Earlier this week, the Board of Education voted (seven in favor, two opposed) to hire Frank Romano as our district's new superintendent. The board has offered Romano a salary of $190,000, with 3.5% annual pay increases. Those raises are guaranteed, not performance-related. Romano's salary would exceed that of Jack Raslowsky, our last full-time superintendent.
Romano was a rather underwhelming candidate, to put it mildly. He certainly didn't merit such a lucrative contract. In our view, the Board of Education has really let taxpayers down. That said, we commend board members Maureen Sullivan and Carrie Gilliard for their dissenting votes.
During that same meeting, the board voted (five in favor, three opposed) to send member Frances Rhodes Kearns on a $2,300 junket to a convention in Chicago. On that particular vote, Theresa Minutillo joined Sullivan and Gilliard in standing up for the taxpayer.
School Board News
Posted on Friday February 12, 2010
25 comments
25 Comments
Hudson Conservative - February 13th, 2010 at 7:30 AM
There are four seats up for election this year. Who's gonna run? We need some REAL reformers on the board. Enough of these "Kids First" posers.
Forde Prigot - February 14th, 2010 at 10:36 AM
Be careful of throwing throwing the baby out with the bath water or rather remember what it was like before kids' first and don't make common cause with the old guard who want to see Hoboken schools made into a kleptocracy again.
This is very reminiscent of a hiring that happened years ago. Watch the video and let me know what you think.
This is very reminiscent of a hiring that happened years ago. Watch the video and let me know what you think.
Red Elephant - February 14th, 2010 at 1:02 PM
Mr. Prigot: You rightly admonish us not to "make common cause with the old guard." We have no intention of doing so. That, however, is precisely what Kids First has done. To ram through Romano's contract, Kids First voted in lockstep with the old guard. That same night, Kids Firsters joined with the old guard to send a fellow board member on a $2,300 junket. Now how can you do that and still call yourself a "reformer?"
Forde Prigot - February 15th, 2010 at 11:20 AM
Now how can you do that and still call yourself a "reformer?"
----
I am, I do, and I can because of number of things.
First, I understand that many were unhappy with the final two candidates for superintendent but many of the people who were unhappy with the final two thought the process to get them was reasonable. Hoboken's problem may very well be that for years, no scratch that, for generations "job searches" have been rigged and because of this many qualified applicants refused to participate. What applicant would jeopardize their current position or aspirations to apply for a position at Hoboken if history tells them the game is fixed. Hoboken is rife with examples of this, you only have to look at the job search that was ignored and gave us John Correa as Parking director.
Second while I don't agree with everything the Kids' First caucus does I agree with most of it. They cut a million dollars in spending in their first year! They exposed fraud and corruption as no other Hoboken school board has done in decades, students funds to buy teachers Ipods.
Third I know how fragile the gains we've made on school board are. One bad election is all it takes to wipe away the budget reductions Kids' First have made. Hoboken's civil service culture has not changed enough for us not to expect spending to rocket up with raises and new hires if the Old Guard is returned to office.
Fourth, there are 4 seats up in April and if the Old Guard returns to power Maureen Sullivan, lover her or hate her, will be irrelevant. Oh she'll shout, moan, and groan and the old guard will pause to let her do so but in the end her positions will lose.
Fifth, I see Kids' First as imperfect but our best chance to continue making gains in the school system. I would like to see all of us here who disagree with their decision reach out to members of Kids' First and start a dialogue. An honest and respectful dialogue can raise the quality of decisions made by the board and elucidate us on the limitations of the school boards' authority.
It's up to us not to make the good the enemy of the great and to guard that the gains we've seen with Kids' First are not lost in the next election.
----
I am, I do, and I can because of number of things.
First, I understand that many were unhappy with the final two candidates for superintendent but many of the people who were unhappy with the final two thought the process to get them was reasonable. Hoboken's problem may very well be that for years, no scratch that, for generations "job searches" have been rigged and because of this many qualified applicants refused to participate. What applicant would jeopardize their current position or aspirations to apply for a position at Hoboken if history tells them the game is fixed. Hoboken is rife with examples of this, you only have to look at the job search that was ignored and gave us John Correa as Parking director.
Second while I don't agree with everything the Kids' First caucus does I agree with most of it. They cut a million dollars in spending in their first year! They exposed fraud and corruption as no other Hoboken school board has done in decades, students funds to buy teachers Ipods.
Third I know how fragile the gains we've made on school board are. One bad election is all it takes to wipe away the budget reductions Kids' First have made. Hoboken's civil service culture has not changed enough for us not to expect spending to rocket up with raises and new hires if the Old Guard is returned to office.
Fourth, there are 4 seats up in April and if the Old Guard returns to power Maureen Sullivan, lover her or hate her, will be irrelevant. Oh she'll shout, moan, and groan and the old guard will pause to let her do so but in the end her positions will lose.
Fifth, I see Kids' First as imperfect but our best chance to continue making gains in the school system. I would like to see all of us here who disagree with their decision reach out to members of Kids' First and start a dialogue. An honest and respectful dialogue can raise the quality of decisions made by the board and elucidate us on the limitations of the school boards' authority.
It's up to us not to make the good the enemy of the great and to guard that the gains we've seen with Kids' First are not lost in the next election.
hulk - February 17th, 2010 at 6:27 AM
MaureenSullivan - February 20th, 2010 at 5:25 PM
You're right, Hulk, this junket was approved at the January meeting. I'm not in the Finance Committee (Theresa, Rose, Irene, Ruth) meetings at which the fine print of the business administrator's agenda is analyzed. I made the unfortunate assumption that there was nothing egregious buried in the list of class trips because my KF teammates had been through it and, I assumed, would have eliminated something so obvious. It's my mistake for not checking it more closely in January.
This month it had to go back on the agenda because of a change in dates. The finance committee had to approve it again and that's how it showed up on the Feb. agenda. I saw it and spoke out against it. The pro-junket side, however, won out. As I said in my letter to the Hoboken Reporter, there are myriad decisions big and small to make and we all miss a thing or two. But when an item like this is pointed out right before the vote, and three members of KF team up with Carmelo Garcia and Jimmy Farina to pass it, then you decide. Can the Republicans reading this support a team that supports taxpayer-financed junkets?
This month it had to go back on the agenda because of a change in dates. The finance committee had to approve it again and that's how it showed up on the Feb. agenda. I saw it and spoke out against it. The pro-junket side, however, won out. As I said in my letter to the Hoboken Reporter, there are myriad decisions big and small to make and we all miss a thing or two. But when an item like this is pointed out right before the vote, and three members of KF team up with Carmelo Garcia and Jimmy Farina to pass it, then you decide. Can the Republicans reading this support a team that supports taxpayer-financed junkets?
TrueReformer - February 18th, 2010 at 10:32 AM
It seems that Kids First is only willing to cut enough of the budget to offset inflationary increases. That's not true reform, its maintaining the status quo.
Forde Prigot - February 18th, 2010 at 9:49 PM
TrueReformer, please list the cuts Kids' First made. When you're done I'll list whatever ones you miss. I think our lists together will more than demonstrate the significance of their cuts.
Hudson Conservative - February 19th, 2010 at 3:56 AM
Forde: It's not your place to assign "homework" to others. Your silly list wouldn't disprove TrueReformer's point, anyway.
Forde Prigot - February 19th, 2010 at 6:57 AM
The Republican party has to be the party of accuracy if we're going to gain people's trust. If we make economic assertions I would expect the ability to back it up. I can easily find hundreds of thousands of economic cuts that were made under Kids' First and equally as significant operational changes. I would ask anyone who labels those cuts and changes as trivial to give context. Else we become like those on bluejersey who bemoan the cuts Christie is implementing without consideration for the larger context, our fiscal situation.
MaureenSullivan - February 19th, 2010 at 8:18 PM
Yes, I'm glad that we brought in interim sup't Peter Carter. He immediately saw the huge changes that needed to be made to the business office if we wanted to be fiscally sound. I had argued vociferously with the KF team but was overruled and we kept a business administrator in the job who had cost the district nearly $100,000 in fees and penalties with the IRS among other bad moves like not billing Hoboken Charter for rent adding up to $500,000 over three years. (Back then I went along with decisions I didn't agree with and kept my mouth shut...mea culpa.)
It's obvious, isn't it?, that nibbling around the edges won't do the job. We need to make massive changes if we are to keep up with the tsunami that is inherent in 4%-plus increases for teachers and an over 10% increase in next year's health care costs. Salary increases for unions will add $1.8 million next year. We'll need another $600,000 on top of the $6 million we already spend on health benefits.
The way it stands now, we're looking at another year of $25,000 per pupil costs. We can't just tread water. We need to make bold moves if we want to cut costs and bring sanity to the budget and tax relief to Hoboken.
It's obvious, isn't it?, that nibbling around the edges won't do the job. We need to make massive changes if we are to keep up with the tsunami that is inherent in 4%-plus increases for teachers and an over 10% increase in next year's health care costs. Salary increases for unions will add $1.8 million next year. We'll need another $600,000 on top of the $6 million we already spend on health benefits.
The way it stands now, we're looking at another year of $25,000 per pupil costs. We can't just tread water. We need to make bold moves if we want to cut costs and bring sanity to the budget and tax relief to Hoboken.
Thomas - February 20th, 2010 at 10:24 AM
Forde Prigot - February 20th, 2010 at 10:59 AM
Maureen I like you and I campaigned door to door for you so please indulge me a practical question. If the old guard wins the majority in the April school board election what is the likelihood of cuts being made. 100%, 75%, 50%, 25%, or 0%?
TrueReformer - February 20th, 2010 at 11:33 AM
Forde,
If you feel the Kid's First cuts were truly significant, then perhaps you can tell me what the budget was last year, what it's going to be this year, how much we spend per student, and the amount of tax relief i should expect.
If you feel the Kid's First cuts were truly significant, then perhaps you can tell me what the budget was last year, what it's going to be this year, how much we spend per student, and the amount of tax relief i should expect.
hulk - February 20th, 2010 at 12:51 PM
Not only was the BA position replaced so was the lawyer, asst superintendent, superintendent and Principal. Add on: multiple cuts, attrition, heading off self interest groups wanting favors,reveiwing all contracts, not entering into no show, high pay bogus contracts/positions, presentation of the audit, presentation of test scores, using stimulus funds for non occuring expenses (academic specialists)and following throught on the Corrective Action Plan thus improving QSAC violations are some of cost savings and improvements that have been occuring under KF majority.
Maureen, a mea culpa-it's kf fault is not going to cut it. Provide a list of cost saving measures and academic plans that you "haven't been able to implement and others you are legally able to implement.
Maureen, a mea culpa-it's kf fault is not going to cut it. Provide a list of cost saving measures and academic plans that you "haven't been able to implement and others you are legally able to implement.
MaureenSullivan - February 20th, 2010 at 2:52 PM
Theresa and Rose were dead set against replacing Brian Buckley, even though they knew (and said it didn't matter!) that he had cost us taxpayers $100,000 with the IRS. The only reason that KF can point to a total of $226,093 in actual cuts to spending next year is because of the accounting acumen of Bob Davis, who wouldn't be here if their man, Buckley, was still in place.
I argued that Joe Morano, the old board attorney who wrote the unlawful contracts for his pals, should be gone Day One. Lawyers serve at the pleasure of the board and we could have brought in a new lawyer on an interim basis the day we were sworn in. Instead, Theresa and Ruth had Morano swear them in, sending a strong signal that they were not going to change the status quo. We did get the reputable firm of Porzio Bromberg, but Morano stayed on the payroll until the end of October.
I lobbied to end Dr. Petrosino's contract when it expired last June 30. I was overruled and he stayed on through the summer for an extra $30,000. When this came back to bite us, Theresa told me "Maureen, I hate to say it, but you were right."
I argued that we shouldn't spend $50,000 on summer stipends for teachers to "finish" Petrosino's curriculum project. I thought it was outrageous but they were worried about offending voters. I believed Theresa when she told me I had a deal with KF to cut the figure in half. But at the board meeting, they backed out of the deal and agreed with Raslowsky instead of me.
Just this month KF members Rose, Irene and Ruth approved a $2,300 junket for Fran Rhodes-Kearns to Chicago. Where will the cuts come to the budget if we can't even agree that frivolous trips for board members should be eliminated. What will they cut if junkets are off limits?
Presentation of test scores? Who stood up at a board meeting last year as a member of the public and demanded to know what Raslowsky planned to do about the abysmal test scores at Connors? That was ME. I released the test scores and I was booed and heckled by the large number of teachers union members in the audience. Theresa and Rose didn't speak out...I DID. Of course we encouraged Mr. Carter to make the scores public this year.
As for so many of the things you mention, they are the job of Mr. Carter and Mr. Davis. If you have a professional administrative team they will write and follow a corrective plan, present scores, use stimulus funds to improve education, etc. This is one of the reasons I was pushing to hire an experienced Chief School Administrator so we could continue with the good work begun by Carter.
My question...what cut have they told you they wanted to make that I was against? which position did they want to elimiate that I pleaded for? which part of the gold-plated custodians contract did they want to slash that I urged them to keep?
I argued that Joe Morano, the old board attorney who wrote the unlawful contracts for his pals, should be gone Day One. Lawyers serve at the pleasure of the board and we could have brought in a new lawyer on an interim basis the day we were sworn in. Instead, Theresa and Ruth had Morano swear them in, sending a strong signal that they were not going to change the status quo. We did get the reputable firm of Porzio Bromberg, but Morano stayed on the payroll until the end of October.
I lobbied to end Dr. Petrosino's contract when it expired last June 30. I was overruled and he stayed on through the summer for an extra $30,000. When this came back to bite us, Theresa told me "Maureen, I hate to say it, but you were right."
I argued that we shouldn't spend $50,000 on summer stipends for teachers to "finish" Petrosino's curriculum project. I thought it was outrageous but they were worried about offending voters. I believed Theresa when she told me I had a deal with KF to cut the figure in half. But at the board meeting, they backed out of the deal and agreed with Raslowsky instead of me.
Just this month KF members Rose, Irene and Ruth approved a $2,300 junket for Fran Rhodes-Kearns to Chicago. Where will the cuts come to the budget if we can't even agree that frivolous trips for board members should be eliminated. What will they cut if junkets are off limits?
Presentation of test scores? Who stood up at a board meeting last year as a member of the public and demanded to know what Raslowsky planned to do about the abysmal test scores at Connors? That was ME. I released the test scores and I was booed and heckled by the large number of teachers union members in the audience. Theresa and Rose didn't speak out...I DID. Of course we encouraged Mr. Carter to make the scores public this year.
As for so many of the things you mention, they are the job of Mr. Carter and Mr. Davis. If you have a professional administrative team they will write and follow a corrective plan, present scores, use stimulus funds to improve education, etc. This is one of the reasons I was pushing to hire an experienced Chief School Administrator so we could continue with the good work begun by Carter.
My question...what cut have they told you they wanted to make that I was against? which position did they want to elimiate that I pleaded for? which part of the gold-plated custodians contract did they want to slash that I urged them to keep?
Forde Prigot - February 20th, 2010 at 3:48 PM
TrueReformer that's a fair request. Let what we have.
The budget for 2009-2010, which was approved by the board against the wishes of the then Kids' First minority, is $62,013,193. The proposed 2010-2011 budget is 59,762,551, a decrease of 3.6% year over year.
The 3.6% cut would have decreased the tax burden however the reduction in State aid has changed our situation and the tax levy was expected to remain flat. I say "was" because the numbers I have are from a document dated 02/01/2010, 19 days old, and as we all know the State situation has changed in the last few days and aid may be further reduced.
The proposed budget makes 10 assumptions the first of which is "A desire to reduce the local property tax levy" so taxes are a prime consideration to the current board.
Sadly we are saddled with the sins of the last board. The contracts the last board approved over Kids' First opposition see salaries increase by over 1.1 million dollars and benefit costs increasing by 600K. With a better board some of this would have been savings.
Please take a look at the numbers yourself. The Hoboken Journal has them up or you can download them from this link.
http://jump.fm/SBWHJ
The budget for 2009-2010, which was approved by the board against the wishes of the then Kids' First minority, is $62,013,193. The proposed 2010-2011 budget is 59,762,551, a decrease of 3.6% year over year.
The 3.6% cut would have decreased the tax burden however the reduction in State aid has changed our situation and the tax levy was expected to remain flat. I say "was" because the numbers I have are from a document dated 02/01/2010, 19 days old, and as we all know the State situation has changed in the last few days and aid may be further reduced.
The proposed budget makes 10 assumptions the first of which is "A desire to reduce the local property tax levy" so taxes are a prime consideration to the current board.
Sadly we are saddled with the sins of the last board. The contracts the last board approved over Kids' First opposition see salaries increase by over 1.1 million dollars and benefit costs increasing by 600K. With a better board some of this would have been savings.
Please take a look at the numbers yourself. The Hoboken Journal has them up or you can download them from this link.
http://jump.fm/SBWHJ
hulk - February 20th, 2010 at 5:56 PM
You do realize that you, alone, are not a majority ie: those who voted for these changes are responsible for the changes. Right now what you have here is a "he said, she said" thing going on-No one cares. Just keep voting to cut the budget and make changes.
Btw,if one follows your insinuations... Carter wasn't here in May-you wouldn't have gotten Davis.
Also, stop posing with the 2300 junket-you voted to approve this in Jan--if it hadn't come back,for a technicality-she would have been on her way with your blessing.
Speaking of custodial contract, is your signature on the MOA? You stated: "we all worked very hard and it was a good contract." Are you going to stand behing your words or throw this at someone else's feet?
I ask again, what cost cutting measures and academic plans do you have?
Btw,if one follows your insinuations... Carter wasn't here in May-you wouldn't have gotten Davis.
Also, stop posing with the 2300 junket-you voted to approve this in Jan--if it hadn't come back,for a technicality-she would have been on her way with your blessing.
Speaking of custodial contract, is your signature on the MOA? You stated: "we all worked very hard and it was a good contract." Are you going to stand behing your words or throw this at someone else's feet?
I ask again, what cost cutting measures and academic plans do you have?
hulk - February 20th, 2010 at 7:03 PM
"Hudson Conservative - February 13th, 2010 at 7:30 AM
There are four seats up for election this year. Who's gonna run? We need some REAL reformers on the board. Enough of these "Kids First" posers."
You need to do your homework. Unless you are part of the "machine",this is the worst thing to do. When 2 reform groups run, the vote gets split and the "machine" gets in. They are salivating right now, they loved the letters- won't even have to campaign. Check the voting records. Never has the reform ticket won, under these circumstances. Was your intention to put Raia and company, back in the driver's seat?
ronnie - February 20th, 2010 at 8:39 PM
So you are calling Kids First a reform group? Where's the proof? Could it be there will be 2 machine groups running? (are you having a heart attack Hulk?)I've been following Sullivan's posts since she ran two years ago. She doesn't seem like a poseur or a liar. If she says that Kids First isn't following through on their promises than I give that much credence. Why would she lie about that? She ran last year and the year before. I wasn't following it when Markle ran but when I watch her on the tv I think she's not the brightest bulb and doesn't do a good job of running the meetings. And the new one, Sobolof, hasn't been in a campaign so how do I know what she thinks? Ruth said some good things during the campaign but I'm going to take Sullivan's word over hers. Why did those 3 vote for that junket even when they got a second chance to vote it down? I think it is great that Minatillo sided with Sullivan and voted against the junket but it makes it even worse that those two with the biggest reformer credentials have no control over their Kids First friends. Ok, Republicans, can we do better? Are we the party that just accepts weak imitations of reform or are we going to show what the word really means?
hulk - February 21st, 2010 at 8:13 AM
Maureen voted to approve the 2300 junket. When sullivan ran against kf tkt, the machine walked in-neither group/person won-which is exactly what will happen again, if he r busband continues to find a ticket-this is clearly counterproductive to cutting the budget. Rose Markle is part of Tax revolt. I am not understanding you machine idea (2 tkts) are youo saying that Maureen has been siding with the machine since May? Most every vote was unanimous- that includes Maureen's vote. What proof do you have on any claims? Look at the facts. This nonsense with "throw out kf" occured after the superintendent vote and after Delea wasn't appointed. If there is culpability it is full culpability or not-unanimous votes sans the superintendent vote-which Sullivan, herself, said was due educational theory. You seem to have your mind made up so I won't bother with the facts-you don't seem interested in that-only making sure that Raia walks back in. Watch what happens on April 21st.
SmartyJones - February 21st, 2010 at 8:41 AM
People are already telling Da Horsey this BoE race is shaping up as another replay of the last election: Zimmer-Mason-Raia, etc. (Except this one now has Frank even more excited.)
I've issued multiple requests first at The Hoboken Journal and also at MSV and now here and at least several emails since Monday) to chat and find out more on Maureen's perspective but have yet to get a reply to that request. She said she was unhappy that Kurt at the Hoboken Journal didn't speak to her to get her perspective.
Since Monday I've tried to do so.
I've issued multiple requests first at The Hoboken Journal and also at MSV and now here and at least several emails since Monday) to chat and find out more on Maureen's perspective but have yet to get a reply to that request. She said she was unhappy that Kurt at the Hoboken Journal didn't speak to her to get her perspective.
Since Monday I've tried to do so.
Forde Prigot - February 21st, 2010 at 10:24 AM
I was thinking about what I could add when I came across this posting.
I think it well sums up my feeling son the issue right now. It's not long and I think it makes some very good points.
http://whatsupwithhoboken.com/
I think it well sums up my feeling son the issue right now. It's not long and I think it makes some very good points.
http://whatsupwithhoboken.com/
MaureenSullivan - February 24th, 2010 at 10:28 PM
Michael Lenz has been whining like a big baby since the lame ticket he masterminded for KF with a wishy washy "platform" was shellacked by Carmelo, Fran and the unknown Phil DeFalco in 2008. I've said it a million times...if you added all my unique votes to Tricia Snyder's, she still would have lost. Not only does he think I kept out one of his candidates (which is mathematically impossible), but I kept out all 3 all by myself? Wow, I'm good!
hulk - February 25th, 2010 at 7:03 AM
What does Lenz have to do with any of this? Do you have any facts to back what you said? I do.
election results 2008-...Sullivan-863, Snyder-1475=2338.
garcia-2241
kearns-1905
defalco-1897
It seems you SAY a lot things with no facts.
election results 2008-...Sullivan-863, Snyder-1475=2338.
garcia-2241
kearns-1905
defalco-1897
It seems you SAY a lot things with no facts.
Leave a Comment
Search
Recent Posts
Worth Reading