ri.us/)? I have been unable to access 2 days now, my provider is Cox. I am trying to find the bill or law changing Hopkintons revaluation date from 2008 to 2010 so as to align us with Charlestwon and Richmond. The latest data I have is located here: http://www.ripec.com/matriarch/d.asp?PageID=66&PageName2=pdfsdoc&p=&PageName=Comments+on+Revaluation+May+2008+Final%2Epdf
I would imagine if the valuation was done now, the resulting increase in the mil rate to compensate for the decreased property values would exceed the state mandated caps. Are we being ponzi’d again by our legistlature?
Comment by RS — July 17, 2009 @ 9:42 am |
Gene just got the time to read the same article and opinion by Scot Lehigh mentioned above good find and good post #43 (charter Schools).Thanks Gene.
Comment by james hirst — July 18, 2009 @ 12:04 pm |
As much as WOW would have me pegged as anti-education, along with RS, the reality is that we have kids in the district, so we actually care a lot.
The reality is that the time for competition has arrived. Competition brings accountability as parents pick schools.
Teacher unions will either adapt by helping poor teacher find a new occupations or they will fade away. It is their choice.
Today, it is move evident than ever that the political landscape has changed, when a democratic president and democratic governors are pushing charter schools, read the writing on the wall or be left behind.
Comment by Gene Daniell — July 18, 2009 @ 3:28 pm |
I wonder how mad the teacher unions are now that a Dem president isn’t playing their tune:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32116686/ns/politics-washington_post/deck/blackberry/
Comment by Gene Daniell — July 24, 2009 @ 8:22 am |
So, it appears there may be another school committee violating the law and the AG does what…
……takes the easy way out, I mean the “I’m running for GOV and need votes” direction.
http://newsblog.projo.com/2009/08/lawsuit-filed-o.html
Comment by RS — August 14, 2009 @ 1:56 pm |