06/03/2013 |
7581023 |
[Yes]
It is an administrative savings that is long overdue. |
06/05/2013 |
7607639 |
[Yes]
Great idea, but it might not result in actual tax savings. The savings would end up on the school side and might not count toward maintenance of effort. Regardless, it is money which could be put toward early education programs. |
06/05/2013 |
7607877 |
[Maybe]
It is worthy of examination. With the proper controls, checks and balances in place, the schools Administrator should not have to worry that educational funds would be siphoned off elsewhere. There is also the concern that the schools would be nickel and dimed to death by city government and handicap professional educators from being truly innovative. |
06/05/2013 |
7607915 |
[Yes]
Sadly too many vested local interests benefit from our legendary municipal inefficiencies. |
06/06/2013 |
7610554 |
[Maybe]
sounds good, although I am not sure what the downside would be |
06/06/2013 |
7610727 |
[No]
If the school committee where appointed maybe. This only transfers money from one side to the other and does not save money. Better to share with Middletown. That would be a real savings. City and Schools are very different operations. I know because I did this for a living. |
06/06/2013 |
7610787 |
[Maybe]
need to read more |
06/06/2013 |
7610759 |
[Maybe]
Not that familiar with the government of Newport, but, if there is duplication within the two groups, let’s get rid of duplication or similar duties. |
06/06/2013 |
7610922 |
[Maybe]
More study and discussion needed. |
06/06/2013 |
7610965 |
[Yes]
The School Committee is dysfunctional. The city should take over essential non-educational operations. |
06/06/2013 |
7611755 |
[Yes]
Reduce duplicate Admin |
06/06/2013 |
7611821 |
[Yes]
The school committee has not used good financial procedures. The city has offered — and should — take over managing school finances. The added benefit would be to improve trust between the council and school committee. |
06/06/2013 |
7612591 |
[Yes]
a good idea, yes. however with the proviso that, if this combination is less successful than the current separate policy, then a return to a new and improved version of the then former method. |
06/06/2013 |
7612981 |
[Yes]
The $500,000 savings alluded to would be realized by the School Department and will free up money for education. The cost of delivering those services would be transferred to the city; that cost has not been determined. The eventual savings are likely to be in the $200,000 range. |
06/06/2013 |
7613933 |
[Maybe]
I am not sure I understand how this works currently, so I would like to see a side by side comparison of the two operating models. It is important to use our resources wisely, and avoid duplicating efforts — but we also need to make sure decisions about Education aren’t overly influenced by external and/or irrelevant factors. |
06/06/2013 |
7616744 |
[Maybe]
Depending on how it’s implemented, this one could go either way… |
06/06/2013 |
7623705 |
[Maybe]
Not sure – I can’t believe we can’t get a better handle on this. |
06/06/2013 |
7623827 |
[Yes]
They are about 15 years late |
06/06/2013 |
7631741 |
[Yes]
All Aquidneck Island schools should be administered together |
06/07/2013 |
7636748 |
[Yes]
In a shrinking school district, it would make sense for the school department and city to share some services. |
06/07/2013 |
7640047 |
[Yes]
We should also combine districts on the island. Having 3 school administrations on this size island is so wasteful and ridiculous. |
06/07/2013 |
7640100 |
[Yes]
I generally agree, but have some concerns about the City being able to deal effectively with school personnel matters. I fear the City’s HR staff may not have the background and experience needed to address personnel matters concerning educators. |
06/07/2013 |
7648198 |
[Maybe]
i don’t believe there would be any savings. |
06/08/2013 |
7650665 |
[Maybe]
Devil in the details. Sometimes one gets less with less. |
06/08/2013 |
7652394 |
[Maybe]
This is the biggest no-brainer I’ve seen in a long time — unless there is something we don’t know. |
06/09/2013 |
7656513 |
[No]
Two different missions. Don’t compromise both. |
06/09/2013 |
7657348 |
[Yes]
Should have been done a long time ago. |
06/09/2013 |
7657424 |
[Maybe]
Not enough facts to give a yes or no. |
06/09/2013 |
7657856 |
[Maybe]
There are pros and cons to the centralization of any process. In the case of the schools, relieving educators of non-education-related tasks would (presumably) free them to elevate the educational services to be delivered. On the other hand, what resources are available from the School Committee? None, as far as day-to-day administration is concerned. And city government does not seem as administratively gifted as one would hope at the moment, so transferring tasks to the city is of questionable value. |
06/09/2013 |
7659436 |
[No]
In the 40+ years I’ve followed Newport administration and politics, the one constant has been the antipathy of the City administration toward the school department and, more generally, toward education. Administrative functions for the schools are quite specialized and quite different from the city’s functions. It would make far more sense to pursue regional initiatives and consolidation with other school districts for these functions. |
06/10/2013 |
7662560 |
[Yes]
I agree that some combining would be a good thing, but have reservations about the hiring of teaching staff and who would be doing that |
06/10/2013 |
7663104 |
[Maybe]
not if it means more job losses for the school department. They’re already short-handed. |
06/10/2013 |
7664980 |
[Maybe]
I have not read Naomi Neville’s piece in the NDN. I would need more data to make an informed decision. Intuitively, it seems that savings could be realized. |
06/10/2013 |
7667750 |
[Yes]
Every successful business combines resources and trims budgets for fiscal health, why should three very small towns be separate? |