"Our fair share"
Rep. Vickie Orsini Nardello voted against more money for our towns. I'll fight for our fair share of state funding.
Rep. Orsini Nardello voted against returning additional state dollars to our three towns. Bethany lost $109,000, Cheshire lost $231,000, and Prospect lost $126,000. (HB 5845, LCO 5217: 2006). These funds could have helped us cut taxes or hire more teachers for our kids.
She boasted in her newsletter that we received “our fair share” of state aid. Yet Bethany received a mere $36,000, Cheshire $910,000, and Prospect only $73,000 in state increases.
And last year, Ms. Nardello voted to subsidize illegal aliens with in-state tuition rates at state colleges. (HB 6793).
Where are her real priorities?
“Hartford is the fifth poorest city in the country,” Nardello explained. “When I came here to the Hartford schools, it was like coming to a Third World country.” Nardello is an employee of the Hartford schools which are quite well funded. (http://www.adha.org/publications/working/working37.htm).
Her concern for big cities is evident in the state budgets she supports. For every dollar of state income tax we pay, cities and towns get back
Bethany 21c
Cheshire 26c
Prospect 50c
Hartford $ 6.74
New Haven $ 3.66
Bridgeport $ 4.42
I'll put our schools and taxpayers first. My only special interests are the people of Bethany, Cheshire, and Prospect.
I'm a product of the Cheshire public schools. As a town Councilman, I've fought for effective school funding and accountability. As State Representative, I'll fight for our fair share of state dollars to ensure the best possible education for our children while keeping taxes down.
"Vote for Tim White. Vote for change – because we can do better."
Tim White
State Rep candidate
Bethany, Cheshire & Prospect
14 comments:
It is a complete joke that Tim is saying he fought for school funding when he voted for the 0 budget, let's get real here he won't do the job for Cheshire/
anon.4:46....I'm a little tired of hearing about the supposed 0% budget. It's getting old. No teachers were laid off during that budget year...there was a parking fee and a participation fee, but other than that it wasn't unreasonable considering the re-evaluation and large increase in tax bills that year. It's called controlling expenses, something dems can't seem to do. Can you name any important programs that were cut?? Not. Did you know that during that 0% budget year the superintendent bought ping pong tables for some of the schools. Hardly responsible spending on his part. Also, if you recall a little later on the boe gotadditional funds of $234K. And if I recall, it was a democrat on the TC who requested $500K for a turf field. It's time for a change.....it's time for Tim.
Turf field to be paid for by State bonding not Cheshire tax payers so get your facts straight.
Many programs were cut but then paid for by the parents of the students so that was a tax increase for them. Hardly a tax cutting measure. It was an irresponsible move by Tim and people don;t forget. Ping Pong tables-I fact checked that and it is a total lie. The additonal money was voted by Tim not to go to the Board of Ed. And as far as controlling expenses was it not Schrumm who proposed putting forward 900K for the trail that was soundly defeated by the Cheshire residents. Give me a break. Since the Dems are in the majority we have had the smallest tax increase and the biggest surplus in a long long time. Get real.
The turf field request of 500K may have been from the state bonding commission but to say it's not taxpayer money is ridiculous. We send our tax dollars to the state and they give back some to the towns. The turf would have cost more than 500K so the taxpayers would have gotten stuck for that bill.
You better check your facts again...ping pong tables were purchased for the schools..if I recall each was just over $400 a piece.
As for the linear trail...at least the voters got to decide, which is how it should have been with the smart boards. Instead the tc approved 275K and didn't send the $300K to referendum. Let's see if the boe buys 55 smartboards.
And as for the smallest tax increase...as Ms. Esty said, this was a windfall year and it won't be the same next budget cycle.
If I recall, there were some reps that wanted to go with a smaller tax increase, but the dems didn't want to.
So who should get real?
A tax increase for working parents with kids in school.That is what the 0 budget means. And that is not good if you raise taxes. The Republicans did this and now don't like facing the music. Alot of programs would have been cut if not for working parents getting a tax raise. With the Dems you have all the programs but a much smaller tax increase. Gee I thought the Rep were the $$ responsible ones/ Not so/
And if you factor in the national Republicans who have spent the surplus from the Clinton Years then you have real big bucks.
The idea that the schools were hurt by the zero percent increase is nonsense with no supporting data to prove it. Fact is, the items which Florio said would need to be cut, were not cut. Fact is, the school system had a surplus at the end of the year. Further fact is, there is no credible data showing that school spending directly relates to increased or positive test scores. Again, fact is if dollars were the mitigating factor in educational success, city schools which spend far more per pupil , whould have the best schools.
This fear mongering that the schools and the kids will be hurt by a zero percent budget is based upon no credible evidence, rather it was based upon political rhetoric.
Here is a thought, how about we run Cheshire HS liek a high school instead of a college campus. How many electives do our kids need? How many athletic programs need to be funded?
Cheshire has a very high opinion of itself and its schools....and ya know what, its unjustified. The schools here are not better than our neighbors in Wallingford or Southington. Further have you been to those dumps we call elementary schools at Norton and Doolittle. Outdated, in need of renovation. Go to wallingford and see what the schools look like over there.
This town has a very high but undeserved opinion of itself.
Fact is Cheshire public schools outperformed their neighbors in all areas of objective testing (SAT's Mastery and CAPT) and fact is that CHS has more students going to College, Fact is that CHS has more National Merit Students than their neighbors. Facts are stubborn things. Fact is that CHS has less electives than their neighbor schools. Fact is if you look at our schools they look way better than South End School in Southington and all Wallingford schools. Those are the facts.
aaron b. 8:57....Thanks for getting the facts straight. Couldn't have said it better myself.
The zero budget was just a Schrumm/Orsini payback which blew up in their faces. Arrogant politics is what is really sinking the Republicans at both the state and national level.
The differences you speak of in terms of test scores between Cheshire and Wallingford for example dont amoutn to very much. Kids in wallingford are receiving top notch education and are as well prepared for college as Cheshire students. As someone who has a spouse who has taught in both Cheshire and now the Wallingford school district, she can vouch for the fact that Cheshire has no "competitive " advantage over Wallingford at the least.
Aaron B. made a very good ppint about the condition of Cheshire elementary schools, notably Norton and Doolittle. They are outdated and in need of major renovation. My wife works in a beatifully renovated school in Wallingford as most have been. With all the doolars we pay in taxes in this town, why do our schools look like they do?
Finally, naother point which was made, was, there is no evidence linking school spending to improved test scores...I would suggest reading Education Myths: What Special-Interest Groups Want You to Believe About Our Schools and Why it Isn't So by Jay Greene. He debunks so many myths regarding public education and the special interests trying to keep it the way it is. Money doesnt make a school, pernt involvement, teacher dedication and student interest does. Like anything in life, it takes more effort than money to be successful.
So it is not money but schools look bad in Cheshire you say and how are we supposed to renovate them-with parent donations? Get real here-
I didnt say we should not renovate schools. I was merely pointing out that for all the talk in this town about our supposed superior school district, the condition of the schools leaves something to be desired. My point has been simply that the idea that a zero growth budget has hurt the schools is based upon rhetoric, not facts.
In addition, we need oversight of the curriculum being used in our schools. We also need oversight of every dollar being spend and requested in the budget, something our wonderful superintendent has not provided.
We also need to fix binding arbitration which allows for the state essentially to award salary increases to our teachers regardless of the town's ability to afford the increase
Bipartisian commission reported that the binding arbitration system actually works well and is not the cause of tax increases. Oversight of the curr? The Board of Ed does that and if citizens want to get involved then they should but most don;t they just complain about salaries but not much about what students learn.
Post a Comment