State cuts put regional busing money ...

State cuts put regional busing money in jeopardy - Sentinel & E...

There are 19 comments on the Sentinel & Enterprise story from Apr 20, 2009, titled State cuts put regional busing money in jeopardy - Sentinel & E.... In it, Sentinel & Enterprise reports that:

Municipal budgets aren't the only ones that would suffer under the House Ways and Means Committee's proposed fiscal year 2010 budget, released last week.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Sentinel & Enterprise.

beenthere

Peabody, MA

#1 Apr 20, 2009
"The transportation-reimbursement issue stems from a state law passed in 1952 guaranteeing 100 percent reimbursement for regional school transportation, according to J.C. Considine, a spokesman for the state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.

Ash-West School Committee Chairman David Christianson explained that state leaders formed the law as an incentive for towns to regionalize their public schools
"

Let this be a warning to all of the schools considering regionalization. The State will promise you everything but they will not deliver when the time comes;
Jay

Westminster, MA

#2 Apr 20, 2009
No more overrides period.
moron

Leominster, MA

#3 Apr 20, 2009
Maybe if they could reduce special ed funding they could us the money to benefit the regular students.
josh wright

United States

#4 Apr 20, 2009
Maybe you need to get your self a special ed kid to understand what that entails. Then you might appreciate the funding and requirements it takes to get these kids through one school day.
Jim

Westminster, MA

#5 Apr 20, 2009
Let the regular kids fend for themselfs The special need kids need the education more!
The Silent Minority

Fitchburg, MA

#6 Apr 20, 2009
Sounds like another reason to consider 4 day school weeks.
Get the parents more involved on the day they stay home.
I know this isnt popular with the parents but everyone wanted change, they got it. Free daycare is over.
Time to step up to the plate. No more tax increase, time to work within our means. I know that I have learn to do that as well as many other taxpayers. Trim the admin at the schools and give the students quality education with the 4 days they have.
Thomas Paine JR

Gardner, MA

#7 Apr 20, 2009
Great let's lay off more teachers to cover this budget shortfall. 40 kids a class sounds great. I thought Deval Patrick was an "education governor". He's screwing the educational system and hurting our children's education.
Regionalization Savings

Sterling, MA

#8 Apr 21, 2009
I thought that regionalization saves money. So far I have found it very hard to find any savings. So I pay for busing in my own city, and now I find out that I have been paying for busing around the state for 50 years!! On the surface, regionalization makes sense, but with most things you need to delve deeper. The more I delve, any good citizen most look closer and see more pitfalls than promises. And from school officials to the State, it is all promises and too many pitfalls. The weight still is bore by the poor citizen and the people who are moving out. Or children are being sold a promise of a new high school and enhanced education, and no time-table can be garaunteed. These same things can be promised via distance learning, dual enrollment and Virtual High School.... and to invest in our current schools. The point is that many people think that they can gain, and those assumptions are erroneous. The actuality is that control is shifted, students spend 1 hour and thirty minutes on a bus that no one can afford (backed up by a 50 year old law, oh and horse and carriage have right of way with pedestrians 1837) to be a person in 700 per class year, and everyone is waiting 15 years for a new school that the administration should plan to replace every 50 years. Regionals should pay their own way, I will keep sending money to the Big Dig....
LTandV

Wellesley, MA

#9 Apr 21, 2009
If state law guarantees 100 percent reimbursement for regional schools, isn't it against the law not to fund it?

This couldn't come at a worse time. If the state wants to encourage Ayer, Lunenburg and Shirley to form a school region, they should not take away this very significant incentive.

Lunenburg residents are already very skeptical about forming a regional school district. Now they have even more reason to doubt.
beenthere

Peabody, MA

#10 Apr 21, 2009
LTandV wrote:
If state law guarantees 100 percent reimbursement for regional schools, isn't it against the law not to fund it?
This couldn't come at a worse time. If the state wants to encourage Ayer, Lunenburg and Shirley to form a school region, they should not take away this very significant incentive.
Lunenburg residents are already very skeptical about forming a regional school district. Now they have even more reason to doubt.
Three magic words in the law get the Legislature off the hook.....

"subject to appropriation"
josh wright

Cambridge, MA

#11 Apr 21, 2009
Lunenburg residents should treat this regionalization like a Hedge Fund from wall St. Sounds great in theory but someday the house of cards will collapse and they will be left supporting Shirley like a toxic asset.
discusted with you

Leominster, MA

#12 Apr 21, 2009
moron wrote:
Maybe if they could reduce special ed funding they could us the money to benefit the regular students.
As a parent of a "Special Child" who needs this funding, I find your answer to only benefit "THE REGULAR STUDENTS" not only "REPULSIVE", but also "DISCUSTING". What kind of a human being ( And I use this term loosely ) are you??? Do you mean that they aren't worthy because of their Disability?? I hope to God that you never have to walk in someone elses shoes, you piece of work. God help us all if you do....
My child brings more love to all our lives every single day. Yes, it is hard to take, but do we complain? NOOOOOOO. It is however hard to take when "PEOPLE" like you think that they are worthless human beings, and for that it makes "ME SICK".
Just me

Millbury, MA

#13 Apr 21, 2009
discusted with you wrote:
<quoted text>
As a parent of a "Special Child" who needs this funding, I find your answer to only benefit "THE REGULAR STUDENTS" not only "REPULSIVE", but also "DISCUSTING". What kind of a human being ( And I use this term loosely ) are you??? Do you mean that they aren't worthy because of their Disability?? I hope to God that you never have to walk in someone elses shoes, you piece of work. God help us all if you do....
My child brings more love to all our lives every single day. Yes, it is hard to take, but do we complain? NOOOOOOO. It is however hard to take when "PEOPLE" like you think that they are worthless human beings, and for that it makes "ME SICK".
Absolutely right. As long as we don't take education away from the other kids. Why should all kids suffer for the good of one? Special ed should also only pay for the closest available schooling. If the parents wants something more, then they should pay for it.
WOW

Gardner, MA

#14 Apr 21, 2009
moron wrote:
Maybe if they could reduce special ed funding they could us the money to benefit the regular students.
AMEN
OMG

United States

#15 Apr 21, 2009
America!!! What a Country!!! Now we can fight amongst ourselves (children) which (who) is worth it and who is not! This America is not the America I grew to love, and learned about in school! Busing is a big issue! For those of us in the rural areas who have to deal with extra miles added because of "bridges" being out! I am sympathetic to the bus companies in the rural areas for this is a "small business" they are not living large. But because they care and choose not to "rape" their peers!
For those of you who are "lucky" enough to not have a beautiful special needs child..... Vent your anger at the powers that be somewhere else. These parents did not choose this for themselves or their child, any parent of a SPED student should be applauded and held on high for their commitment to their child! Those of you who choose to condemn them financially.....OMG!!!!!
LTandV

Shirley, MA

#16 Apr 22, 2009
OMG wrote:
America!!! What a Country!!! Now we can fight amongst ourselves (children) which (who) is worth it and who is not! This America is not the America I grew to love, and learned about in school! Busing is a big issue! For those of us in the rural areas who have to deal with extra miles added because of "bridges" being out! I am sympathetic to the bus companies in the rural areas for this is a "small business" they are not living large. But because they care and choose not to " **** " their peers!
For those of you who are "lucky" enough to not have a beautiful special needs child..... Vent your anger at the powers that be somewhere else. These parents did not choose this for themselves or their child, any parent of a SPED student should be applauded and held on high for their commitment to their child! Those of you who choose to condemn them financially.....OMG!!!!!
I agree with you. Don't let a couple of selfish, mean-spirited people get you down. They probably think they're special or more deserving because they happen to have "normal" children. What a crock! How do people get the idea that you must take away from others in order to get more for yourself?
Just me

United States

#17 Apr 23, 2009
LTandV wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree with you. Don't let a couple of selfish, mean-spirited people get you down. They probably think they're special or more deserving because they happen to have "normal" children. What a crock! How do people get the idea that you must take away from others in order to get more for yourself?
Bravo!!!! That is the whole point!!!!!!!!
LTandV

Harvard, MA

#18 Apr 24, 2009
Just me wrote:
<quoted text>
Bravo!!!! That is the whole point!!!!!!!!
Thanks for the kudos, but didn't you write:

"As long as we don't take education away from the other kids. Why should all kids suffer for the good of one? Special ed should also only pay for the closest available schooling. If the parents wants something more, then they should pay for it."

In Shirley, the closest available schooling for Special Ed is out of town because they don't have their own programs. The Shirley school system must pay for these out-of-town programs, including transportation. Are you saying that the parents should pay for something the school system chose not to include?
Just me

United States

#19 Apr 24, 2009
No that is not what I am saying. If your town does not offer the needed schooling, then they should pay for the nearest available schooling. That is what we pay taxes for. I have no problem with that. My problem is with parents who insist that the kids be transported halfway across the state to a school of the parents choice. If you want that for your kid, then you should pay for it and not the school system. Many towns have adopted that approach and all I am saying is that our school system should do that too. We are fighting for survival, but yet spending millions in elective schooling. That is taking away from other kids. Special needs or not.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Bolton Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Police arrest log (Dec '10) Mar 30 nick 11
Cousin is 13 and I'm 15 and I wanna have sex wi... (Jan '15) Feb '18 Dr Pill 7
k1kw Jan '18 Citizen 1
News Drug Charges Follow ATF Raid (Sep '12) Jan '18 Tameeka n Carl 10
News Paul J. McCarthy, 86, of Marlborough Jan '18 cindy lou 1
News Bolton call firefighter charged in Lancaster, M... (May '15) Oct '17 Peaches 12
News Solar power microgrid goes online in Cuttyhunk ... (Aug '17) Aug '17 Solarman 1

Bolton Jobs

Personal Finance

Bolton Mortgages