Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Extras | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Eliminate post in Ripley

May 12, 2013

According to seethroughny.net, Ripley Central Schools Superintendent Karen Krause earned $123,000 in 2012....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(42)

DarkStar

May-21-13 7:31 AM

As I said, I thought it was a 1.7% tax reduction, 4% isn't that bad since if we assume tuitioning the students is 50% of the cost of keeping them in Ripley, which it was actually less then 50%, that would mean a 7% cost savings for the school.

Although the tuition cost does raise the question, why keep RCS open at all if they can tuition their students to a nearby district for 40% of what it's costing them to keep them in ripley. Add in 10% for extra transportation cost and that would see an $8.5 million budget drop to $4.25 million.

Just a thought.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RipleyResident

May-20-13 10:08 PM

They did talk to Sherman, however they were not able to take the entire secondary. Also, CLCS is perhaps 0.2 miles farther from RCS than Sherman.

1.7% reduction in budget, resulted in 4% reduction in taxes. Also, you can't straight up compare and say there should have been a 14% reduction, as without the tuitioning the budget would have increased instead of decreased. Transportation costs increased significantly as well. And as I've said before, the BoE expects further reductions next year, but went conservative this year not really knowing fully what to expect.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PizzaMaker

May-20-13 3:36 PM

So I wonder if BOE even talked to other districts (like Sherman for example who shared a football team with Ripley and had good test scores and is nearby). I think they did not, but as was said - I wonder why...

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

uhgtbk

May-20-13 1:53 PM

Dark... Ripley BOE chose to tuition students to one of the most expensive and wasteful districts around; it isn't cheap. That is one reason why they are not saving much.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DarkStar

May-20-13 1:51 PM

4% tax rate reduction?

Sorry I must have read that wrong, I thought it was a 1.7% tax rate reduction

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DarkStar

May-20-13 1:50 PM

Eliminating 16 teachers, if the average pay, with benifits, was $75k that alone would result in a $1.2 million dollar cost reduction.

While I can't find last years budget numbers but even using this years that $1.2 million is just over 14% of the total budget.

Now add to that the fact that the costs given for tuitioning the students was less then half of what Ripley was currently spending per student (not sure how that works) so even if the savings is only half of that total that still would be just over a 7% cost savings so a 1.2% cut is stingy.

I fully support consolidation, but when groups consolidate if look at the savings as a windfall and find other ways to spend it nothing will be accomplished. I'm just trying to figure out if that is being done here?

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RipleyResident

May-20-13 11:06 AM

16 teachers as I understand it. 1.7% budget reduction, 4% tax rate reduction, when most other districts are increasing, with more reduction expected next year. Remember, they did not want to cut the budget too much with no real blueprint with what's going on. Kept the guidance counselor this year to help with the transition.

The reduction was never projected to be huge, but the lowest in 8 years isn't bad...

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DarkStar

May-20-13 7:46 AM

"All of the secondary teachers have been eliminated for next year."

Do you know how many positions that is? I ask because I'm curious that they tuition have the student body, for less then half of they they have historically paid per student in Ripley so I expected something more than a token reduction, although maybe I was just being naive.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PizzaMaker

May-19-13 2:17 PM

Just so you know. Principal is the person (your pal is an easy way to remember the difference.) Principle is an accepted or professed rule of action or conduct. Thanks for the insight/information.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RipleyResident

May-18-13 9:44 PM

Actually, this year it will be two, one principle & one superintendent.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PizzaMaker

May-18-13 6:28 PM

Oops! You are right! It just seems like 4 1/2. This year 3 1/2. Dean of students used to be responsibility of the HS principal. Still too many for so few students!

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RipleyResident

May-18-13 10:37 AM

4-1/2? Now you are really getting out there. Also, for next year, there will be 1 superintendent & 1 principle. That is the administration. Dean of students is not an administrative position.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PizzaMaker

May-17-13 9:38 AM

RipleyRes - Respectfully, it really doesn't matter what additional responsibilities the Assistant Principal has or that the Dean of Students is also a HS science teacher. What matters is that for such a small student population, Ripley has more administrators (4 1/2 positions) than they have had for the last 20 years or more. Shame on the BOE for not addressing that issue. In addition the Superintendent (and her spouse) have Health insurance for life while staff have nothing, but that's another topic for another day.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RipleyResident

May-16-13 12:09 PM

Pizza - The Assistant Principle is a part time position not sure what she does the rest of the time off the top of my head though. The Dean of Students is a part time position, he is also a HS science teacher. In order for the people of Ripley to ask the board anything, they would have to go to the meetings. At the budget review, I think there were 4-5 citizens.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ciecie

May-15-13 10:53 PM

i'm wondering if all the schools in the county will be county schools like they are down south and in other parts of the country sometime in the future.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PizzaMaker

May-15-13 10:18 PM

What is the logical answer to this? And why at Ripley do they currently have a fulltime Superintendent, fulltime Principal, fulltime Assistant Principal and part-time Dean of Students (for discipline) for 320 students? The reasonable answer is to have one person fulfill the role of Superintendent and Principal – especially next year when they will have such a small number of students. The answer to the second question is beyond my comprehension. I just wonder why the people of Ripley haven’t asked the same question – or if they have, what possible answer the School Board could have given.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RipleyResident

May-14-13 12:37 PM

And proud, just for the record, teachers get the summers off, administration does not. They work through the summer. I'd say it's more fair that you chip in to pay a superintendent salary than you chipping in to pay welfare for somebody that is capable of working but instead just works the system. If you don't want to get an education, don't complain about making $30k per year, but even w/o education, I'd think you could do better...

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RipleyResident

May-14-13 12:34 PM

Just to set a couple things straight:

All of the secondary teachers have been eliminated for next year.

The school is actively working on a couple of agreements to rent out portions of the building.

This next year is a transition, no other school district has done this before, so there is no blueprint. There is a very good possibility that taxes will be further reduced for the 2014-15 year.

Every district needs a superintendent.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ProudToBeUnAmerican

May-13-13 9:15 PM

I wish I had summers off and still earned $123,000 a year. Of course I'm too lazy to get the required education to do so, but is it fair that I have to work twice as hard for 1/4 the pay while all the while paying her salary?

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Captain

May-13-13 7:41 PM

Dc sees no wrong w/the runaway spending & endless cost increases for public ED, and attempts to justify these costs by trying to convince the public that it actually amts to a mere $1.50/hr per student, or that district residents only pay 25%, while NYS picking up the rest? This can only mean 1 of 2 things, Dc is either a public ED employee or a sympathetic BOE member.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DKexpat

May-13-13 5:01 PM

DarkStar, ya beat me to it. :-)

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DarkStar

May-13-13 4:15 PM

"...Cronig you must be just a foolish poster. Noone can be that ignorant.And you are not a misogynt..."

Hello pot, meet kettle.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Steiner

May-13-13 2:44 PM

the misogynt dc with his clueless church lady gaggle is at it again. He quotes the market for a declining school disrtrict. Dc, is there any govt program you disagree with ? Hey dcronig where does the rest of the supers salary come from ? the taxpayers.Are you that ignorant or what ? Cronig you must be just a foolish poster. Noone can be that ignorant.And you are not a misogynt ? How many times have you said clueless church lady gaggle ? Dont you know anything else ? What is wrong with you ?

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DarkStar

May-13-13 12:13 PM

Also with the reduction in students should come a need for fewer ancillary services.

Fewer classrooms in use means fewer that need to be cleaned daily. It also would allow shutting off parts of the building, be it classrooms or wings, which could be locked off and powered down completely, which would save on staffing and utility costs.

And of course with half as many students attending the district the number of administrative personel needed would be drasitically reduced as well.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DarkStar

May-13-13 12:08 PM

Nothing is really going to change until NYS itself steps in and mandates mergers between districts.

While I applaud Riply for tuitioning some of the students to another district I would like to point out that the amount they said they would be paying per student is less then half of what they pay to teach them in Ripley.

Using the current budget of $8.4M and 320 students that comes to $26,250 per student.

But they were saying last year that it would cost about $10k per student to tuition them to another school, but let's say it's 50% of what they spend so $13,125.

That means that if they tuition 160 students the school needs $2.1M less this year then last but instead there was a token decrease.

Now I understand buildings and maintenance are fairly constantly, and I could even see adding one or two of the grade 7-12 teachers on to enhance the curriculum of the remaining grades but shouldn't the rest of the teachers be let go?

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 42 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web