Where does it say “I would charge teachers”? I pointed out that your revenue stream is flawed and not generating revenue at its maximum potential.

You said: “Phil is stating that district employees should pay $40 to park.”

Please show where I said this without taking the entire statement out of context.

I don’t support charging students a penny. I agree with you when you said “charging for parking is stupid” it’s stupid for teachers and its stupid for students.. because that’s why we pay taxes. Next you will want to charge for bathroom services.. maybe per flush?

Maybe you should go back to May 11th of 2009 to see how I felt about the idea shortly after it was presented in the budget.

http://www.jacksonnjonline.com/2009/05/11/5-revenue-generating-ideas-that-didnt-get-boe-approval/

I am delivering facts. I have not offered a single insult. If you can dispute my facts, do that. Name calling i snot productive and the people of Jackson deserve a factual, honest and courteous discussion.

you imply Mr. Sharpe is a teacher by your wording. Why not detail his position.

At no time did Linda state she was the only teacher running. She is the only teacher seated. Marvin Krakower is a superintendent and has not been in the classroom for many years.

Here is the quote from the letter published by the Jackson Times:

Linda is an active member of NJ School Boards Association and is currently the sole Certificated Member on the Jackson Board of Education. She was selected to be a member of NJSBA’s New Board Member Orientation Team, training newly elected school board members State wide on issues including school law, policy, collective bargaining and finance.

Yes, she is the only Certified Member of the Jackson BOE. She is a trainer. Something she achieved on her own time.

The spin is all yours.

You can go send the email to all the teachers in the district “Phil Stilton wants to charge you to park”. I’ll have to expose you as the dirty lying political spin jockey that you are during these elections.

While I’m at it, I’ll check you on all of your lies. In the recent newspaper editorial written by Linda Lackey and Sharon Dey, they claimed Linda Lackey was the only candidate this year who has educational experience. Jeff Sharpe is an employee of the Howell School District. Gus Acevedo is a school teacher. You might want to submit a correction letter to the editor so as not to further deceive those whose votes you crave at all cost.

The good thing is Joe, I know none of you have the spine to move forward on such a move, so this is all hypothetical.

The reason Mr. G “denied” it was because it was never said.

This was not a fundraiser to pave parking lots. It was a line item, approved by the voters in the budget.

Phil is stating that district employees should pay $40 to park. Are you OK with that?

*Note* Phil Stilton did not say this. Phil Stilton said that parking fees on just students/residents is an unfair tax. If Joe Fiero and his team (Barbara Fiero, Linda Lackey and Sharon Dey) want to charge people to park on school property, they should charge everyone or noone.

I know parents may not want to hear this, but if the district charges ALL employees and students at all schools the same parking fee because they need to generate revenue, I would support this, but I would not support an unfair tax that only targets residents.

I think we already know what he has in mind.

THAT issue right now, is a bigger threat to education in Jackson than Chris Christie as we witnessed last Tuesday.

On the same token, you seem to not understand the position that how could we spend $29 million when we don’t have $1.5. It’s like buying a 52″ LCD TV from Best Buy because they were offering 40% off coupons when you can’t afford your mortgage.

I know there’s two sides to this and two fundamental philosophies, but making big purchases on credit because the deal is too good to pass up when you can’t pay your critical bills is what has put America in the situation we are in. You subscribe to the more liberal point of view of relying on state aid (which is going to be cut anyway) and I subscribe to a more conservative view of not overspending and as a result, overtaxing.

If we can’t pay our teachers to teach our children, we can’t afford irrigation for sports fields. I don’t really see how there is a logical counter to that opinion. I’m also tired of the “cost of a cup of coffee” or “cost of mc donalds” or “the cost to get your nails done” thing. Residents are getting tired of hearing that and I would advise it to never be used again if you ever want to plead your case with something.

You fail to see the bigger picture. It’s not “just a cup of coffee”, It’s a total tax bill of $5000 for somebody making $65,0000 that with al these “cups of coffee”, “mcdonalds lunches” and “night at the bar” turns it into a $5,500 tax bill for that same guy making $65,000 who may not see his bonus in 2010 or may have to cut his hours back and make $60,000 this year.

Again. Liberal agendas vs. conservative agendas are really the only difference here.

Joe, you are good at dodging reality. How can you sit here and say residents should have approved a $29 million expenditure when the district can’t even figure out how to save jobs because of a $1.5 million reduction in state aid?

My response:

Reality is we lost 40% in taxes that were scheduled to be returned to Jackson taxpayers. We lost $460,000 a year in revenue generated from solar.

The net cost to residents on a yearly tax basis was less than 3 people would spend in a fast food restaurant in one meal. The return on investment was over 20:1. That $460,000 would have closed that gap by 1/3.

Phil said:

Pink slips have already gone out from what I have been told and we are cutting teachers already, yet you still say we can afford a $4 million irrigation system. Where are the priorities? Where is the accountability in that assessment? Instead of pushing a $29 million referendum down the throats of taxpayers and parents, you all should have been coming up with a contingency plan for weathering the upcoming storm.

My response:

I checked. No, there have been no “pink slips” st this time.

$4 million to irrigate fields has nothing to do with the operating budget. That’s why it was a referendum question.

The referendum was not “pushed down the throats” of anyone. It was offered for opinion, as is LEGALLY required. State law PREVENT projects like this from being “pushed” which is why there is a referendum process. “Pushed” would be if a school board was to just move on a project of this magnitude without community approval, thinking they know better than the taxpayers how to spend their money.

Phil said:

The problem is we have people who fell asleep at the wheel and it slipped by your candidates (Dey & Lackey) and the rest of the BOE. …… they are just as responsible for this budget as Tom Gialanella and Michele Richardson.

My response:

What slipped by? Please explain so I can address something tangible.

There are no similarities between this issue and the softball fields. 1st, we are talking $261,000 versus $4,000,000.

Response….

Phil, I was not comparing the field irrigation to the girls softball. I was referencing the perceived value, which is a direct parallel.

Here are both our comments from above. I am sure when you read it again you will see I made no reference to the fields.

From above:

You (Phil) said:

The school was over the top and a breakdown in the process in the school administration is what prevented the initial irrigation wells from not being drilled before the regulations were changed.

I (Joe) responded:

Over the top? Based on what specifically? I have demonstrated, time and time again that Liberty HS was less than half the cost of other high schools that were built at the time. Not just in NJ, but Connecticut, Massachusetts, Delaware and Pennsylvania. I provided 11 different “comps”. Schools in similar communities and of similar size. The $70 million cost to build Liberty paled in comparison. The closest school was $93 million and most were in the range of $180 million.

This is no different than the issue with the girl’s softball. Some people questioned the cost, but it is actually a good value for what is being provided. Liberty was brought to the residents of Jackson through great efforts and innovative thinking. The design is functional and is a direct response to all the issues that were found to be in earlier school designs. Wider halls facilitate easier movement during class changes. Large window walls reduce the need for artificial lighting. Durable materials assure lower cost long term maintenance.