New Math at FOX
remember when

United States

#61 Jan 23, 2013
Patrick wrote:
Sam, prejudge if you like then go to church and read in your bible what it says about judging.
Oh good god! Out comes the bible card in defense ! Are you serious ??
You don't mind all that ADULTERY in the administration circle. You don't mind all the DECEIT standing in the hall knowing full well what relatives are getting hired. You don't mind the basically STEALING jobs from more qualified applicants. You don't mind all the LYING to the public trying to cover it up.
Partner, when you get all that cleaned up we will discuss my judging.
I do not intend to ever let a high school grad due surgery on my body. Your stupidity is overwhelming !

Tell me how that HS grad will be qualified in two years ?
Then we will discuss reality.
Sam Ferry

Saint Louis, MO

#62 Jan 23, 2013
Patrick wrote:
<quoted text>
You make a ton of ASSUMPTIONS in your statement that just don't hold water. You say there were 100 more qualified managers better than her. You have absolutely NO WAY to know that for a fact. Why didn't they all apply? There was nothing saying they could not have applied.
Again, you say she would not be hired in another district...NO WAY you can prove that either since she did not apply in those districts. She may have very well gotten hired in another district. Your assumption is that the ONLY REASON she was hired is because of relationships.
You are making judgements and assumptions that we teach our children not to make about people all the time.
Also, you obviously have never hired people. You "RARELY" if ever get someone with all of the qualifications you are asking for. You take all that have applied, interview them for fit, and then hire the one you think will do the best job based on the interview. I believe that is what was done here and I believe you have to WAIT TO JUDGE.
I understand, and it is okay, I have seen the decay of logic and fairness before. Did you know that to this day there are people who actually defend O.J. Simpson? They have that right. But based on even limited facts the rest of us have always known that he was guilty. You have every right to defend the actions of those who hired Kelly Nash. But for me I will stand up for those that got screwed over in that hire!!! Anyone can call it what they like but those that were qualified know what really happened, I choose to stand with them!
Barb

Turtle Lake, ND

#63 Jan 23, 2013
remember when wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh good god! Out comes the bible card in defense ! Are you serious ??
You don't mind all that ADULTERY in the administration circle. You don't mind all the DECEIT standing in the hall knowing full well what relatives are getting hired. You don't mind the basically STEALING jobs from more qualified applicants. You don't mind all the LYING to the public trying to cover it up.
Partner, when you get all that cleaned up we will discuss my judging.
I do not intend to ever let a high school grad due surgery on my body. Your stupidity is overwhelming !
Tell me how that HS grad will be qualified in two years ?
Then we will discuss reality.
Again, who are you to judge. We will discuss your judgemental bias NOW. You were not in the interview, you know nothing!!!. This person could have really been the best interviewee and had the best ideas of how to run this operation. I know you think you are smarter than everyone else but it is YOU who is showing their stupidity by "pre-judging" someone you know nothing about. You're not even giving this person the 2 years to prove you wrong. Reality is YOU'RE JUDGEMENTAL. If you were in her position you would want the chance to prove yourself. She deserves that chance.

Were not talking surgery here. We are talking managing people is a process which has already bee extablished.

So it is "YOUR OVERWHELMING STUPIDITY" that is showing with your pre-judgement of someone you do not know and have no right to judge.
Top Gunn

United States

#64 Jan 23, 2013
Barb wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, who are you to judge. We will discuss your judgemental bias NOW. You were not in the interview, you know nothing!!!. This person could have really been the best interviewee and had the best ideas of how to run this operation. I know you think you are smarter than everyone else but it is YOU who is showing their stupidity by "pre-judging" someone you know nothing about. You're not even giving this person the 2 years to prove you wrong. Reality is YOU'RE JUDGEMENTAL. If you were in her position you would want the chance to prove yourself. She deserves that chance.
Were not talking surgery here. We are talking managing people is a process which has already bee extablished.
So it is "YOUR OVERWHELMING STUPIDITY" that is showing with your pre-judgement of someone you do not know and have no right to judge.
Now Barb,
Do you know Kelly Nash? Here's the deal, degrees are required in these positions for a reason. Governent food requirements, nutrional values....etc. This was not entry level, and the pay is excessive compared to other districts. Above all Kids are the most important thing here, you wouldn't want a teacher without a degree teaching your child, with a wait and see how she does before she can be removed attitude. Unless you're related to said individual.
Barb

Turtle Lake, ND

#65 Jan 23, 2013
Top Gunn wrote:
<quoted text>
Now Barb,
Do you know Kelly Nash? Here's the deal, degrees are required in these positions for a reason. Governent food requirements, nutrional values....etc. This was not entry level, and the pay is excessive compared to other districts. Above all Kids are the most important thing here, you wouldn't want a teacher without a degree teaching your child, with a wait and see how she does before she can be removed attitude. Unless you're related to said individual.
No, no relation, just a fair person. Entry level? I believe this person has over 15 years of management experience. I believe with the program that is in place, if she can "manage" them well the children in our district will be served very well.

Stop Pre-judging!!!!
Old Sage

High Ridge, MO

#66 Jan 23, 2013
I have to agree with Patrick and Barb.

At first glance, the hiring looks fishy. Then again, we really don't know, do we? I don't.

It's like the adultery comment above. Ruthless. Is it true? I don't know. Do you have photos with that day's newspaper in the shot? How about sworn affidavits? I will not acknowledge hearsay and this pertains to many, if not most, of the comments made in these threads.

Some (but not all) the statements presented as "fact" on here are despicable, really.

Think before you post. Wisdom is only attainable by recognizing one's own ignorance.

One other thing: I would never condone allowing a high school graduate to run a nuclear power plant, but I can't see hiring someone with a PhD in nuclear engineering to run our food service, either.

Peace to all.
Money

Saint Louis, MO

#67 Jan 23, 2013
bond trader wrote:
Here is how the deal works.
Fox Schools have a voter approved $0.33 tax levy to support or pay the interest and principal payments on their outstanding debt. In 2012, the district was making the final interest/principal payment on a 20 year bond issue. When the bonds are paid off, the related tax levy expires and property owner taxes decrease accordingly.
Instead, the district proposed to retain the expiring tax rate by asking voters to approve a “no tax increase” bond issue. This allows Fox to keep the debt tax levy at $0.33 and borrow more money in the financial markets to construct capital improvements within the district.
In August 2012, Fox Schools asked voters to approve issuing $18.5M of bonds. Voters approved.
Somehow, Fox seriously underestimated market conditions, because the expiring tax rate would support borrowing $23M rather than $18.5M. If Fox issued its $18.5M of bonds with a stated interest rate of 3.0%(matching market rates), the district would still need to lower its tax levy.
Market conditions determine interest rates and bond prices. If a school tries to sell bonds with stated interest rates at market rates, the bonds will sell at par value, meaning that $18.5M of bonds will sell for about $18.5M. If the stated interest rate on the bonds is below market rates, the bonds will sell at a discount, or a price less than $18.5M, so that bond investors will still realize market rate earnings from the investment (but the district will owe $18.5M of principal to bond holders). If the stated interest rate on the bonds is above market rates, the bonds will sell at a premium, or a price greater than $18.5M, so that bond investors will still realize market rate earnings from the investment (but again, the district will owe $18.5M of principal to bond holders).
The difference between bonds selling at a discount, or par, or at a premium is the amount of interest costs over the life of the bond issue.
In this case, Fox miscalculated the total bonds needed to be issued at market interest rates to use up the entire $0.33 tax levy. Fox did not want to give up any tax levy, so the stated interest rate on the bonds was increased in order to use up the tax levy. This leaves Fox paying a higher than market interest rate, and makes bond investors willing to pay a premium for the bonds.
This tactic is very questionable, because it effectively circumvents the voter approval. The act of issuing $18.5M of bonds at premium interest rates is the equivalent of issuing $23.0M of bonds at market rates. Questions arise because voters did not approve issuing $23.0M of bonds. Most reputable investment bankers and bond attorneys would not cooperate with this scheme.
The pain will be the future interest costs. In order for Fox to gain a 25% premium on the sale of the bonds, the interest rate needed to increase approximately 75%(from a market rate of 3.0% to a stated interest rate between 5.0% and 5.5%).
Clearly this transaction is an attempt to circumvent the voter approved limit of $18.5M. The premium received from the bond sale is actually upfront reimbursement of the excess interest costs on the deal. Ideally, this upfront reimbursement would be set aside to pay future interest costs. Instead, Fox plans to spend the funds on projects in order to avoid reducing the tax rate.
Sadly, Fox administrators choose to explain the transaction by saying “the stars aligned” and good fortune has shined down upon the school. This is an illegitimate explanation of this financial transaction. The true explanation is that Fox is attempting to outwit the public in its quest to avoid lowering its tax rate.
Since none of the amateur financial wizards have challenged this post, it appears that Bond Trader has made his/her point. Thanks for the post.
remember when

United States

#68 Jan 23, 2013
Barb wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, who are you to judge. We will discuss your judgemental bias NOW. You were not in the interview, you know nothing!!!. This person could have really been the best interviewee and had the best ideas of how to run this operation. I know you think you are smarter than everyone else but it is YOU who is showing their stupidity by "pre-judging" someone you know nothing about. You're not even giving this person the 2 years to prove you wrong. Reality is YOU'RE JUDGEMENTAL. If you were in her position you would want the chance to prove yourself. She deserves that chance.
Were not talking surgery here. We are talking managing people is a process which has already bee extablished.
So it is "YOUR OVERWHELMING STUPIDITY" that is showing with your pre-judgement of someone you do not know and have no right to judge.
You listen here missy.....this is not your business or corporation to run in the ground as you see fit.

The school belongs to us the tax payer. We pay !
There are rules , regulations and guidelines you are to follow. If you can't, or refuse to follow those then you will be sent packing. I don't care who you know or blow.
Why is that so hard for you to underdstand ?

Manage ???? Malarky !!! A disaster in the making and I'm not the only one that thinks so.
Haters

Imperial, MO

#69 Jan 23, 2013
If the district had the opportunity to take advantage of the market and benefit from it so be it. The district will use the money to take care of capital improvements that are needed. Improvements in the athletic areas are included in that. Since the events at Sandy Hook I am glad that the district is able to provide some much needed changes to security features across the district.
Timmy B

Alexandria, VA

#70 Jan 24, 2013
remember when wrote:
<quoted text>You listen here missy.....this is not your business or corporation to run in the ground as you see fit.

The school belongs to us the tax payer. We pay !
There are rules , regulations and guidelines you are to follow. If you can't, or refuse to follow those then you will be sent packing. I don't care who you know or blow.
Why is that so hard for you to underdstand ?

Manage ???? Malarky !!! A disaster in the making and I'm not the only one that thinks so.
Run what into the ground? The district performs at a very high level. If the negatives (that you seem to see) of the district are owned by Dr. Critchlow, the same must be true of the immense and numerous positives. You can't have it both ways.

As to the nepotism, in regards to teacher hirings, this a rather moot point. Many teachers that have been hired in the C-6 district have been hired because they are from here. Why should someone be disqualified from working in their home district because of their last name?
Goin Old School

Saint Louis, MO

#71 Jan 24, 2013
Maybe they hired Bernie M. to handle this for them?
Goin Old School

Saint Louis, MO

#72 Jan 24, 2013
Barb, wrong again, she has 2 years as an assistant manager. Do you thing that she did purchasing for McD's NO! That is all done by corporate, did she plan menus NO! She did not invent the McRib. Did she do inventory or cost analysis, NO, again done by corporate. She is as Jethro Bodine would put it a "Fry Cook"!
Jed

Arnold, MO

#73 Jan 24, 2013
Weeellll doggies! Things are not good at the district when it is run with fear and intimidation. It is also not good when graduating class numbers are inflated by graduating students who do not do the work required of all the other students. It is also not good when children are encouraged to ride the bus when walking would be healthier because the district gets more money that way. It is not good when money is mysteriously found to do things when it wasn't available before begging for tax increases. We need a watchdog group like Rockwood. Look at their site and what they have been able to accomplish, might guide the effort here.
Top Gunn

United States

#74 Jan 24, 2013
Haters wrote:
If the district had the opportunity to take advantage of the market and benefit from it so be it. The district will use the money to take care of capital improvements that are needed. Improvements in the athletic areas are included in that. Since the events at Sandy Hook I am glad that the district is able to provide some much needed changes to security features across the district.
The Bond was for 18.5 not 23 million. It's taxpayer money and not approved. Nice quotes from the Leader, you sound exactly like Pete Nicholas. If you want to pay the District extra tax money, go for it. Leave the rest of us out.
Hmmmmm

Imperial, MO

#75 Jan 24, 2013
I doubt Pete Nicolas post on here. He is not very computer savvy. Just saying.
Timothy

United States

#76 Jan 24, 2013
Goin Old School wrote:
Barb, wrong again, she has 2 years as an assistant manager. Do you thing that she did purchasing for McD's NO! That is all done by corporate, did she plan menus NO! She did not invent the McRib. Did she do inventory or cost analysis, NO, again done by corporate. She is as Jethro Bodine would put it a "Fry Cook"!
Barb is NOT wrong again, you need to look closer at Mrs. Nash's credentials. She did "manage" a group of people just like she will do for our district.
drrd

Warrensburg, MO

#77 Jan 24, 2013
Timothy wrote:
<quoted text>
Barb is NOT wrong again, you need to look closer at Mrs. Nash's credentials. She did "manage" a group of people just like she will do for our district.
This position is a Director position - it is much more than scheduling employees and being "likeable". The primary functions of this position are not anything that an assistant manager from McDonald's would possess the ability to do. An assistant manager is a "lead" person. As an assistant, she would not be in charge of developing a budget, she would not evaluate the menu, she would not have determined equipment needed and sought to get the best deal, she worked in one building not multiple buildings with primarily prn employees as her workforce. A Director position requires much more than a manager at McDonald's would even possess. If she was such good management material, why did she remain an Asst Manager? I am sure McDonald's is always on the look out for management material employees to move into higher level positions. It is ludicrous to think she was chosen for her management experience!!!
Top Gunn

Des Moines, IA

#79 Jan 28, 2013
Has anyone else seen how Jim Berblinger tries to explain the extra bond money?
embarassed taxpayer

Saint Louis, MO

#80 Feb 22, 2013
Dried Boogers wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, you are embarrassing, I'll give you that.
You are stupid FAT BOOGER at that HA! HA!
embarrassedtaxpa yer

Saint Louis, MO

#81 Feb 22, 2013
Steve T wrote:
<quoted text>
Rickman and Chelew didn't "bow down" to the school board? You have completely gotten the cart before the horse. The School board is elected to RUN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. The ONLY person they actually hire is the superintendant. The others hired in the district are hired by the administration and then approved by the board of education members. They are to basically "trust" the administration to hire the best people and if not, hold them, the administrators accountable for hiring the wrong person. That is how the system works.
Hey dumb shit, Read more carefully next time. I SAID THEY DIDN"T BOW DOWN TO THE SCHOOL BOARD DAH!NOT LIKE THE PRESENT SUPER.PLEASE GIVE ME SOME more BIG MAC YUMMY YUMMY. That's Why both were GREAT SUPER'S.( Rickman + Chelew.)

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.

Pacific Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
25 people Arrested on Federal Meth Charges (Sep '13) Fri Technology 50
Fox C6 Board of Education : Discussion (Jun '14) Thu yes 1,296
shop & save parking lot Aug 31 north co transplant 1
Anyone Know This Woman? Aug 25 lolz 6
John Griggs Aug 23 DOC 2
Review: Bays ET Highspeed Internet Aug 18 nointernet 2
News 2 bodies found in Pacific apartment Jun '15 Concerned Neighbor 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Pacific Mortgages