Bayonne isn't an Abbott school, and you're spot on-residents pay 48% of their own school cost. That's still way below what schools in the suburbs pay. Here's where to find all school funding info
http://www.state.nj.us/education/guide/2013/district.shtml

Quote:

Well good for Secaucus, they was paying 100% and complained about the fact. Bayonne is also complaining, the last time I saw the figure, they were paying close to 50%. It is foolish to think JC will continue to receive more money than surrounding towns. I do remember when we paid 50% of school costs.

Secaucus pays 87% of the cost, but they also spend way less per student than JC, and have a worse student/teacher ratio too. But don't worry, Abbott is around to stay it would seem.

In 2005, JC paid 13% of cost, in dollars amount that was $72 million, the 16% in dollars in $110 million, an increased of $38 million in 9 years. This is an example of how numbers lie. Local taxpayers are giving $38 million more and you are stuck on a percentage. By the way, many in the state want an uniform system because some town like Secaucus pay 100% of funding to the school system. I cannot say they are wrong. But if an uniform system was instituted and JC had to pay more, homeowners would be bankrupt. It is the reason I talk about abatements. There were people in the 1990s, during the Schundler years who said, the state would never raised the figure of 13%, the reason Schundler gave abatements, those people are wrong. So the idea the state could introduce a formula of local taxpayers paying 50% of cost, which was the formula before the state takeover is frightening.

You may spin it any way you want, but the facts are that JC taxpayers pay only 16% of the cost of their own schools. So the issue of abatements (which are given out way to easily, I agree) really don't have that big of an impact re: school funding.

One tenth of that money goes to charter schools, health care costs, which has risen eats up another part, and payment into pensions which went up take up another. Then, there are foolish mistakes that the board of ed does: issue contracts for substitute teachers which is I heard is bloated. The only reason, the board of ed does not videotape the public comments, they don't want to taxpayers public to hear about all of their contracts that turned sour. In the meantime, JC is building tax abated buildings saying 1.5 children will live in the buildings which actually is a step from from Newport's abatements. The council then said no children will live at Newport. Children do live in tax abated building and go to the public/charter schools. Also, the city practices foolish things such as giving Salem Lafayette another abatement which extends their tax abatement to 66 years and that large complex probably has 800 school children. To say abatements are not part of the problem, it equivalent of saying JC will not have another flood during a storm. We need to acknowledge we are placing more children into the system without the tax dollars to follow them.

Half a billion dollars a year 'flows' into JC from suburban taxpayers to fund JC schools, the abatement issue is minor compared to that, no?

Quote:

Greco is being paid by JCBOE? Is it possible to go lower than that? They should hire his hair stylist too. It's important in our school system revival.

Quote:

Does he do anything for the BOE or just the union?

Quote:

If you want money flowing into the public schools then abatements cannot be given. Here is the Math: zero dollars from one abated property plus zero dollars from another abated property equals zero dollars going to the Board of Education.

1. I think this shows why the board should broadcast full public comment sessions. They will be reported on in excerpt anyway, without the full story being told.

2. I am surprised to hear that Greco gets his salary from JCBOE. Generally the union pays the salaries of its officers. The employee may remain on the books as earning the salary, because if he steps down from office he goes back to his job.

I suppose it can be negotiated as part of the contract as a leave line that is proportionately deducted from every other member (which would be less than $3.00 per JCEA represented employee's salary). But for JCBOE to actually pay the salary outright? I doubt it.

Union officers do accrue pension credits. Not sure if the union has to chip in the required contribution.

3. Why not put the board's offer to a vote? This is an easy one. Because the union is the exclusive bargaining agent. That means the union negotiates, and decides when a deal is adequate to present to membership. There are obligations for both sides to bargain until impasse, and then procedures for impasse.

Expecting the union to go back and put every employer proposal for a vote let's the employer control the negotiations and places a wedge between the union and its members.

Furthermore, when a union presents a proposal to membership for a vote, it is expected to recommend it. The union can be found liable for an unfair labor practice if it recommends voting "no" and in some cases, unions have been found to have committed unfair labor practices even if they recommended voting "yes" but weren't sincere or energetic enough about it.

4. At 4:45, is Greco really talking about PRACTICE?

5. As far as labor relations go, this is pretty tame, and while the union can endorse candidates I'm really surprised they see this board as the antichrists that they portray them as. I have seen unions, particularly public sector unions, out of contract for much, much longer than JCEA has been. I have seen entire job titles eliminated and bargaining units whittled down to almost nothing. Complaining at a board meeting about a "past practice" violation and alleged retaliation for bringing it to his attention? That's a basic grievance and unfair labor practice charge. No union president can credibly claim they've never had to deal with that before.

6. The underlying issue here is not just the contract, and I suspect the contract is not even the primary issue. The issue is the belief of the union and its members that Dr. Lyles and her strongest supporters on the board want to contract out and privatize as much as possible. I think this perception is ill founded. Given what is going on in Newark, Camden, and other large cities I understand the fear, though I think Jersey City has been heading in a different direction, in part because of the board members who they despise the most. Still, the board members sometimes do feed this perception. But this goes off into another topic on a post that is already too long.

7. The lack of a contract has little, if anything, to do with tax abatements, notwithstanding Yvonne's continued attempts to place Jersey City tax abatements at the center of the Grand Unified Theory.

I did not say I side with anyone, I posted a link. The problem is a set number of people pay school taxes but everyone uses the system, T-Bird. It is the reason I speak against abatements.

Did the union really cancel negotiations meetings? Wow if I was in that union I would vote their leadership out, they don't seem to be representing teachers very well.

You can't possibly be siding with Greco on this, Yvonne. His outrageous negotiating tactics (plus his mere existence on the JCBOE payroll doing nothing other than serving as the union head for $100k+ Per year) is wasting tax dollars. What is he afraid of? Why not put the board's offer to a vote? Or is he grandstanding and delaying to make this an election issue? I think you know the answer to that.

Teachers storm out of school board meeting

The Hudson Reporter
Oct 17, 2014 | 17

JERSEY CITY ? After running through a laundry list of complaints ? not least of which was the demand for a 19 percent pay hike ? Jersey City teachers, at the direction of their union leader, stormed out of the Oct. 16 Board of Education meeting.

Ron Greco, president of the Jersey City Education Association, spoke at the public portion and highlighted some other issues, then directed his membership to leave the building.


Read more: Hudson Reporter - b Teachers storm out of school board meeting b
http://hudsonreporter.com/bookmark/25 ... f-school-board-meeting-b-