Ever hear the one about throwing stones in a glass house?
It goes like this: HoLa ("stakeholder") files an ethics complaint against 3 sitting Hoboken BoE Trustees. That opens up scrutiny of HoLa's administration and Board.
After all, it's only fair to question HoLa's moral authority to file "ethics" charges against the BoE, right?
It's also fair to scrutinize claims the charter "operates on half... the Hoboken district operates on" at the same time they hide their taxpayer-funded budgets, costs and expenditures.
"All around, we have a very successful public school—that operates on half of the per-pupil taxpayer funding that the Hoboken district operates on."The more we peek behind the curtain, the curiouser it gets- see above letter response to a District "stakeholder's" OPRA.
-HoLa Board President, Barbara Martinez-
Who's insured and who's not?
An OPRA request from HoLa for a breakdown of costs for health insurance returned these "estimated" yearly premiums:
- Medical: $89,008.32
- Dental: $27, 600
That totals $116,608.32 in "estimated" health insurance premiums for at least 15 classroom teachers, 10 administrators, 5 specials teachers (Art, Music, Gym, Health & Fitness, STEM) and unknown additional support staff.
That seems awfully low doesn't it?
A former NJ public school teacher told me that average health premiums cost a district anywhere from $25K to $40K per person.
If 30 HoLa employees are getting health benefits, that would amount to $4K per person. That's incredibly cheap, by any measure. Impossibly cheap?
So then, who is insured, and who is not?
The school denied the OPRA request for that information "on advice of our legal counsel we cannot provide the names of employees who participate in health plans due to privacy laws."
Um, baloney. Public sector employees who collect taxpayer-funded health benefits is not privileged information.
|source: 2015 Taxpayer's Guide to Education Spending- HoLa Dual Language Charter School|
So, what exactly is going on?
Why deny access to public information? The OPRA already provided requested administrators' salaries and benefits, yet full disclosure of insured violates "privacy laws?"
It doesn't make sense. Or does it?
|Anthony Petrosino deposition in Petrosino v Board of Education- he LOST, the BoE WON its counterclaim|