I don't think he even knows what a golf club looks like. Did the guy you hit look like a short Italian with a mustache?

No. are medium weight clean shaven curly haired individual who said he was the music director

So you actually believe the threats made by towns when budgets aren't where they'd like them to be? Threatening crowded classrooms and decreased programs for kids are ways to stir up support so towns can get money. No one wants to hear that kids are going to have to pay the price. Do you know where the $1.2 million is coming from?

Not threats. It's inside information presented to him personally by a trusted administrator. This info wasn't some public release made by the school. In a formal sense, the School Administration has been a bit mum as to what the actual consequences would be. Very little information has been presented to the town aside from the fact that the school is facing a $4million deficit. The town has tried to find money for the schools but you can't get water from stone.

Aside from this year, I've been involved with the Mansfield School System since I got out of high school. I've seen the progression of cuts to departments, the progressive down scaling of support for the arts departments and decreased programs after school for students. This also isn't a matter of the budgets that "aren't where they'd like them to be." Some of the deficit is caused by the state providing significantly less to the town for the 2009-2010 school year even though the freshman class is over 100 students larger than the graduating class.

The $1.2 million is coming from the stimulus package - trickled down after being given to the state as allocated for education.

What happens when the $1.2 million is spent?

The $1.2 million is coming from taxpayers, isn't it? How can Mansfield be in such a hole when other towns with fewer resources are in decent shape? I thought Mansfield did well with all the taxes generated from all the businesses in town.

It does and this is an issue I've brought up on a few occasions. I think a major problem is that the town has gotten so accustomed to have the extra money that with the current short income and decrease of state funding, they don't know what to do. Think of the investment banker who was making millions and now *only* makes $300k. They've grown so used to have all that income they now won't be able to send their kids to a $30k/year private school, will have to fire their private driver and find a cheaper nanny.

My understanding is that administrators and government workers are paid more in Mansfield than in many of the area towns. It's pathetic and has been pissing me off for some time.

They "sold" Mansfield Crossing to the town by trying to boast how it will bring $1.2Million in additional revenue to the town. Yet, they hired something like 4 more firefighters and at least a half dozen cops and used the added coverage needed for Mansfield Crossing as the excuse. 10 jobs starting around $40k/year = $400,000. That's a third of the supposed increased town income and that doesn't begin to take benefits and pension into consideration.

I had been saying that since day one, but D'Agostino and Co. refuse to say no to developers in the town. Fortunately, he's gone after this year.

So the tax payers bail out teachers jobs and everythings right in your world. What happens next year? I have heard layoff talks at the schools for 25 years. We didn't need a trillion dollar bailout to save a music teacher.

Mansfield is fine. Every town talks layoffs at this time of year. The schools are still among the best. $1.2 million is the amount talked about almost every year for the past 5 years.. They propose their wish list in the budget and then they come back to reality and cut it down.

I agree with buckman, you hear this layoff discussion every year and the pink slips go out until the town gets its budget together

That was my original point, Buckman. It's a tactic by the town to get more money by talking about how the kids will suffer if they don't get the money they "need". My sister in law is a teacher in Mansfield and my niece and nephew both go to school there. The schools will be fine with or without the stimulus money. Mansfield is the type of community that would find a way to get money that is really needed for the schools. The doom and gloom approach is just more effective because it preys upon peoples fears.

You guys have to be kidding me? This wasn't some BS spouted out by the school so the town gives them more money. There was a $4Million deficit. Not the "$1.2million we hear about every year."

Do you guys even read all the posts before making a comment or just the posts of people who agree with you?

Since you chose not to read it the first time, I'll copy/paste it for you.



You're right we don't. But just about any English, Science, History or Math teacher that has been at the schools for 2 years or less is likely to lose their job.

Let's bring this topic of "the schools are just bluffing like they always do" back up again in June when the Administration makes the announcement about who's getting pink slipped.

With people being handed pink slips across the entire job market, I fail to see how you can be so disillusioned to think the school system is any different.

It's funny, if it involves the national economy, then everything is doom-and-gloom. Yet somehow Mansfield has avoided all these economic troubles.

It's easy for someone who doesn't even live in the town to say. Or buckman who is in no way involved with the schools aside from having a kid that goes to them.

Like I said, aside from this past year, I've been working at the school for almost 7 years. That allots me information that isn't PR crap given to the residents. We'll find out in June what the results will be; that is when the towns are contractually obligated to make all announcements of lay-offs.

Johnny, I'm not doubting your source, but the figure of $4 million seems off the mark. How does a town like Mansfield get that far in the hole? Even with overpaid town employees I find it hard to believe it could be that bad. They may have to make some cuts, but I doubt it will be nearly what you think it will be. My sister in law is in the less than 2 years category and she's not worried about her job.

If you worked for the schools for 7 years then you know what is announced for layoffs and what really happens are two different things, right?

Absolutely. Every year there is the possibility of program cuts. It's mentioned that this program and that program aren't going to be funded, but things have never been to the extent they are now.

Like I said, we'll all see in 3 months.

Also, does your sister teach at the high school or middle school?

Johnnyd. I don't want to sound like a wise ass but.....Are you arguing about school $$$ on my dime?

That's the frustrating thing about taxes. You have to pay them but have little to say about what they go to. I don't think you sound like a wise ass at all.

I pay taxes to the town too my friend.

If you don't like the way the town spends money, I look forward to hearing you voice your displeasure at the next town meeting where it really counts, as opposed to on a fishing forum. I'm sure there is a significant amount of items about how wasteful the town is that we agree with.

I'm pretty active in town politics. As much as time allows anyway.

FYI, it looks like we will be spending more litigation $$$ on that POS Town Manager.

Yeah, I've heard that. I cannot wait until they drop the POS and the liability that comes with him. I still wish they'd release his review, but somehow he got that under lock and key. Guess he knows that any future employer that read it would know what kind of guy he really is.

I don't know the dude but is he that bad of a prick?

Pretty much. A large portion of the town has wanted him out for some time. But rumor is that there were some back door stuff going on and that's why he kept having his contract renewed. In the latest election, it looks like enough of his supporters had been ousted to get rid of the piece of crap. He's a huge liability to the town.

Not to mention he has the stereotypical face of an old school con-artist.

OK, I've watched some of the town meetings it didn't seem so bad.
I really can't comment on the back door stuff, I don't have enough history. But politics being all about influence and wink wink behind the back stuff

He's scum.

good enough for me, your more involved than I in that arena

The solution is simple, Ethics, Values, and Live within your means, whether a private citizen, business, city, state or country. If we can't afford it, we either find a way to live without it or less of it, or we utilize the wonder of Capitalism and make more money to pay for it. Increased taxes usually does not increase the revenue (usually decreases it). Makes about as much sense as charging your kids for meals and then having to increase their allowance to pay for it. The money slowly circles in an ever decreasing amount like a terd in the toilet.

PS. More government is just more terds spinning in that toilet.......

This is perhaps one of the biggest urban myths ever pounded into our heads by conservative pundits.

Reagan certainly did cut tax rates and increased revenues, but a lot of this was restructuring of the tax code that spurred international investment here at home. A single event but a good example.

But most of the tax calculations used to prove this point don't factor in the growth in population or business cycles (i.e. bubbles) that have a huge impact on tax revenues. Clinton raised taxes and when you look at it per capita the revenues went up dramatically.

If cutting taxes always led to increased revenues then I'd say we should do away with them completely and enjoy the infinite revenues that would bring forth.

-spence

Actually, I thought tax revenue did not increase for like 5 years after the tax cuts.

Until enough of the corporations got tired of it, and many moved offshore. If we make it too expensive to conduct business here in the US, big money will almost always find a cheaper place to conduct it. The big money that doesn't becomes not so big money.

Not saying reduce all taxes, mainly don't raise the taxes on business, especially small and medium sized ones. Leaving them alone, or reducing their taxes will allow them to prosper and thus hire more employees, pay more to their employees, and when the company is doing great because of individuals, give them a "bonus".

Trying to say a business owner making over 250k a year, should pay close to 40% of his profits to the government is ridiculous. Let him keep most of that and maybe he can expand and grow his business. It all equals more money for everyone, including the government as each new employee, new store, or bait shop, will all pay taxes.

just my thoughts.

But there are a lot of other factors that influence companies moving operations offshore. Manufacturing has looked towards labor often less than 10% of here in the USA, and also tried to move to Asia to shorten their supply chains. Many advanced jobs have moved offshrore to take advantage of a growing talent pool, or more recently, limitations in H1 Visas.

The point being, high corporate tax rates are not the showstopper here.

This was the claim hammered home by McCain during the campaign, but the facts as I've seen them indicate the impact to small business under Obama's tax plan would be minimal.

That being said, I agree that small business is the foundation of our economy and shouldn't be taxed excessively.

-spence

Ahh, but you're only looking at the tax impact to the small business itself, what about the companies that do business with the small business? As their tax increases, they look for cheaper alternatives which potentially could drive business away.