Fire a cop, take a vacation...

[Straydog]

Gotta love our elected 'leaders'..........

Double standards in our legislature........ vote em out!

[Kruechief]

"Reasonable expenses" :blush: [img]graemlins/berry.gif[/img]

BS!!!!!

Krue

The Oregon Youth Authority was to lay off 5 Area Coordinators" which were outdated and useless positions that cost the State about $125,000 in wages and benefits each. Instead, the Director, Karen Brazeau, reclassified them and even promoted the other.

[Thumper]

Waste, waste and more waste. Spending like drunken sailors. :depressed: Oregon does not have an income problem. It has a spending problem.

[Straydog]

Oregon has both problems and both need to be addressed.

[Sea Nymph]

oregon isn't the only state going down the financial gutter.

How many teachers went to California?

[Lepper]

For his part, Kulongoski gave up 5 percent of his pay and now flies coach on official business, including a recent trip to China.

why the HECK does he need to go to China anyway!!??? DIdn't he like promise to fix the problem?? and oh even better..

Gov. Ted Kulongoski has said he won't even consider changing the state's tax structure until he can convince Oregonians that Salem is spending the public's money effectively


Well I guess I will see Hell freeze over eventually..

[happybrew]

My brother lives in California, and the governor there ordered every agency to do layoffs. He had just gotten on with the CHP, and was going to go to the academy, but that's off now. And, just like Oregon, they had been running a surplus before the economy tanked. It certainly is a spending problem.

happybrew

[Lepper]

maybe there is a cali onboard here that can clear something up for me.. California has laws that school class rooms can only be so big. I think it is like 20 students or soemthign similar. how can they lay off teachers and get away with it then?
dave

[TheRogue]

why the HECK does he need to go to China anyway!!??? DIdn't he like promise to fix the problem?? and oh even better..

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">My feeling is that China is an EXCELLENT place for him to make an official trade visit!! We are no longer a natural resources driven economy (like it or not, I certainly don't!!). We need to be able to respond to "niche" markets, especially in areas which are just now really becoming available, such as China. Apples, Nike shoes, computer chips, these all are a good tie to China, and should just become more important as time passes. Good for Kulongoski for continuing the relationship with China that was started by Kitz. If it's like many other of these type of visits, big business or the Chinese government probably picked up most of the tab, anyway.

An old business adage, for those who rant that the government should be run like a business....

"Ya gotta spend money to make money!!"

TR

[Straydog]

Well said Rogue.

You do not build our economy without building trade. Seems a pretty good bet to attempt to build trade with one of the most populated countries in the world.

Spending is part of the problem and spending to provide a kicker instead of banking it for later is rediculous. Keep the kicker!

By the way, for you all talking about running government like a business, many major businesses are hurting and laying off people like crazy but are still advertising and marketing, much like a business recruiting trip to China entails.

I think we are going to have a harder time building the economy and business if we don't first invest in education. Of all of the new comers I know, and there are many, all most all said that the quality of the schools were big issues when they chose to relocate and most say they would not have done so today given the shape our schools are in.

Again, you have to spend money to make money.

[El Shaddai]

Investment in our economy is important. However, responsible businesses live within their means.

I heard on Lars Larson last week that the State of Oregon ranks 8th in overall revenue (taxes, fees, surcharges etc) per capita in the United States. ( I have not actually seen the study, but LL is very good at verifying his sources) That means the State of Oregon gets more money from each of us on average than 42 other states do from their people.

This is not an income issue, it is a spending issue.

[Straydog]

LL is very good at verifying his sources and even better at taking data out of context to support his lies and fuel his rants.

Anyone that gives LL as a source of any information for any debate has as much credibilty as LL and that is ZERO.

BTW, responsible businesses live within there means and stop growth when it outpaces their abilty to produce. Are you willing to give the Legislature the power to stop growth at will?

Also, Oregon Revised Statutes says public education will educate all children of the state. Private business has the right to refuse service to anyone. Shall we give the Legislature the power to choose who gets an education and who does not? Our consititution says our government will protect all citizens. Shall we give our Legislature the power to decide who gets police protection and who does not?

The 'run government as a business' argument is as shallow as the "reasoning" of LL.

[ 04-07-2003, 07:27 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

[El Shaddai]

Straydog-

With regards to the kicker; why in the world would we want to fund a government savings account? Especially a government that has never demonstrated fiscal responsibility.......

Education- Schools in bad shape? That's a really interesting comment. I have the State of Oregon 2003-2005 budget on my desk...I am still reading through it (probably 300+ pages). One things that stands out is the 6.3% increase in education spending over the previous budget. Please refer to page B-12 in the Education section. I am also a little curious why the cost to educate our children is 3x higher in public schools vs. private schools? BTW, I have kids in public schools and my kids have had school days cut. Our government has acted in a very irresponsible fashion.....again!

[El Shaddai]

Straydog- Your comments regarding LL are overly emotional and lacking real basis. You may disagree with his positions most of the time. To say he has zero credibility is ludicrous. In his many years on the radio, I am certain he has said something true.

I am not overly fond of President Clinton, however, there are many things he did very well. I believe the same is true for most people....we all add value....just some more than others......(-:

[Straydog]

Comparing private school education to public school education is even more shallow than comparing government to business.

Private schools are not required to provide transportation. Private schools are not required to teach the student that must have full time assistance to even exist, let alone learn. Private schools are not required to educate the child that refuses to follow the rules. Private schools are not required to educate the child that comes from a home where dad is gone, mom is a crack addict and makes money selling her body down on broadway...

As for your reply concerning my comments about that ilk, you are right, I do get emotional about that zealot. He is the most divisive, non productive mouth I have heard in my life. I will though concede, ZERO credibilty is probably a little extreme, he is, in actuality, probably only wrong about 99.9% of the time.

Thank you for setting me straight.

[ 04-07-2003, 05:53 PM: Message edited by: crabbait ]

[El Shaddai]

Straydog- 01/100% concession....if I can get that from you everyday you will be 100% cured in 27.4 years. Fair enough fair now....

I appreciate your passion regarding what you perceive as circumstances unique to public education (and some are). That being said, careful scrutiny of your basis for the cost per child does not bear out. If you totaled the cost of the programs that public schools provide that private schools do not, any non biased person would conclude that the bulk of the dollars do not lie in this part of the education budget. Citing extreme examples is a really ineffective and highly inaccurate premise to support your position. There are exceptions everywhere. They certainly need to be accounted for. However, the vast majority of our kids do not have special education requirements. The social issues you cite are definitely not unique to public education. They are in fact, a societal problem.

BTW- You blew right past my question regarding funding increases for education. That is not ilk, spin or lies. Those are real dollars and that is a real increase...can you explain that?

[Straydog]

I haven't the time to dig up the numbers from my School District Budget but the cost of Special Education has grown considerably the last few years. Pretty much in line with the growth of drug addiction, poverty and other social ills.

Further, look at the cost of insurance and fuel just for two areas of cost growth and quite substantial at that. Then of course, there is the PERS debacle.

I missed one thing in my private/public education comparison, cost of teachers. Private school teachers can be had at a much lower pay scale.

I don't have time to debate you but I have many years experience volunteering in our local schools, am on the district budget committee for a second time and am about to become a board member. If there is money being squandered in other districts, please tell me how to get it as I can tell you we are cut to the bone in our district. And I didn't hear that from Lars Liar, I learned it from first hand experience in the trenches. Bring it on, I am not anxious to cut more yet from our district.

[Kruechief]

SD,

Private schools are not required to educate the child that comes from a home where dad is gone, mom is a crack addict and makes money selling her body down on broadway...

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Wow, do you have the statistics on this? i would say that this variable is less then 2% of the population (distributed throughout the State) and is most likely not the cause you are looking for.

I do get emotional about that zealot. He is the most divisive, non productive mouth I have heard in my life.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">I have found there is a lot of emotional, self-nullifying arguing in the world, and IMHO, it is from the extreme left who are losing their grip on a wiser society. Currently, the extreme left is losing arguments from their stance on our war in Iraq to their favorite drum to beat, “the class war in America.”

Have you seen the Gallup Poll on "Richness in the US"? I am looking for it but can't find a link yet.

Krue

[ 04-07-2003, 06:27 PM: Message edited by: crabbait ]

[Sea Nymph]

Just a littli bit of trivia.... (hope we don't end up in the same boat)

Gov. Davis -D of California - When he first got elected, (the first time) California had a budget surplus. Now the states deficit is greater than all other states deficits added together!

Question for Straydog: Are there any conservative Radio or TV personalities out there that are not liars? If so, who?

SN

[ 04-07-2003, 08:45 AM: Message edited by: Sea Nymph ]

[Straydog]

SN,

I don't watch TV enough to know but I have heard Bill Oreilly on the radio and he is more honest than most of them I have heard. Michael Medvet (sp?), the few times I have listened to him, seems more honest than others, as well.

Please note that lying can consist of not telling all of the facts, taking facts out of context and manipulating facts to make a point.

One quick example........ Gov. Elect Kulongoski said he would create a lot of jobs with bridge contruction and repair projects. Larrs Liar took that and now claims the Gov. promised all the unemployed state jobs building bridges. That is a lie and but one of many, many, many..

[Sea Nymph]

O'Reilly is registered independant and claims to be neither conservative nor liberal.

Don't know who Medvit is.

SN

[Straydog]

Krue,

I never said dysfunctional families were the only reason public schools cost more. That example was to be an abstract view of one circumstance that creates dysfunctional families and is listed as but one of the cost factors. It is not 'the' answer, it is though, one of 'the' reasons public schools cost more to run.

Tell me Krue, how many of the kids you deal with came from the "Leave it to Beaver" households we would like all of our kids to come from? (I believe it was you that put the apples and trees example up one day) How many of your kids came from private school backgrounds?

Let's be honest if nothing else. Dysfunctional families have grown considerably since the '60's. Kids coming from dysfunctional families cost more to educate than Wally and Beaver. There are far fewer kids from dysfunctional families in private school than public.

[ 04-07-2003, 09:14 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

[Straydog]

SN,

I matters not what his party affiliation is. It matters not what he claims to be. If one listens to his opinion it is conservative. You asked about conservative personalities. Are you trying to tell me he is not conservative in his opinion?

[El Shaddai]

Straydog- Are you choosing to ignore the obvious? The education increase? The social ills not equating to the additional revenue required to educate our kids in public schools......wake up!

[Straydog]

El Shadai,

Why are you choosing to ignore that social ills is only one of the causes of increased costs of education? I never said it was the only reason.

Fuel, insurance and electrical costs have all risin significantly. There are fewer entry level teachers and more of our teachers are making more money. There are more requirments mandating Masters Degrees for certain teachers.... those teachers cost more money. Testing, Pres. Bush's "leave no child behind" requires increased testing which increases costs, yet there was no Federal money given to
pay for them.

Also, please don't lose sight of the fact that I am the one that pointed out the irresponsible expenditures of people in Salem and called for thier ouster in the original posting on this thread.

I am sure there are circumstances to be found where education dollars have been spent irresponsibly as well. Stann Bunn comes to mind.

However, this will not negate the lack of dollars in our budgets for education. It can and should help, but it won't fully negate the shortfall.

You remind me of the mantra we have heard since the last regular session and all five special sessions. That mantra is that the money is there and is just being misspent. I ask you to do the same thing I have asked others all along........... show me the money.

It is now obvious that even our most conservative legislators are admiting that we don't have enough money to run our state. I am sure they too would love to be enlightened with your seemingly inside knowledge as to where this money is hiding and how they can put it to work for us.

Please, do your part as an Oregonian, show us the money!

[ 04-07-2003, 11:26 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

[Hoosier Daddy]

Nice reminder that government fiscal responsibility (or lack of it) starts at the top. Although it rolls downhill to state agencies and ends up ultimately costing the citizens, either in reduced efficiency of work being done on their behalf, or in outright waste of our money (as with the chairs for the legislature). I am not impressed with legislators that claim to be trying to "clean up" state government when they can't even clean up their own offices......

[Big Dog]

You make it sound as if $212,000 is no big deal. Would you feel the same if we took back $212,000 from the budget. This is what we know about. What about all the other $212,000 projects that go unnoticed? They all add up at the end of the year. It is thinking like this that is the reason we are in the situation we are in.

You talk about government spending. What about government employees work ethics and the willingness to NOT help the customer.(The public)

[Lepper]

Also remember that several of private schools teachers do not hold credentials and most do not have a teaching degree....

To teach a public school in oregon you have to have 1st a b.a. degree then within 5 yrs you have to have a masters degree.

[Cool Texan]

Originally posted by Big Dog:
You make it sound as if $212,000 is no big deal. Would you feel the same if we took back $212,000 from the budget. This is what we know about. What about all the other $212,000 projects that go unnoticed? They all add up at the end of the year. It is thinking like this that is the reason we are in the situation we are in.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Agreed.

Williams for Governor!

[CATCH AND EAT]

The Rogue, its another one of those vortex days. I agree with you. [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

[TheRogue]

C&E, we gotta stop that, people are going to talk!!

TR

[El Shaddai]

Show you the money? What part of the 6.3% increase did you miss?

[Sea Nymph]

Originally posted by Straydog:
SN,

I matters not what his party affiliation is. It matters not what he claims to be. If one listens to his opinion it is conservative. You asked about conservative personalities. Are you trying to tell me he is not conservative in his opinion?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">so then he's lieing? wouldn't that make him a lieing conservative radio personality? that leaves only one you know of... wow! only one conservative radio personality that might be honest? i agree he agrees more with the conservative argument than that of the liberal. i believe though, it's because a majority of the conservative arguments makes more sense to him. however, he shares some opinions with the liberals too.

[ 04-07-2003, 10:19 PM: Message edited by: crabbait ]

[Straydog]

Whatever sea nymph.

I type fast and no, these little sound bites don't take me much time.

Yes, I am expressing opinions on here. How novel, someone expressing opinions on a forum.....

Party affiliation really has little bearing on a person being liberal or conservative.

Whatever he calls himself is ok but as you said, he seems to be more conservative.

I don't know who all the others might be to judge so 2 of the four I have heard is 50-50.

Go ahead and split hairs, once again, I don't have time.

[ 04-07-2003, 09:59 PM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

[Straydog]

Big Dog,

I don't know why you say I make it sound like no big deal. That was not my intention.

What I did do is point out that relative to the total dollars we need this is a drop in the bucket. Yes, there are other drops in the bucket.

I am still waiting to see the kind of money we need. According to several papers today, so is most everyone that is paying attention.

[ 04-07-2003, 09:51 PM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

[happybrew]

Originally posted by Straydog:


Let's be honest if nothing else. Dysfunctional families have grown considerably since the '60's. Kids coming from dysfunctional families cost more to educate than Wally and Beaver. There are far fewer kids from dysfunctional families in private school than public.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">I would submit that public schools got us into that situation to begin with. They decided to take the place of the parents in teaching values, or the lack thereof, and setting low expectations, which the students then meet. When we started to allow public schools to socialize our kids, the result was quite poor. Then the problems that were caused by it became the justification for throwing more money at the schools that created the problems to begin with. By the way, private schools also have children from dysfunctional families, children with learning disabilities, etc. When I went to a private school for a few years, it was even worse than when I was in public school because parents with problem children gave up on the ability of the public schools to handle the problem, or blamed the public schools for causing the problems. My kids are gifted. This was recognized in kindergarten and first grade. Eventually they tried to label my oldest as ADD because he wasn't doing his work, and didn't seem to be paying attention. When we started to homeschool him, this went away entirely because he was finally being challenged. My daughter is in public school. She started kindergarten this year, then got bumped to first grade. She started out the school year at a second grade reading level. Lo and behold, the teacher is now telling me that she's not paying attention, not finishing her work, acting up in class. It's the same thing all over again. She's not being challenged, so she'll get labeled as a problem. Th problem with the children in public schools being difficult to educate is a problem that has been created by the public schools themselves. More money will not solve the problem, and less money will not make it worse. They need to do things differently.

happybrew

[Straydog]

I don't know how we got where we are socialy but have not seen or read anything to make me think it is the school's fault. I started school in 1960 but don't recall the them telling my parents how to raise me.

I think the "do your own thing" mentality of the 60's, the "me" generation, the acceptance of divorce, the advancement of two parents working outside the home and the prevelance of and accessability to drugs have all taken a toll on our social values but don't see that the fault of public education.

Further, yes, some private schools have kids from dysfunctional families but I am betting if one were to do a study and crunch the numbers, the ratio of kids from 'normal' families is much higher. Plus, the private schools can kick out anyone that makes it tough in the classroom. If a public school does that, they must offer two alternatives for that student which, by the way, is expensive as well.

We haven't talked about the necessity of alternative schools adding to the cost burden of public education.

[Big Dog]

From Your original post.

Despite the state's financial troubles, the managers spent $212,000 for new chairs and farmed out the old ones as surplus -- at 77 cents each

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Here is some money.

[Straydog]

Absolutely Big Dog

Now, let's see, just our district alone is looking at 5.5 million dollar shortage for the next biennium. I think the latest figures of state wide deficits is something like 2 or 3 billion. You have pointed out 212,000. So, for our district, we only have 5,288,000 to go and for the rest of the state, only about 2 and three quarters billion, give or take a few million.

As noted, there is money being mispent and you have confirmed that. However, as also was stated, there isn't enough to do the job we need done and so far you have confirmed that as well.

[ 04-07-2003, 12:32 PM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

[Snapset]

Straydog, you have the inside track on school budgets. Ballpark, can you tell me what percentage of a school districts budget goes to Teachers' compensation?

[k9jeff]

ya all know about the new ODFW building in Salem?? I mean NEW. It all makes me sick.....what about basic servies first, then let re-decorate.

Government cant me run like a business, its not the simple.

[Straydog]

Snapset,

In our district just over 80% goes to personel. This would include certified, classified and administrative.

Of this, a little over 25% is to PERS and another sizable chunk to other employer costs. (insurance and the various tax contributions)

I think it safe to assume that the numbers are pretty much the same state wide.

[ 04-08-2003, 06:43 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

[Straydog]

k9jeff,

What's interesting about the move of ODFW is that the Legislature forced the move on the agency and in times of revenue problems.

As my original post says, vote them out next go 'round!

[ 04-08-2003, 06:41 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

[El Shaddai]

Straydog- We do have some common ground. Ask where the 6.3% increase in funding went at your next school board meeting. I think most of your views on societal issues are accurate, I just know they are not a primary factor in cost differences. Take the private schools out of the debate......I think that point is made.....how would you explain the cost differences in charter schools vs. public schools?

[Hoosier Daddy]

SD, I agree. I happen to think a whole lot of our state budget problems begin and end with the legislature. However, they are not the ones being held accountable. There are of course problems elsewhere, but you have to look at whose watch it's all occurring on.....

[Straydog]

ES,

Dang you, you keep asking good questions and making me later for work! :grin:

I was on the board of an attempted charter school last year. (we were denied by the dist., didn't have the where-withall to fight it at state level)

Our cost reductions came primarily in the form of teacher pay. Charter schools have different mandates concerning the use of currently certified teachers and we would have utilized more non certified professionals and retired teachers. At least that was the plan.

Food services was another area we were going to save. We would have provided no lunches. Same with transportation......none.

Also, parents would have had to commit to a certain number of hours of volunteer time. We would have used them to do a lot of the classified people's jobs.

Our goal was to have a truley community school involving members of the community as volunteers.

I will ask the question you pose concerning the increase. It must be being held hostage in Salem as we are getting substantially less than we did our last (current) biennium. For that matter, we never got the full amount we were told we would get last time!

[ 04-08-2003, 09:55 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

[Kruechief]

SD,

[img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

Now your talking, what a grand paradigm change that would be.

Krue

[Straydog]

Krue,

Thank you! :smile:

The bad news is, the Legislature seems to want to go the other way. I think the idea of one district per county would achieve little beyond lessoning the sense of community in our schools and that is already happening at an alarming rate, in my view.

[El Shaddai]

SD- You have definitely picked up the scent....follow it and see where it goes!