Hogan to cut MCPS budget

[Anonymous]

MCPS does a much better job of integration than small town school systems that ignore their urban neighbors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good for Hogan. There is so much waste in MCPS.

Start with layoffs at the Carver Center to make up for the budget shortfall. Is Starr really worth what he is paid? Do we really need to spend so much money "investigating" the school start time debate? What about the BOE Credit Card fiasco? Etc. MCPS is an over bloated bureaucracy that has room for fiscal scrutiny. Is Starr up for the task to trimming costs? Heck no. He should be the first on the chopping block.

Starr is in charge of a school district with 153,000 students, 202 schools, 22,392 employees (including 12,698 teachers), a $2.28 billion operating budget, and a $1.53 billion six-year capital budget. Plus the weather closing decisions. For this, he gets paid $250,000 per year. Do you consider this salary inappropriate?

(For what it's worth, I wouldn't do the job for less than $500,000 a year, just because of the inevitable complaining about the weather closing decisions.)

What's more, his entire salary makes up 1% of the $17 million less that MCPS will get from the state under Hogan's proposed budget, and 0.01% of the annual operating budget.

I agree. The salary is fine.

Starr, however, is an idiot and must go. I'd even agree to a pay increase for a supt who actually HAD a vision and could follow through on practical initiatives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And you are surprised that the republican governor plans to cut funding for education???

Just wait until he cuts funding for the university system and tuition jumps up significantly (noting that O'Malley was committed to funding the university system so tuition wouldn't be increased).

You get what you vote for. Way to go, Marylanders.

Maybe after class sizes increase and services are cut folks will put a Dem back in Annapolis.

Oh please.

Versus Brown who wanted to spend even more money implementing public pre-K programs. Where does this endless stream of money come from?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course you can continue to rely on taxing people. That's where government revenue comes from.

another idiot. or is it the same idiot?

Lots 'o idiots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good for Hogan. There is so much waste in MCPS.

Start with layoffs at the Carver Center to make up for the budget shortfall. Is Starr really worth what he is paid? Do we really need to spend so much money "investigating" the school start time debate? What about the BOE Credit Card fiasco? Etc. MCPS is an over bloated bureaucracy that has room for fiscal scrutiny. Is Starr up for the task to trimming costs? Heck no. He should be the first on the chopping block.

+1 to both of those statements.

[Anonymous]

They aren't going to lay anyone off...they just won't hire new staff...and class sizes will increase...per Starr: but not at the most needy schools.

Translation: title I and focus schools will remain the same, but class size will increase at all other schools.

I would have welcomed Brown's pre-k plan over this (losing $17 million for mcps). Ymmv.

And tuition at UMCP, Towson, etc. will jump up. And protections for the bay will be cut back. Ditto for Perdue and the other poultry farmers who pollute our waters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They aren't going to lay anyone off...they just won't hire new staff...and class sizes will increase...per Starr: but not at the most needy schools.

Translation: title I and focus schools will remain the same, but class size will increase at all other schools.

I would have welcomed Brown's pre-k plan over this (losing $17 million for mcps). Ymmv.

And tuition at UMCP, Towson, etc. will jump up. And protections for the bay will be cut back. Ditto for Perdue and the other poultry farmers who pollute our waters.

Define "most needy."

I am at a "most needy" high school. I have English inclusion and on level classes (grade 9) at 29. One of my inclusion classes was at 30 until I complained. There's no way to teach kids reading 5 grade levels behind with THAT many in the class. So while he may not increase class sizes at the "most needy" schools, what we have now is still ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Well, I don't get to define most needy...Starr does. It's not looking good, folks. The cuts will impact students, not staff (unless there's a hiring freeze and new grads from Towson and UMCP won't get jobs).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, I don't get to define most needy...Starr does. It's not looking good, folks. The cuts will impact students, not staff (unless there's a hiring freeze and new grads from Towson and UMCP won't get jobs).

Staff's affected.

If we're unable to meet the needs of kids in a classroom b/c there are simply too many, we can't do our jobs.

And that means the kids aren't learning.

Do you think kids and teachers exist in bubbles that are isolated from one another?

If the heart isn't pumping, the lungs are working.

[Anonymous]

^^^ as a business person , I am always amazed at government crybabies . My revenue was hit 50% in the downturn and still isnt back to what it was before 2008. We worked harder for less money...why can't government?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^^ as a business person , I am always amazed at government crybabies . My revenue was hit 50% in the downturn and still isnt back to what it was before 2008. We worked harder for less money...why can't government?

Maybe because teaching children is not the same as selling products and services? You can't just stick 50-60 kids in the classroom and tell everyone "work harder, deal with it!" Wow, can't believe I had to explain that.

[Anonymous]

To 9:26 - I get your point. But my point was that existing staff will not be laid off (as suggested by PPs who think mcps is bloated). It's too much trouble to lay off staff since many can file lawsuits --- and lawsuits are expensive. So existing staff will not be let go. If there's a hiring freeze and numbers shift, then existing staff might end up being offered positions at other schools (and former teachers with fancier titles might be sent back to classrooms).

Make sense?

If you've been around mcps for the last two decades, this would all sound familiar.

Oh, and raises could be affected (obviously).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^^ as a business person , I am always amazed at government crybabies . My revenue was hit 50% in the downturn and still isnt back to what it was before 2008. We worked harder for less money...why can't government?

wow

With your thinking, deserve your 50% hit.

So you wouldn't balk if your child were in a class of 30 in an elementary setting? Or you'd be fine with your on level child in a history class of 37? (yes- have had colleagues in this setting)

These are children; hey're humans, not widgets. One size doesn't fit all. I'm not pushing some button and cranking out 100 American Girl dolls every hour.

What a moron you are!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To 9:26 - I get your point. But my point was that existing staff will not be laid off (as suggested by PPs who think mcps is bloated). It's too much trouble to lay off staff since many can file lawsuits --- and lawsuits are expensive. So existing staff will not be let go. If there's a hiring freeze and numbers shift, then existing staff might end up being offered positions at other schools (and former teachers with fancier titles might be sent back to classrooms).

Make sense?

If you've been around mcps for the last two decades, this would all sound familiar.

Oh, and raises could be affected (obviously).

I've been in the system for over 20 years - in central office and at the school level with "fancier titles" and have never experienced these changes of which you apparently know.

Most of my years in the system have been in the classroom (in highly impacted high schools). I CHOSE to return to the classroom for many reasons. This is not the case in MCPS. Once you're out of the classroom setting, you don't automatically shift back in. You're often reabsorbed by other departments or shifted into other non-teaching roles.

Unless you've been in the system, I don't think you're the expert.

[Anonymous]

You've never seen staff put back in the classroom in the last twenty years??? Happens all the time. Same with resource teachers and other non-classroom teachers who work in schools. They'll do whatever it takes to prevent laying folks off when budgets are cut and numbers (of students) shift.

Getting back to the point: teachers and administrators will not be laid off. Class sizes will likely increase instead.