Schools to report unexpected surplus

Posted

Over the summer, the Warwick School Department projected a deficit for the first time in Anthony Ferrucci’s seven-year tenure as finance director. However, documents sent ahead of a special school committee meeting to be held this Thursday reveal that some favorable fiscal developments have wiped out this projected deficit and returned a scant surplus for FY18.

The financial report must still undergo a finalized audit, of course, but the news means the auditor general will not need to be notified about Warwick running a deficit, which was projected at $545,064 during the July 10 meeting of the school committee.

Thanks to unexpected revenues above projections – including over $100,000 in state housing aid and over $130,000 in Medicaid/indirect funds – and items originally being projected to run a deficit actually coming out above expectations, the schools are projected to achieve a surplus of $157,847.

You may be wondering how this could happen, or that it’s convenient that the schools were able to find money during the eleventh hour to avoid showing a deficit – even though that original projected deficit only accounted for about 0.3 percent of the school’s $166 million operating budget at the time.

The simple explanation is that the July 10 projected revenue/expenditure report was just that – preliminary. The schools must report such projections after the school year during the summer, despite the fact that accounting for line items such as salaries – where the largest disparity in projections versus actual numbers occurred – continues until the end of the year.

This means that the schools have to make decisions for upcoming school years based on projections that are, at the time, essentially a best calculated guess. In this case, the schools couldn’t anticipate getting more money from the state and were able to compensate certain salaried positions through grant moneys rather than the general operating fund. Additionally, the schools are able to collect money if there is an overdrawing of the sick bank for staff. These variations resulted in the unexpected surplus.

However, running an unexpected surplus for last year does not mean much in terms of the ongoing budgetary crisis being experienced by Warwick schools this year. Those challenges, including the number of students who have requested out of district placement for various programming, will dissipate this surplus quickly.

Ferrucci declined to comment on this story, as he will be officially reporting this information in more depth to the school committee on Thursday. The meeting will be held at 6 p.m. at Warwick Veterans Middle School.

Comments

27 comments on this story | Please log in to comment by clicking here
Please log in or register to add your comment
richardcorrente

Here's the math as it fell together this year. The School Committee received $166 million to handle the expenses of a certain number of students, a certain number of teachers and a certain number of school buildings (over a billion and a half since 2009). The actual numbers of students, teachers and buildings were far less in all three categories. Therefore, logic dictates that they should have had a LARGE surplus. When they claimed they didn't and actually NEEDED $84 MILLION MORE I got very suspicious. I still am. It just didn't make sense. It still doesn't.

I see signs all over the City that says vote for the $40 million dollar bond issue "for the students". In 2006 Warwick did the same thing with $25 million "for the students". How did that work out? Did the students get their $25 million worth? I don't think so and it cost Warwick taxpayers over twice that amount with interest. I don't think the students (or the taxpayers) will get their money's worth this time either if this bond issue passes. I hope it doesn't.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone.

Rick Corrente

The Taxpayers Mayor

Tuesday, November 6
Cat2222

Just for fun, why not try to address the percentage that went towards the teachers contracts/salaries? It is always a glaring black hole in your arguments against the WSC. That cost continues to rise despite the falling student population. You are biased towards the WTU and the absence of any mention of that money and its contribution to the budget shows just how one sided your argument is.

Tuesday, November 6
DannyHall82

Exactly Cat2222, as for 2006 you can thank Mayor Avedisian for refusing to release the bond money for repairs. The School Committee had no control over that also sure Richard, you can say we’ve given the School Committee 1 Billion over 10 years but you neglect to say that the WTU accounts for 85% of that Billion dollars.

Tuesday, November 6
CrickeeRaven

Cat and Danny, you are both correct to point out the two-time election reject's continued attempts to ignore the 85+ percent of the school budget that pays salaries and benefits to WTU teachers.

That means of the "billion dollars" spent on the school department, $850 million paid teacher salaries and benefits.

Let's also review this statement:

"[T]he schools are projected to achieve a surplus of $157,847."

As we know, the teacher contract represents a $4.5 million increase in the FY19 budget -- nearly 30 times the amount of the surplus -- and yet the two-time election loser doesn't mention this.

His "logic" is flawed, as is typical for him. We know that the recent program audit explained why there was not a larger savings from school consolidation -- it's because of the high number of teachers who are receiving top-step salaries and were not affected by the layoffs. And again, the two-time election reject doesn't mention this.

We can be sure that the two-time election reject will continue to disgrace himself with his selective reading of the actual situation with the school budget.

Tuesday, November 6
ThatGuyInRI

Tough day to be the "taxpayers mayor."

After all, the "80,000 taxpayers" of Warwich just passed the $40 million bond by nearly 74%

https://www.ri.gov/election/results/2018/general_election/warwick/

It may be a tough day for the taxpayers in the future as we now have a school committee stacked with WTU sypathisers and family members.

Kudos to the WTU for organizing their candidates and getting control of the school committee, it's great for them. It's probably not good for the students or taxpayers of Warwick but that's democracy for you.

Wednesday, November 7
richardcorrente

Dear Cat2222,

You make a good point as usual.

However, when you cut the number of teachers as much as the School Committee (SC) has done, you are required to cut "last-in first-out". Therefore the teachers that are left are the more expensive kind. True that the vast majority of the SC budget goes to teachers salaries, pensions, and benefits, but it ALWAYS has, and it always will. I have never argued that. What I have argued is that they had to fight for two years to get a 3%+- raise. Not a 20% raise. A 3% raise. That was horribly wrong of Avedisian, and I felt it was destructive to the Warwick Schools reputation. Years ago people moved INTO Warwick because of the schools. More recently they have moved OUT, because of them. I blame Avedisian; NOT the teachers for that.

Solomon is a definite upgrade. I can't imagine he would refuse to sit and talk with the teachers like Avedisian did, and he now has the opportunity to be just as selfish and controlling with his new $40 million dollar credit card as Avedisian was with the $25 million dollar credit card of 2006...OR...he can be a smarter, fairer politician. Time will tell and people like you and me will give credit if he does, and criticize if he doesn't. That is a quality I think we both share. Others will disagree with me if I say the sky is blue. Their comments are useless. I have always respected yours however, even when they don't agree with mine.

Happy Thanksgiving Cat2222,

Happy Thanksgiving everyone.

Rick Corrente

The Taxpayers Mayor

Wednesday, November 7
richardcorrente

Dear ThatguyinRI,

How can you say "tough day to be the taxpayers Mayor"?

Solomon had hundreds of thousands of dollars, the support of the unions, the enormous contributions of all the Political Action Committees, and almost twenty years on the job and he only got 19,334 votes. I, on the other hand was a political unknown, had ZERO unions backing me, had ZERO PAC donations (I refused any), and I still somehow managed to receive 14,000+ votes. That was more than Stenhouse; more than any previous opponent of the incumbent Mayor and only 5,000+- less than Joe got in this election. Not bad huh? ThatguyinRI, 2020 is only a few months away and EVERYONE I run into repeats my message. "Cut Taxes - Cut Spending" If Joe does, he will get re-elected. If Joe doesn't...

Hey, Happy Thanksgiving ThatguyinRI.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone.

Rick Corrente

The Taxpayers Mayor

Wednesday, November 7
CrickeeRaven

Cat, I give you full credit for finally getting the two-time election reject to admit how much of the school budget goes toward teacher salaries after he's done so much work to ignore it and deflect from that fact -- and then, of course, he goes right back to deflecting from it.

"I have never argued that."

Wrong. Until today, he had never admitted it, possibly because there was nothing to "argue."

"I can't imagine he would refuse to sit and talk with the teachers like Avedisian did..."

That's an imaginary version of events. Avedisian never "refused" to be part of the negotiations -- he gave the school committee an opportunity to solve it on their own, amid illegal sick-outs, work-to-rule, pickets, and union leadership walking out of meetings. [These are also things the two-time election reject ignores.]

And, in fact, Avedisian met 25 times with both parties, as reported by mediator Vincent Ragosta -- yet another fact the two-time election reject ignores; he actually stated at one point that he just didn't believe Mr. Ragosta.

So, don't let his condescending and hollow compliments fool you, Cat; the two-time election reject is just twisting them again and using them to rehash his failed and false statements.

Wednesday, November 7
CrickeeRaven

And ThatGuy, look at how you drew out the two-time election reject to willingly prove his delusional ideas.

He received just 600 more votes [14,086 to 13,481] than Stenhouse in 2016, where turnout for the mayor's race was 65%, while this year's turnout was 50 percent.

Stenhouse got a higher percentage of the vote [39.7 to 34.8] and spent less money [$15,000 to $40,000] than the two-time election reject.

So, Stenhouse spent less than half the money, campaigned for four months, didn't spend her time peddling lies on the Beacon website, ran in an election with fewer overall voters -- and finished within 5 percent of his vote total in 2016 and actually captured a higher percentage of votes.

Don't be fooled by his spin. His two campaigns resulted in blowout losses; he should not be credited with anything except wasting money and time to run a lie-filled campaign that our honest, taxpaying neighbors saw through and rejected as a direct result.

His failed slogan did not get him elected, and it will not make any difference in any election, except to result in an even more overwhelming and humiliating loss for him if he runs again.

Wednesday, November 7
CrickeeRaven

Also, for readers who value honesty and accuracy, here is the link to the Rhode Island Board of Elections results web page for Warwick: https://www.ri.gov/election/results/2018/general_election/warwick/

As shown on the site, Mayor Solomon won 20,364 votes, not 19,334 as claimed by the two-time election reject.

Wednesday, November 7
Scal1024

One day afrer the election Rick Corrente has already begun his 3rd FAILED campaign for Mayor. This delusional tax delinquent is so out of touch he actually believes he can add his vote totals up over 2 campaigns and draw a fair comparison to a 1 time candidate in 1 election. This is a ridiculous comparison. When compared to his opponents in the 2018 Dem Primary Corrente finished with 200 votes more than Gerald Carbone (a relative unknown who hardly spent any money) and roughly 1,600 votes ahead of Mr Ferla (another political unknown whose wife was accused of a crime by state police, he didn't campaign and dropped out 2 weeks before the election with health issues). That is the only comparison to make. Adding vote totals over 2 elections still probably doesn't even crack the top 25 embarrassing things Rick Corrente has done as a candidate.

In 2016 Rick Corrente recieved over 14,000 votes in the General Election. This was after spending $40,000, littering our great city with illegal campaign signs and running for 2 years. After that election, he further embarrassed himself when he was once again confronted with facts regarding his tax delinquency, losing his home to tax sale and effectively not paying car taxes on time from 2011-2016. Rick claimed anyone who posted this information was a "henchmen" who worked for the Mayor. Claims that are baseless, without fact and made up to distract from his own pathetic failing record. Oh yes Rick...I'm surrreee Rob Cote was just dying to help Scott Avedisian HAHA That is how delusional you are though, you actually believe that! It was no surprise Corrente announced he'd run again in 2018. Voters now had 4 years to evaluate Mr Corrente and his terrible record. Voters took another look and in 2018 less than 2,000 voters supported Mr Corrente. Even though he claimed he was "carrying 14,000 votes into this election". That means in 2 years he went from 14,000 supporters to less than 2,000 supporters. This all from a man who claims he is "the taxpayers mayor"...maybe he means the 2% of Warwick residents that voted for him? Rick, 12,000 voters jumped off the "Corrente bandwagon" between 2016-2018, ITS OVER!!!!!!!!

Every so often we see the real Rick Corrente and it does not reveal a kind person. He used homosexuality as if it were an insult toward me and another commenter whom he'd never met, in a disgusting comment 2 weeks ago. Rick offered zero apology when called out for his unacceptable, juvenile rhetoric and behavior. He told the wife of a school committee candidate to "shut up" and when called out on it stated "I didn't know she was your wife". So its ok to tell a woman to "shut up" as long as you don't know their husband? What!?!?!?!? What kind of thinking is this? He also took veiled shots at Former Mayor Avedisian claiming he did not know the school system because "he doesn't have a family of his own" stating "I've been to the soccer games". If this was some sort of dog whistle, your subtlety was horrendous. Rick also accused Joe Solomon of distorting his property values with ZERO facts to support it. For what Rick? Looking to discredit a 20 year public servant?

Rick Corrente never had a bad word for Joe Solomon...until Joe Solomon declared himself a candidate for Mayor. This again speaks to the person Rick Corrente is. So in 2016 when Rick needed Joe Solomons support as a candidate for Mayor, Rick spoke highly of Mr Solomon and praised him for his 2 decades of service. However, when Joe declared himself a candidate for Mayor in 2018 suddenly Rick began making up conspiracy theories that he'd never spoken ONE WORD ABOUT BEFORE. Why would that be? Again, for what? All to win a few votes in an election? Its THAT important to you Rick? What kind of loyalty is that? Shameful! That is the kind of person Rick Corrente is: a delusional, unloyal, tax delinquent who will lie, say or do anything to get elected. That's not what Warwick needs which is why Warwick voters have let Corrente know exactly that in back to back elections against 2 different candidates. When someone stubbornly refuses to see the writing on the wall, ignores their own decline from 14,000 voters to less than 2,000 voters and teases they'll run for Mayor a third time there is no hope for them. This is of course without any documentation or polling to suggest there is any actual reason for Rick Corrente to continue his attempts at becoming Mayor. Is there any doubt now with a third run for Mayor looming that Rick Corrente is indeed all about himself? I think not...

Wednesday, November 7
Thecaptain

Not withstanding this:

July 28, 2015

Richard Corrente

177 Grand View Avenue

Unit A

Warwick, RI 02886

RE: Notice Termination of Tenancy under R.I.G.L. 34-18-37

Dear Mr. Corrente:

Please be advised that this office represents the interest of Red Stick Acquisitions, LLC, the landlord/owner of the property located at 177 Grand View Avenue, Warwick, RI. You are hereby directed to vacate and remove your property and personal possessions from the premises located at 177 Grand View Avenue, Warwick, RI and deliver control of the premises to the landlord/owner Red Stick Acquisitions, LLC, on The first day after the end of your current rental period, namely September 1, 2015.

This notice is given for the purpose terminating your tenancy. You must continue to pay rent as it becomes due until the date indicated above. If you fail to pay that rent, an eviction action for nonpayment of rent may be instituted against you.

If you fail to vacate the premises by the date specified, an eviction action may be instituted against you in the Kent County District Court without further notice. If you believe you have a defense to this termination, you will be able to raise that defense at the court hearing.

Red Stick Acquisitions, LLC

Thursday, November 8
Thecaptain

Or this:

From the court records:

" Further evidence that Plaintifff Corrente believed the order to be inequitable at its issuance is found in past court records from previous court appearances. The computation of Corrente's income has been the central focus of the past nine years of litigation.

Corrente has continually urged in past court appearances before different judges, that the Family Court's method of computing his income is inequitable because the court has not subtracted what he considers to be legitimate business expenses from his gross earnings. Appearing before Justice Michael Forte in the same matter on March 12, 1997, Justice Forte asks Corrente, "What's your annual income?" (Record, 3/12/97, page 12, line 7) Corrente responded , "Under $7000 per year, and I can prove that to you. My gross earnings is (sic) one issue. What I live off is a fraction of that, Yor Honor." (Record, 3/12/97, pg 12, lines 8-11) In the same court appearance, Justice Forte asked Corrente, "I'm asking you what your willing to pay temporarily until I can resolve this. If you're a good father - and I'm sure you're going to stand there and tell me that you are - then you're willing to pay something. How much?" (Record 3/12/97, pg 11, lines 8-13) Corrente responded - " I don't want to set a precedence (sic) Ten dollars a week is about what I can afford." (Record 3/12/97, pg 11, lines 14-16) to clarify Corrente's response, Justice Forte later asked,

The Court - "You're telling me, you can only pay ten dollars a week?"

Mr. Corrente - "Yes sir"

The Court - " You're telling me that on the record?"

Mr. Corrente - "Yes sir, I'll stand by that"

Mr. Watson - There is a W2 form that declares $40,000 in income in 1995

The Court - "What happened to that?"

Mr. Corrente - "Gross earnings, Your Honor, He's neglected to tell you the $25,000 that it cost me to make that, Your Honor."

The Court - " Well, we're going to have to wait. We'll deal with it at the hearing".

Mr. Corrente - "You cant look at gross receipts and consider them earnings, I wish you could."

In a court appearance before Justice Forte on January 28,1997, to determine his income for child support payments, Corrente stated on the record, "He (defendants attorney) does not know what my income is. All he know's is my gross receipts , and he's trying to manipulate this Court into believing that my gross receipts is my income." (Record, 1/28/97, pg 3 lines 22-25)

This small sample of on the record statements demonstrates plaintiff's concern with the court's computation of his income - specifically his contention that certain business and/or personal living expenses should be deducted from his gross earnings. It also shows the amount of money that Corrente believed he could afford to pay for child support: $10.00 per week. Corrente was aware at the time of the issuance of the May 27th court order that the court had not deducted the amounts from his gross earnings that he had wished. He was also aware the court order stated he must pay $223.15 per week for child support payments: $213.15 more than he stated on the record he could afford. It is hard to imagine how this order could ever have been considered "equitable" by Corrente in light of his previous testimony. His statement on the May 27th record confirms this theory. "

Thursday, November 8
Thecaptain

And this recent defeat:

3SC-2016-01563 | Richard Corrente v. Sharon Stone

Case Number

3SC-2016-01563

Court

3rd Division District Court

CASE DISMISSED

Thursday, November 8
Thecaptain

Then on January 26th 2012 the lien placed by the Greenwich Village Condominium Assn. on 1050 main St. Unit 16

Aka 441 Old Forge Rd, Assessors map 64, Plat 5, Lot 157-16 (East Greenwich)

Assessors Plat210, Lot 1 Unit 26 (Warwick)

In the amount of $4857.12 for unpaid assessments.

What a guy ! He leaves nothing but a trail of unpaid taxes, bills, and child support wherever he travels.

Thursday, November 8
richardcorrente

Dear DannyHall82,

Small correction: It was a "billion-and-a-half" dollars since 2009.

Moreover, I never mentioned that the WTU receives "X" percent of the overall budget because that wasn't the point I was making. WHATEVER the percentage is, the teachers NEVER should have gone through two years of torment to get a nominal raise, one that is the most common in every town or city in R.I. That poor treatment of Warwick teachers damaged the reputation of Warwick far greater than others admit. I blame Avedisian entirely for it. My critics want to have readers forget about that horrible treatment of Warwick teachers by deflecting the conversation to "percentages-of-the-total-budget".

For the record, I don't think Solomon will refuse to "sit and negotiate" like Avedisian did. I also don't believe he will withhold the $40 million as Avedisian did with the $25 million of 2006. Time will tell and so will you and I. If Solomon handles it badly we will both say so. If he handles it well, you and I will say that as well.

Happy Thanksgiving DannyHall82, to you and your family.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone.

Rick Corrente

The Taxpayers Mayor

Thursday, November 8
richardcorrente

Dear CrickeeRaven, (AKA Mark Carruolo)

My numbers for the election results came from Channel 12.

If they weren't 100% accurate I'm sure they apologize to you.

You anonymous coward of a critic.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone.

Rick Corrente

The Taxpayers Mayor

Thursday, November 8
DannyHall82

Richard, that wasn’t your argument before. You continually stated “we should not give the school committee one more cent or that we’ve already giving them 1 billion dollars”. So are you for the 40 Million bond? And if not, out of that $24,000,000 that remains in the budget after the rest is used on salaries and benefits what would you cut from that $24 Million so that infrastructure repairs could be made?

Danny

Thursday, November 8
Scal1024

Rick Corrente continues to show a lack of understanding on budgeting and pretty much everything else effecting our city. The real reason he ignores 85% of the schools budget makes up salaries and benefits is because it interferes with his pandering to the WTU. Rick, what you don't seem to understand is when 85% of the budget is inflated by salaries and benefits, in most companies employees wouldn't be receiving ANY RAISE. You say 3% is much like other towns, but there are other factors at play other than whether NK and Cranston teachers get a raise. The other issue Rick, is that most companies reward employees with raises when they achieve RESULTS. That has not been the case as our schools have been struggling with below average test scores for years.

Instead of focusing on that 85% (salaries and benefits) and how to reduce that (which is where this conversation needs to be RIGHT NOW), Corrente and others (to be fair) attack the School Committee for how they spend the other 15% of the budget. How is this effective budgeting? I believe the best way to deal with this problem is to gain concessions on the salary and benefits side. I know much easier said than done but until people acknowledge where the budget is inflated we are going to be chasing our tails for decades. Whether it's raising the employee contribition toward health care costs, capping sick days, freezing salaries or even changing to a cheaper health care provider. We can't waste anymore time and my fear is with this newly elected School Committee thats exactly what we will be doing.

Thursday, November 8
Scal1024

Mr Hall, Corrente has stated on this website he was against the $40 million bond, not only that...he had the audacity to tell voters to vote against it as well. Talk about reckless and irresponsible. Lucky for all of us he has no following and hasn't moved the needle on a single issue EVER.

Thursday, November 8
CrickeeRaven

"Dear CrickeeRaven, (AKA Mark Carruolo)..."

I invite the two-time election reject to call the person he thinks is using this screen name. The burden is on him to prove it, instead of engaging in cowardly online name-calling of someone else.

"My numbers for the election results came from Channel 12."

Those are not official numbers, nor were they the updated and confirmed numbers as posted on the Rhode Island Board of Elections website. The error was his in using those numbers, not Channel 12's in reporting them on Tuesday night.

-----

Scal and Danny, you both rightly point out the glaring defects in the two-time election reject's statements.

As Scal said, the two-time election reject opposed the bonds, and as Danny correctly notes, he made misguided statements about "not giving another dime" to the school department -- and yet never acknowledged that this would apparently include breaking the teachers' contract by not paying for it.

[Danny, I respectfully need to correct one statement of yours: None of the bond funding will pay salary and benefits. By law and under the direction of the RI Department of Education, and city and state officials, it must be spent on capital improvements only.]

So, yet again, we see the underlying contradictions and delusion of his comments: He wants the teachers to be paid, but doesn't want to adequately fund the school department; he doesn't support the bonds, but doesn't want to increase the operating budget for it; he calls sick-outs, work-to-rule, pickets, and walking out of contract negotiations by the WTU "horrible treatment" toward the teachers; and he claims that the new school committee members will "work for students" even though they supported the school bonds that he opposed.

As we already know, the two-time election reject will continue to make such statements in the pathetic and incorrect belief that they affect anything in the city.

I thank you for joining me and the thousands of honest, taxpaying voters who so easily saw through his lies in rejecting his candidacy twice.

Thursday, November 8
DannyHall82

CrickeeRaven,

I apologize for not explaining what I meant, I know that the bond can’t be used for benefits and salaries. I meant that if Richard was against the bond for school repairs where in the budget would he cut to replace what the bond would’ve. (Infrastructure repairs, HVAC etc...).

Again I apologize, now that I have a little one at home who turns 2 in a few weeks her future is in the hands of people who have nothing vested. It’s extremely disappointing to feel that the fate of her future education is in the hands of people who don’t have a child, live with mom and dad still or aren’t employed.

We also need to replace the City Wide Seats and District Seats with Ward Seats. We have 9 Councilmembers that determining our City Budget, We should DEFINITELY have 9 elected School Committee members representing each ward. It’s crazy to think that 3 people can determine how $160,000,000 is spent.

I suggested it back in 2016 and will try again to get some traction with it...

Just my thoughts

Thursday, November 8
WwkVoter

Danny what do you think about an appointed school committee?

Thursday, November 8
CrickeeRaven

DannyHall, thanks for clarifying. Now I understand your original point.

For my part, I apologize for initially misunderstanding. We cool?

Beyond that, I am sure you will find that the two-time election reject has no answer to your question -- that if he didn't favor the bond, where would he find the money to fund these much needed and legally-mandated [under ADA] repairs?

The only thing his delusional pronouncements prove is that he is far out of touch with how the school department is run, and is more interested in scoring political points [though he has always failed at it].

I share your concern about the backgrounds of the new school committee members, though I am also willing to wait see what they do with the next budget.

And I'm generally in favor of a larger school board so that it represents the city more effectively.

Thanks for your input and perspective.

Thursday, November 8
DannyHall82

Warwickvoter, I’m not in favor of an appointed School Committee. I just think each ward should be represented...

CrickeeRaven of course we are cool !

Thursday, November 8
richardcorrente

Dear DannyHall82,

I feel I have been clear on my position about the bond. However, again, I am totally AGAINST giving the School Committee $40 million MORE after Warwick taxpayers gave them $166 million+- all with little or no accountability. But that was then. This is now. Now the question is "How will they actually spend it?" Time will tell but I think there are better people making that decision. I think the students will actually come first with this new School Committee and this new Mayor. That is all that really matters.

On a related note, your daughter is ALMOST TWO?! When did THAT happen? The last I heard she wasn't even born yet.

Very Happy Thanksgiving to you, your wife, and daddy's little girl.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone.

Rick Corrente

The Taxpayers Mayor

5 days ago
WwkVoter

Corrente is spinning his uninformed delusions is a slightly different way lately, by attaching platitudes to his BS. Simply put, fake, transparent platitudes dont make any more true such bogus pedestrian statements such as "little or no accountability". He's been corrected on that nonsense numerous times yet seems deaf to any statement that attempts to break him out of his delusional rants.

Again, our school department answers to RIDE, US Dept of Education, the city council (for overall total and any questions that come along with approving that), as well as legally bound professional outside auditors, and finally, to the voters through the school committee.

Do things (like the LaPlante fiasco) get through the net? Yes, but that doesnt mean there is "little or no accountability". After all, LaPlante was caught by the then-new Thornton administration.

Happy Correcting Corrente Month everybody!

4 days ago