Both the Express-Times (read it here) and the Morning Call (read it here) have articles (from late last week) about Dr. Lesky’s comments regarding the lawsuit filed against LNT.
If I remember correctly, the school will save $50,000 (later revised to $80,000) per year on its electric bill (read previous post) at Lower Nazareth Elementary.
The current school budget is: $68,100,000. The amount of money the district is suing LNT over is one tenth of a percent of its total budget.
The Morning Call quotes, “"We're facing shortfalls in keeping our programs in effect," Lesky said after the conference. "Here is what we consider an excellent way to save a huge sum of dollars that will enable us to put those dollars toward education — all of this stands to be lost if the township supervisors don't change their minds."
The Express-Times quotes, “In a statement read this morning, Lesky said, "Implementation of this project would allow the dollars saved to be allocated toward maintaining current programs and services for our students, keeping class sizes at reasonable levels and allowing the current real estate tax millage to stay within state (standards)."
4 comments:
I think they could have found that 50 grand SOMEWHERE in all the spending that has gone down in the last couple of years.
I am all for the solar farm, but, and this is the big BUT, how can Lesky honestly stand up there and talk about saving $50-$80K when he was all for spending $50M+ on the new MS, the new football field, the new weight room, the new field house, and the list can go on and on.
The BOS in LNT turned it down. Filing a law suit will only cost us more than we would have saved. It is time to cut the losses and move on and find other ways to decrease the budget.
Like maybe cut an administrator or two.
Most people who don't pay attention would read the NASD's remarks and think LNT was devastating education.
This same argument is brought out each budget year and every other time the school wants something.
In context, the money saved is nominal - not that I don't want them saving money, but they spend it so freely so often, it does kind of grind you to see the argument made now.
Isn't this found money? The way he argues this is like arguing that taxes will go up because the school hasn’t opened a gas station or restaurant on school property.
What's the purpose of the school, anyways?
Post a Comment