Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Clarification on the School District's Stimulus Funds

At last night’s meeting, Dr. O’Malley clarified the details swirling around the use of the stimulus funds for balancing the budget and funding the RTI program.

Last March, the state informed the Matawan-Aberdeen school district that funding would be flat. Dr. O’Malley then presented a zero tax-levy increase budget based upon the state’s assurance that state funding would remain at the prior year’s level.

In September, the state informed the school district that federal stimulus money had been used to fund the state’s obligations to the school district. The federal government was now requiring a report as to how many jobs were “created or saved” through the use of the federal stimulus funds.

Dr. O’Malley recommended we report to the state that the funds were used to “save” the RTI teaching positions.

Moving forward, however, Dr. O’Malley does not expect that funding will be available next year. That means we’re likely looking at a $1.7 million revenue shortfall for next year.

Next month, the district will provide a review of the RTI program. Undoubtedly, a $1.7 million revenue shortfall will entail program cuts somewhere or everywhere.
>>> Read more!


Anonymous said...

Was the meeting well attended?.

Was the topic of the disgraceful and repeated violent actions of this same football coach discussed? Was it completely again ignored by school management? Did anyone do any favors for Gorilla Joe Martucci's man as to a lawyer or the charges in total being downplayed or done away with?

Mr. Aberdeener please advise those of us who could not attend the meeting last night as to a recap of the meeting. When will it be broadcast on Ch. 15? That would be informative as well.


Aberdeener said...

The board meeting will be televised Thursday and Monday, 7 PM.

Here's the schedule for Huskievision.

By the way, Huskievision will soon be available to FIOS customers.

Anonymous said...

Can it be aired durning the day... I work second shift from 4 to 11.

Aberdeener said...

Once it goes to video, the school website has video streaming.

Anonymous said...

To answer Anonymous,
Since our board member will not answer your questions maybe this will help. The topic of the disgraceful and repeated violent actions of the football coach in question was not discussed. It was completely ignored by school management, and since it was, your third question could not be answered. What did come up was two parents who suggested the athletic director/head football coach was disgraceful by telling a student to never come to him for anything, and as athletic director he will never do anything to help him. He also addressed the team and announced that the student Is Dead To Him. The administration and some board members obviously knew about it and did nothing. If this happened to any one of these board members children, this would not be tolerated, and another example of the superintendent protecting bad behavior. Where are you, if true, on this type of behavior of an administator, Joey?

Anonymous said...

I heard about a number of parents who publicly complained about the Athletic Director at the Education Board meeting last night. Not sure, but there was talk that an investigation is being conducted about his actions as head coach of the football team?

Friends of the Athletic Director are the ones making the posts regarding the “coach”. He is using his friends to post on this blog to get the attention directed away from him. The other "coach" that his friends have been trying to discredit has helped us get the best football record in years.

The Education Board and numerous Superintendents have allowed this guy to do anything he wants over the years. This has to stop. His football above all sports attitude stinks and hurts our other athletes. It is time for him to go.

Superintendent O'Malley, as a high school parent of a non-football athlete, I want to know when the other sports (especially women’s sports) are going to be treated equally with football?

Anonymous said...

I actively post about the other coach. I take offense to you insinuating that we are posting to deflect from Martucci.

Supposedly, Martucci is the reason this other coaches behavior was swept up under the rug the last time, trust me, I'm NO fan of Martucci.

They better not cover up the other guys crimes again. As far as Martucci goes..F him too, if he did what was posted previously, he should be fired.

Anonymous said...

Easy solution, get rid of the A.D. and the ex NFL player with questionable morals.

Aberdeener said...

Just a reminder -

It is illegal for any school board member to direct action for or against any employee or student.

Anonymous said...

You always have an opinion and without getting into specifics, if what the parents allege is true what should be done to that administrator. Better yet, what if you were the parent of a student who was treated this way, what would you expect the superintendent and board of education to do to make this right.

Anonymous said...

First, as a stalwart of this community, Martucci deserves the benefit of any doubt. Second, I have never known Martucci to be as cruel and dismissive as the above poster suggests. Third, a good question is what did the student do to warrant such a reprimand?

(No one has posted that information and I'm curious as what behavior led to this "incident")

Anonymous said...

The student went to Martucci to complain about the abusive conduct of coaches. Martucci said "You're dead to me." Martucci told the team that the player quit the team and that they should deal with him as they see fit. This is what was told to the Board of Ed. Seems pretty condemning, no?

Play ball said...

Joe does not help students as much as people think. That has been known for years. Time for Joe to go has long since past.

Anonymous said...

He is untouchable like he has been for many years. Football winning at all costs to promote his legacy is now in the forefront. They are winning again so don't expect anything to happen here.

Anonymous said...

After watching tonights podcast of the recent board meeting it becomes obvious that what people on this blog have been talking about is appalling. Dr. O'Malleys silence on the remarks made about the athletic director speaks volumes. The parents tried to resolve this issue with the athletic director and the superintendent with no satisfaction. Board president Kenny did not give correct information ("get a lawyer", I guess he he can't help it) to the parent who asked what is the next step. He should have referred those parents to the public complaints and grievances of the community section in the policies of the district. After the inability of the superintendent to satisfy the parties, they have the right to appeal to the board of education. Later Mr. O'Connell tried to clarify Mr. Kennys position saying he believed the board did have an obligation to hear the complaints. Dr. O'Malley should not be allowed to bury this situation as he did with the football coach with the anger problems. There is obviously a problem in this program and how some of our student atheletes are being handled. Dr. O'Malley has an obligation to explain the outcome and why no action was taken on both these issues.

Anonymous said...

Is it true that the board president did not handle the requests of those parents correctly at the board meeting? If what she said was true and her son was treated that way, her next course of action is to retain a lawyer? Wouldn't that cost the district more money to defend such a case? Shouldn't this be resolved by the administration and the board? I am sure she has some recourse with the commissioner of education before having to hire an attorney.

Aberdeener said...

These are the procedures as I understand them.


The principal investigates then, at the conclusion of the investigation, has 10 business days to issue a report and "take steps to avoid any further hazing and/or harassment, intimidation, or bullying behavior and to prevent any retaliation against the pupil who made the complaint, was the subject of the behavior, or against those who provided the information or were witnesses."

Anybody involved can appeal to the superintendent who then gets 10 business days to review the principal's report.

Anybody can then appeal again to the school board who has 45 calendar days to review the report.

Therein lies the problem. The school board is legally barred from directing the superintendent to act for or against and employee. Furthermore, the board has to initiate a separate process to even discuss an employee.

So, what happens if a parent isn't satisfied? As Mr. Kenny suggested, a parent always has the recourse to pursue legal action but I don't see that as a viable option based upon her statements.

I believe she said she filed a complaint. If so, we should let the process finish before jumping to any conclusions.

Anonymous said...

I believe the regulation you refer to is related to pupil behavior. This may come in to play if the students react negatively based on what was said to them but does not apply now. Her complaint was with the actions of an administrator. The superintendent should handle this (if what was said is true) in a responsible manner not like he did in allowing a football coach with questionable morals to continue.

Aberdeener said...

The regulations cover both employees and students. The only change in the current situation is that any penalty would need to be imposed by the superintendent because he is the only one with authority over a director.