Only two residents attend meeting on ...

Only two residents attend meeting on proposed override - Sentin...

There are 93 comments on the Sentinel & Enterprise story from Jun 3, 2009, titled Only two residents attend meeting on proposed override - Sentin.... In it, Sentinel & Enterprise reports that:

School district officials said they want locals to understand the importance of an upcoming Proposition 2 1/2 override vote, but there were as many presenters at Tuesday's public forum -- two -- as locals in the audience.

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

First Prev
of 5
Next Last
Ashburnham Resident

Worcester, MA

#87 Jun 11, 2009
I hope everyone making all these posts makes sure to go out and vote. Your words are useless if you don't put them into action.
Vote

Chelmsford, MA

#88 Jun 11, 2009
I know I do
Westminster Resident

Chelmsford, MA

#89 Jun 11, 2009
I'm new to this post
I went to another regional school district in MA.
The district is a little smaller that Ash-West
The elementary/ middle school was and still is grades 1 through 8. There was one principal, no asst. principal and one secretary. There were no guidance counselors. Class size was 25 to 30 students and there were no teachers assistants. The high school had a principal and an assistant principal. There was no dean of students. There were 2 guidance counselors. Again, no teacher’s assistants.
The students and teachers managed just fine. If you were having trouble in a class the teacher would offer to stay after school to work with you one on one. Do they do that in Ash-West?
Where did the Ash-West district go wrong? What was the reason for creating teacher assistants, dean of students and assistant principals where one is not needed? Are there other paid positions that really aren’t necessary where those dollars could be used to save the teachers jobs??? I heard the high school has a full time employee to watch students that act up or are sent to detention. Is this true? Don’t teachers rotate detention duty anymore? They did in the school district I went to. And before you ask, no I did not spend any time in detention.
School budgets need to start with teachers. Once the teacher positions are all filled, then start to fill the next most important positions and so on. If it comes down to one principal and no assistant principal per building then that’s what should happen. I still don’t get the teacher’s assistant position? That sounds like money not well spent. If the goal is reduce the class size per teacher then spend the money on teachers and not on positions the district can live without. More money spent on teachers the smaller the class size. Children don’t get an education from an assistant principal or a full time employee (probably with benefits) that runs detention.
I’m not sure that throwing more money into the budget is the solution right now.
WOW

Fitchburg, MA

#90 Jun 14, 2009
Westminster Resident wrote:
I'm new to this post
I went to another regional school district in MA.
The district is a little smaller that Ash-West
The elementary/ middle school was and still is grades 1 through 8. There was one principal, no asst. principal and one secretary. There were no guidance counselors. Class size was 25 to 30 students and there were no teachers assistants. The high school had a principal and an assistant principal. There was no dean of students. There were 2 guidance counselors. Again, no teacher’s assistants.
The students and teachers managed just fine. If you were having trouble in a class the teacher would offer to stay after school to work with you one on one. Do they do that in Ash-West?
Where did the Ash-West district go wrong? What was the reason for creating teacher assistants, dean of students and assistant principals where one is not needed? Are there other paid positions that really aren’t necessary where those dollars could be used to save the teachers jobs??? I heard the high school has a full time employee to watch students that act up or are sent to detention. Is this true? Don’t teachers rotate detention duty anymore? They did in the school district I went to. And before you ask, no I did not spend any time in detention.
School budgets need to start with teachers. Once the teacher positions are all filled, then start to fill the next most important positions and so on. If it comes down to one principal and no assistant principal per building then that’s what should happen. I still don’t get the teacher’s assistant position? That sounds like money not well spent. If the goal is reduce the class size per teacher then spend the money on teachers and not on positions the district can live without. More money spent on teachers the smaller the class size. Children don’t get an education from an assistant principal or a full time employee (probably with benefits) that runs detention.
I’m not sure that throwing more money into the budget is the solution right now.
I like it. Build a budget from bottom up. Not from the top down.
Building expenses
Teachers AND Sports/Band etc.
KIDS DON'T LEARN ANYTHING FROM THE FOLLOWING
Cafeteria workers (gotta feed the kids)
Janitors.
Guidence counselors
Prinicple
Administrtive Assistant.
Superintendent's office (which should be in one of the school building)
If any money left over for personal then maybe.
assistant principal.
I would rather have a case reserve.
querry

Brewster, MA

#91 Jun 14, 2009
I disagree that Guidance Counselors don't teach children anything.

I have known them to help kids get out of abusive homes and relationships because the kids had noone else they trusted to talk to.

I have known them to help countless children find a way to attend college because their parents just weren't educated enough or plugged in enough to help.

I have known them to help kids select the right courseload that will benefit them through their years in school.

I have know them to help parents who need help finding protection for their kids in school who are bullied or pressured and the administration wasn't listening or didn't care.

I'm just surprised, I guess, that you included them on your list. What is your point for listing needed positions, but that you feel students don't learn from them?
WOW

Fitchburg, MA

#92 Jun 14, 2009
querry wrote:
I disagree that Guidance Counselors don't teach children anything.
I have known them to help kids get out of abusive homes and relationships because the kids had noone else they trusted to talk to.
I have known them to help countless children find a way to attend college because their parents just weren't educated enough or plugged in enough to help.
I have known them to help kids select the right courseload that will benefit them through their years in school.
I have know them to help parents who need help finding protection for their kids in school who are bullied or pressured and the administration wasn't listening or didn't care.
I'm just surprised, I guess, that you included them on your list. What is your point for listing needed positions, but that you feel students don't learn from them?
You are right about the guidance counselors. They can be moved above
"KIDS DON'T LEARN ANYTHING FROM THE FOLLOWING"
Supporter of Education

Westminster, MA

#93 Jun 14, 2009
Some of you show some real intelligence, it is not hard to see why you don't get it. Here is an easy retort:

From our Resident College Professor WOW:
"KIDS DON'T LEARN ANYTHING FROM THE FOLLOWING"
"Cafeteria workers (gotta feed the kids)"
Yes, you are right, it is the law.(M.G.L. Ch. 69, Sec. 1C)

"Janitors."...No, why do we need them, just have the kids do the work, and when they can't complete the tasks, we fail them. Real thought put into this one.

"Guidence counselors" See post above

"Prinicple" First of all, it is spelled Principal. Second, have you ever worked when there wasn't someone in charge, the Principal is the Manager for their building.

"Administrtive Assistant." Again, Administrative. But I would agree, if we get rid of all the Managers, why do they need Administrative Assistants.

"Superintendent's office (which should be in one of the school building" You are just so observant, it is in a school building, it is located at Oakmont and has been for at least five years now.

"If any money left over for personal then maybe.
assistant principal." One more, it is personnel, not personal. But if we don't need Principals, we have no need for Assistant Principals.

You alone have presented the reasons why all these positions are more than neccessary. I just hope for the sake of the people that live in these two Towns, that you did not attend Oakmont or any of the other schools in the District.
Westminster Senior

Fitchburg, MA

#94 Jun 15, 2009
Read post #73. I thought we had this debate years ago and decided how much we wanted to spend as a percentage of our overall "budget". Being pro-education is like saying you shouldn't beat your grandmother, you should like apple pie, and love your ugly dog. An emotional bias, and very understandable but we only have so much money to spend.
WOW

Chelmsford, MA

#95 Jun 15, 2009
Supporter of Education wrote:
Some of you show some real intelligence, it is not hard to see why you don't get it. Here is an easy retort:
From our Resident College Professor WOW:
"KIDS DON'T LEARN ANYTHING FROM THE FOLLOWING"
"Cafeteria workers (gotta feed the kids)"
Yes, you are right, it is the law.(M.G.L. Ch. 69, Sec. 1C)
"Janitors."...No, why do we need them, just have the kids do the work, and when they can't complete the tasks, we fail them. Real thought put into this one.
"Guidence counselors" See post above
"Prinicple" First of all, it is spelled Principal. Second, have you ever worked when there wasn't someone in charge, the Principal is the Manager for their building.
"Administrtive Assistant." Again, Administrative. But I would agree, if we get rid of all the Managers, why do they need Administrative Assistants.
"Superintendent's office (which should be in one of the school building" You are just so observant, it is in a school building, it is located at Oakmont and has been for at least five years now.
"If any money left over for personal then maybe.
assistant principal." One more, it is personnel, not personal. But if we don't need Principals, we have no need for Assistant Principals.
You alone have presented the reasons why all these positions are more than neccessary. I just hope for the sake of the people that live in these two Towns, that you did not attend Oakmont or any of the other schools in the District.
Very good. You passed the test. Vote tomorrow.
Supporter Too

Fitchburg, MA

#96 Jun 15, 2009
Supporter of Education wrote:
Some of you show some real intelligence, it is not hard to see why you don't get it. Here is an easy retort:
From our Resident College Professor WOW:
"KIDS DON'T LEARN ANYTHING FROM THE FOLLOWING"
"Cafeteria workers (gotta feed the kids)"
Yes, you are right, it is the law.(M.G.L. Ch. 69, Sec. 1C)
"Janitors."...No, why do we need them, just have the kids do the work, and when they can't complete the tasks, we fail them. Real thought put into this one.
"Guidence counselors" See post above
"Prinicple" First of all, it is spelled Principal. Second, have you ever worked when there wasn't someone in charge, the Principal is the Manager for their building.
"Administrtive Assistant." Again, Administrative. But I would agree, if we get rid of all the Managers, why do they need Administrative Assistants.
"Superintendent's office (which should be in one of the school building" You are just so observant, it is in a school building, it is located at Oakmont and has been for at least five years now.
"If any money left over for personal then maybe.
assistant principal." One more, it is personnel, not personal. But if we don't need Principals, we have no need for Assistant Principals.
You alone have presented the reasons why all these positions are more than neccessary. I just hope for the sake of the people that live in these two Towns, that you did not attend Oakmont or any of the other schools in the District.
I, too, support the school district as I always have and I hope we are able to get the necessary funds to prevent the need to eliminate staff and programs.

You need to be quiet now. After reading through your rants, I am convinced you are not on my team and I certainly am not on your team. You sound like a spoiled rotten 4 year old who is stomping her feet on the kitchen floor and sticking out her bottom lip because mommy won't give you a cookie! Everyone who has read through this post, knows exactly what you support.(Everyone...see post #78).

Please cease. You're not helping us at all.
Supporter of Education

Westminster, MA

#97 Jun 16, 2009
Supporter Too wrote:
<quoted text>
I, too, support the school district as I always have and I hope we are able to get the necessary funds to prevent the need to eliminate staff and programs.
You need to be quiet now. After reading through your rants, I am convinced you are not on my team and I certainly am not on your team. You sound like a spoiled rotten 4 year old who is stomping her feet on the kitchen floor and sticking out her bottom lip because mommy won't give you a cookie! Everyone who has read through this post, knows exactly what you support.(Everyone...see post #78).
Please cease. You're not helping us at all.
Point Taken, I let myself get taken in too much. Thanks for setting me straight.
parent in Ashburnham

Gardner, MA

#98 Dec 3, 2010
Get It Right wrote:
<quoted text>
So maybe we need to do something about overrides, but is telling the taxpayers about layoffs and reductions in services really scare tactics? Come on, you can't have it both ways. If you don't want to hear bad news, don't listen, but don't call it "scare tactics".
One thing the current superintendant and school board has done over the past few years is tell the public what's going on. When they said there would be layoffs, there were. When they had surplus dollars that they promised to send back to the towns, they did. Etc.
Which raises a totally unrelated question: what ever happened to the money that the schools returned to the towns in past years? Shouldn't that have gone to lower the tax rate? Should there have been an "under ride"? Hmmm.
It is scare tactics when they tell my 10 year old they won't have enough teachers for all kids next year. Oh ya and when they told my junior if it wasn't for the republicans we could have more extra curriculars. Learn of what you speak before you try and teach others.
Dmarshall49

Westminster, MA

#99 Apr 2, 2015
Layoffs of teachers are NOT needed... Teachers have contracts, they can't take paycuts and they shouldn't, you can't blame the schools- blame the state for not helping like they should
Bill wrote:
Lets see, You have schools 50%
Then you have police and fire, and dpw, etc.
and public health.
It looks like schools take as much as all four dept combined.
Time to cut the fat LAYOFFS are needed they were warned years ago they are pulling the towns down.
Shame on them they can take paycuts also, Havnt heartd anything about that have you?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 5
Next Last

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.

Westminster Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Safe Stolen In Super Bowl Ring Heist Found (Apr '09) 10 hr Patrick 11
Kevin Lynch, Big Fat Blowhard 16 hr USAF Vet 3
Pathetic Troll Life Mon Jtn 68
News Fitchburg resident publishes novel, children's ... Mon Gilda Horgan 10
Kevin Lynch, Cop Hater, Liar and Nut May 29 Donny Brocker 11
News Fitchburg police: Officer fired shots after sus... May 25 Tell the Truth Kevin 10
Beatles For Sale tribute band returns to Gardne... May 24 New England Music... 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Westminster Mortgages