UPDATED:
Folks have asked, " What was the ethics complaint about?" The answer...
Biancamano was brought up on ethics charges for disseminating false statements about the Hoboken School Disrict in 2013 when he ran for City Council while on the BoE.
Here's the campaign lit that got him in trouble. His campaign falsely claimed: "Hoboken schools spend about $30,000 yearly per student..." and "Hoboken Schools Cost as much as a Notre Dame Education"
In 2013-2014, Notre Dame's undergraduate tuition alone was $44,605.
In 2013-2014, Hoboken's "actual cost per pupil" that year was $21,142 .
Of course, Biancamano knew this since voted on the 2013-2014 proposed budget ($21,171).
Ask yourself: WHY would a sitting school board member attack his own school system with a LIE to advance his own political interests in Hoboken?
Probably for the same reason he would do this:
Original post on 01/25/2017
Holy cow, that is udderly abusive of the Hoboken taxpayer!
That's what you get when you let ethically-challenged board members play with Other People's Money.
The ethics charges brought against BoE Trustee Peter Biancamano could have been defended for HALF the amount.
Why choose such a costly defense attorney? ESPECIALLY if his 2012 Letter to the Editor called "Less money to lawyers equals more money in the classroom" was TRUTHFUL...
Was even one OUNCE of this letter written in good faith? Or was it hypocritical, politically-motivated grandstanding- blaming the Reform coalition on the BoE for "excessive" legal fees?
You decide.
Biancamano's "alternative facts" do not agree with the actual facts in archived audits of the Hoboken District Legal Costs. Our District's legal costs have STEADILY DECLINED since 2011:
Those are the facts.
So why did Biancamano put the Hoboken taxpayer on the hook for a $450/hour defense attorney?
Biancamano is correct; his $450/hour defense attorney fees came out of our children's classrooms....
First stop: our WALLETS.
Folks, GA has more to say on this subject, later.
But really, if YOU needed to defend yourself from Ethics Charges using OPM (other people's money)-effectively defunding a classroom- wouldn't YOU hire an attorney with a lower billing rate?
There are plenty out there.
Any Hoboken Board Trustee who really CARED about keeping money in the classroom, and protecting the District, would.
Folks have asked, " What was the ethics complaint about?" The answer...
Biancamano was brought up on ethics charges for disseminating false statements about the Hoboken School Disrict in 2013 when he ran for City Council while on the BoE.
Here's the campaign lit that got him in trouble. His campaign falsely claimed: "Hoboken schools spend about $30,000 yearly per student..." and "Hoboken Schools Cost as much as a Notre Dame Education"
click to enlarge
In 2013-2014, Notre Dame's undergraduate tuition alone was $44,605.
In 2013-2014, Hoboken's "actual cost per pupil" that year was $21,142 .
Of course, Biancamano knew this since voted on the 2013-2014 proposed budget ($21,171).
2016-2017 User Friendly Budget
Ask yourself: WHY would a sitting school board member attack his own school system with a LIE to advance his own political interests in Hoboken?
Probably for the same reason he would do this:
click photo to enlarge
 |
| Parents United campaign shines flashlight into the eyes of BoE candidates for opposing slate. Trustee BoE Peter Biancamano was Parents United's campaign manager. |
___________________________
Original post on 01/25/2017
Holy cow, that is udderly abusive of the Hoboken taxpayer!
That's what you get when you let ethically-challenged board members play with Other People's Money.
The ethics charges brought against BoE Trustee Peter Biancamano could have been defended for HALF the amount.
Why choose such a costly defense attorney? ESPECIALLY if his 2012 Letter to the Editor called "Less money to lawyers equals more money in the classroom" was TRUTHFUL...
Was even one OUNCE of this letter written in good faith? Or was it hypocritical, politically-motivated grandstanding- blaming the Reform coalition on the BoE for "excessive" legal fees?
You decide.
Biancamano's "alternative facts" do not agree with the actual facts in archived audits of the Hoboken District Legal Costs. Our District's legal costs have STEADILY DECLINED since 2011:
So why did Biancamano put the Hoboken taxpayer on the hook for a $450/hour defense attorney?
Biancamano is correct; his $450/hour defense attorney fees came out of our children's classrooms....
First stop: our WALLETS.
Folks, GA has more to say on this subject, later.
But really, if YOU needed to defend yourself from Ethics Charges using OPM (other people's money)-effectively defunding a classroom- wouldn't YOU hire an attorney with a lower billing rate?
There are plenty out there.
Any Hoboken Board Trustee who really CARED about keeping money in the classroom, and protecting the District, would.
The man is full of cow manure.
ReplyDeleteCan't wait to read the Petro-Spin on this one.
ReplyDeletePetro is attacking the schools again. Wonder if they know about his hate-fueled very public obsession at the University of Texas.
ReplyDeleteHe won't be able to curious gal his way out of this one.
DeleteNah, his university will white wash it. Contact the NSF. Send them a pile of his whacky kids first articles and fake graphs then ABRACADABRA... watch his grants DISAPPEAR. Poof!!!
Delete5:28- good point. The NSF is a federal agency so Petrosino's grant is taxpayer money. It's reasonable for taxpayers to be concerned where their money is going and who it is going to.
DeleteBetter to send links than hard copies.
What's the ethics complaint about?
ReplyDelete$450 could buy a lot of classroom supplies.
ReplyDeleteCosts per student is an odd way to talk about legal expenses since student enrollment isnt known. Can someone post legal expenses in dollar amounts over the same period?
ReplyDeleteCost per pupil is not odd, that is how funding and budgets are calculated. The information you want is probably available online, so why ask "someone" to do what you can do yourself?
DeleteStudent enrollment is on the budgets, too. Never seen one?
DeleteThis idiot has never had an original thought. Any thought that may have wandered through that grey cheesy mass inside his skull was placed there by the OG. Have you not witnessed his insipidly spontaneous typed-out remarks at the BOE? His contributions as a board member could just as easily be made by a cardboard cutout in his image sitting in his chair. I am sure that he cannot fathom the irony of using an overpriced lawyer paid for with tax payer funds to defend him against his own ethically challenged conduct, at the cost of the children about whom he claims to be concerned. Ethics - what ethics - I went to the Mamma Russo $5 a Tow Memorial High School. And I graduated at the top of my class with honors. Amazing that he lacks the objectivity to see his own irrelevancy. Give it up, schmuck.
ReplyDeleteSomething seems mentally off about Biancamano.
ReplyDeleteApparently, dude LOST his ethics defense and had to apologize to the board. I wonder how that expensive humble pie tasted?
ReplyDeleteSecondly, for someone with political aspirations, he is rather obtuse to the ways that certain factions are manipulating him and putting his reputation on the chopping block. Associating with Stick will only get you so far. The schnozzy laughing next to Caliccio captured in photos at the BOE forum will not be lost on parents or reform-minded citizens for years to come.
Ask Ruth McAllister whether he lost his ethics complaint....she should know.
ReplyDeleteIt's public information. Biancamano lost. It was read into the record.
Delete9:13 It was dismissed without prejudice-- as GA well knows.
DeleteNow how would you know that, "Dr." Petrosino @ 10:13?
DeleteDismissal "without prejudice" refers to "prejudice"against the complaint, which means the court sees merit but arguments were insufficient so the COMPLAINT MAY BE REFILED.
The Bajardi complaint was "dismissed WITH prejudice" which means the court never wants to see their garbage again. It cannot come back.
Hence, Biancamano was ordered to apologize, and if you are correct (doubtful, given your record) dismissal WITHOUT prejudice means the complaint is "open" to be re-filed. It was not tossed. Um in what universe is that a "win"?
Biancmano LOST.
Doc, you really need to learn more about the courts,, especially since a pair of SLAPPers want you to star in their re-trial.
GA, your interpretation is correct. It can absolutely be refiled. And I think it should be refiled - and the board should refuse to pay for his attorney this time around. Let the douche pay $450 an hour out of his own pockets.
DeleteIt was dismissed without prejudice--
ReplyDeleteEverything and everyone surrounding Biancamano always seems to be sketchy.
ReplyDeleteI think the BOE should have a resolution that if any board members are brought up on ethic charges they lay out their own money for their representation, if they win the board pays the attorney's fees if they lose they pay for it out of there own pocket. That way it's fair and transparent for all.
ReplyDeleteIn the 2013-2014 School year how many students were in the Hoboken system, including Public Charters?
ReplyDeleteLook it up.
DeleteWhere can I look it up? Does the BOE site have charter numbers?
Delete3:08 what do you want to know specifically? Please post and will send you info asap
Delete