|
The error: using older legislation of Rep. Mahoney's HB 351 and posting:
There's no "tends to give more power to the government" about it. There would be more power but, there
are other considerations whether this would be direct government as the school board directors would not be 'elected.' They
would be appointed by members of the board of commissioners.
They'd be a step removed then from the taxpayers
who at least now can hold school board members of 7 school districts directly responsible for their hirings and well nepotism.
there are other considerations whether this would be direct government as the school board directors would
not be 'elected.' They would be appointed by members of the board of commissioners.
They'd be a step removed then
from the taxpayers
Not Enough Said:
My error was my going by an earlier version of Rep. Mahoney's legislation on county-wide school consolidation, not the
re-introduced version of the 2009 House Session. In the latter bill, the county commissioners only appoint a school director
in the event there is a vacancy in the "elected" position. Voters in each of the 7 sub-divided areas would elect a director
for that representative area. So I was wrong that the commissioners would have a direct role in that regard.
However,
should a campaign be mounted for the county-wide consolidated school district, county commissioners would by majority vote
alone be able to place the measure on the Fall 2011 Election ballot for the county voters to consider.
None of that
changes the situation bigger government would be created, and what is sought by the legislator's measure is a uniform curriculum
and the way we do education.
Fay West Message Board Thread
Beware Pushers Wed, May 04, 2011 - 1:45 PM
Archives of threads at Fay West Message Board
Not Enough Said:
Talk about 'bloopers' I'd better get this one out there upfront or first off it will continue to haunt me not coming
clean now. Maybe things happen for a reason is all I can say, and I have said that many times over these many years.
I
also don't want this error to circulate as it might and then be responsible for having somebody else continue the 'error.'
We
all know those search engine results go way way back, too and the error could continue into perpetuity if left uncorrected.
I
also know state legislator Rep. Tim Mahoney will be a guest on WMBS 590 radio talk show sometime soon with new host, Mark
Rafail, and honestly, I don't want the focus, if it comes up during the interview, to veer from important questions concerning
the legislator's county-wide school consolidation plan and the already completed Standard and Poor Study both should have
read by now.
I had commented here at Fay West on the debate among candidates for county commissioner which was reported
on by the Herald-Standard.com.
here's what I said:
"There's no "tends to give more power to the government"
about it. There would be more power but, there are other considerations whether this would be direct government as the school
board directors would not be 'elected.' They would be appointed by members of the board of commissioners.
They'd be
a step removed then from the taxpayers who at least now can hold school board members of 7 school districts directly responsible
for their hirings and well nepotism."
http://discuss.faywest.com/uniontown/? thread=20110541123233
I truly apologize
for the error. Wet noodles well-deserved. Maybe I should wear an I messed up sign should I attend the Fayette Patriots forum
tonight. Ah, no, not "everybody" reads these message boards, blogs, and free websites.
The re-introduced legislation
HB 351 Session 2009 is located here:
http://www.legis.state.pa.us/CFDOCS/Le gis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=PDF&
amp;sessYr=2009&sessInd=0&bill Body=H&billTyp=B&billNbr=0351& amp;pn=0382
I dedicated a page to
the error on my site "Not Enough Said"
Get It Spot On and Don't Cover Up When You Don't Page
https://dirtline.tripod.com/notenoughsa
id/id24.html
Again I feel badly for this error and beg forgiveness. Maybe things happen for a reason though. Before
making the comment here, I did not check my own blog at blogspot where I had commented on the re-introduced legislation back
in February, 2009! Talk about lapse of memory, geesh.
PA state Rep. Tim Mahoney's re-introduced bill on school consolidation House Bill 351 Session 2009
House Bill 351 pertinent section addresses the election of the board of directors for consolidated school districts
Section 308 (a)
Section 308 (c)
|
GARDENING CLASSES
|
|
Landscaping: How To
|
|
|
|
M-F 3:30
|
|
Intro to Gardening
|
|
|
|
T-F 10:30
|
|
Selecting Plants
|
|
|
|
M-W 11:30
|
|
The question is actually still planned to be pushed to be on the November 2011 ballot, pending, so it is said, the outcome of the $100,000 study on consolidation.
Rep. Mahoney's former legislation has already determined the board of commissioners will have a direct vote in appointing school board members (7) to a county-wide school board.
After all, the 'county' angle means just that, county. County-wide district. One is either for the the body of county commissioners directly having a role in selecting school board members for a COUNTY unified school district or one is not.
Should the referendum question show a majority of 'yes we can' votes, the matter would be in the purvue of the board of county commissioners.
Lohr actually answered he was against bigger government and he implied such would be had in a regionalization of school districts.
"In response to a question regarding the regionalization of public services and school districts, Lohr said he is against big government and that regionalization tends to give more power to the government."
http://www.heraldstandard.com/news/loc al_news/commissioner-candidates-debate -issues/article_ec89bd92-454f-5a0b-9dc 7-ef087a614ed8.html
He's dead on right as that is all 'consolidation' into one COUNTY-wide school district would accomplish - bigger government. I quibble with such "tends to give more power to the government."
Has Lohr read Rep. Mahoney's former 2009 legislation on consolidation?
There's no "tends to give more power to the government" about it. There would be more power but, there are other considerations whether this would be direct government as the school board directors would not be 'elected.' They would be appointed by members of the board of commissioners.
They'd be a step removed then from the taxpayers who at least now can hold school board members of 7 school districts directly responsible for their hirings and well nepotism.
Zimmerlink did not adequately answer if what she's reported to have said is accurate.
"Zimmerlink said the consolidation of public services and schools is not under the purview of a county commissioner but that she does believe in the elimination and consolidation of certain county government offices."
http://www.heraldstandard.com/news/loc al_news/commissioner-candidates-debate -issues/article_ec89bd92-454f-5a0b-9dc 7-ef087a614ed8.html
There may still be hope for Ambrosini, Vicites, and Zapotosky to see the danger consolidation of public school districts for a uniform curriculum would bring.
And make no mistake, that is what Rep. Tim Mahoney is after. He's said himself, he might not see great savings from the study. 1 percent might be ok with him for all we know. After all, he acknowledged in recent articles he believes we should change the way we do 'education.'
And for Cellurale, too, even though she answered she was for regionalization for public services and for schools, there may be hope to see the so-called already announced cost savings just won't materialize in a consolidated district of some 7 school districts.
Cellurale said she believes in the regionalization of public services and schools, noting that it would save money and benefit the middle-class taxpayer."
She and the others should review the Standard and Poor "Study of Cost-Effectiveness of Consolidating Pennsylvania School Districts. The 2007 study was commissioned to be done by the state Legislative Budget and Finance Committee
http://lbfc.legis.state.pa.us/
Is consolidation of 7 school districts into 1 large public school district what parents and voters really want? If Fayette County schools are low on scoring tests now - using the same public union-tenured teacher system we now enjoy with its crowing results - what is to be expected when the same teachers are reshuffled, the same union-tenure system remains unchallenged, and so much more?
The more being this: any private innovation need not apply here because all would be unified "public" schooling. Vocational-Technical. Cyber School. Alternative School. All public all centralized public using your tax dollars any way desired.
Need a new building for a $50 million vo-tech school for the one unified school district? Hey, we just happen to have such an idea, and some monies are waiting in the wings, too.
And those county-unified-district teacher salaries, the largest chunk of the budget along with other such operating costs, yep those would go down and down to the lowest common denominator. Just like pension packages and health care plans for the usual public suspects.
Once the referendum question makes it to the ballot there is no way to say Stop - any 2 districts can already 'merge' in some way without formal consolidating for any number of potential cost-saving approaches.
There is no way after that to say Stop, we haven't read Volume 2 of the Standard and Poor report which theoretically pairs some of PA school districts to meet the parameters the study shows may bring cost-effectiveness. among those so paired is Brownsville Area school district and it is paired with another small district outside Fayette County.
http://lbfc.legis.state.pa.us/
We'd welcome Lohr and Zimmerlink saying Stop Now. And the others should quickly follow - with a copy of the Standard and Poor study in hand, or at least available on laptops in pdf so others can see for themselves what one study has already adequately conducted - a study of all of the school districts in Pennsylvania.
http://lbfc.legis.state.pa.us/