Curmudgeon comment-79120 2013-02-01T16:27:43Z 2013-02-01T16:27:43Z How is a tragic road accident like a criminally violent death? Curmudgeon 2013-02-01T16:27:43Z rgreenwald1 comment-45195 2011-02-06T19:17:54Z 2011-02-06T19:17:54Z It is a shame the the teachers bear the brunt of poor fiscal management. A school district should never get to this point. it's no different then running your household. Live within your means every day and you won't have these problems. Where was the Board when spending went over budget? Our economy will likely be more volatile for years to come. We are only just beginning to feel the effects of permanently higher rates of unemployment and in turn, lower tax receipts. If receipts drop 10% you have to immediately cut spending the same or rasie ad valorem taxes. It has become painfully apparent that if you don't embrace fiscal responsibility, it will be forced upon you in way that is out of your control. Since you are now past the point of no return..... teachers take the pay hit.....homeowners...approve the necessary tax hikes. Slowly pay down your debt. after 10 years and you are healthy again...you can think about better days. Have no misconceptions. There is no quick fix and you better be prepared to suck it up for a good 10 years. Budget and plan accordingly. rgreenwald1 2011-02-06T19:17:54Z thsas comment-44875 2011-02-01T22:02:46Z 2011-02-01T22:02:46Z For the teacher that lives across the street from me, as I stated, it is a fact. I pay money in taxes that as I understood it, pays for school. I have asked questions, I have not complained. If you do not like your salary or your job, quit, (you sound very bitter). Please do not take the position that as a citizen I must NOT question the school system. You need to show some respect for the people that you serve. College degrees are a dime a dozen, so there are no bragging rights there. $60,000 for 10 months work annualizes to $72K a year. You are in the top 10% of earners in America! Rejoice! Is there a retirement plan with that? Do you save your post--tax dollars in an IRA? At what age do you get to retire, and how will it compare to the national age of retirement for most of America? Again, questions. TEACH me. thsas 2011-02-01T22:02:46Z natomasmom comment-44871 2011-02-01T21:41:14Z 2011-02-01T21:41:14Z thsas-You have no idea what teachers do. And to insinuate that other teachers are home by 4 and drunk by 5 because of your neighbor is disrespectful to teachers everywhere. I am a teacher and yes, I am usually home by 4. But that is because I have to pick up my own children from school, because I can't afford afterschool care. After I put my own children to bed I spend the next few hours grading papers and planning my lessons. As far as pay goes, we are not paid to work 50 weeks a year. We are paid to work for 10 months (or so). I have a college degree, a credential (another year of school)and a master's degree and I make around $60000. Oh and I am not a new teacher, I have been around for 13 years. Quit complaining about teachers and their salaries when we all have AT LEAST 5 years of college,if not more, when there are people out there with NO COLLEGE who make a lot more than teachers. Show some respect because we are the ones there in the classrooms educating YOUR children. natomasmom 2011-02-01T21:41:14Z thsas comment-44861 2011-02-01T19:27:23Z 2011-02-01T19:27:23Z From your description, I suspect you are not the typical teacher. Perhaps teachers now do work full time (being 40-50 hours a week, 50 weeks a year). While my daughter was in school I attempted many times to meet with her teachers before 8 or after 5 or on the weekends, but they vanished from the property by 4 PM and would not meet on the weekends. There seemed to be about 30 holiday days off. (my current neighbor is a school teacher...home by 4, drunk by 5 , off lots and lots of days for Spring and Christmas, and off all summer) My experience with public sector is about 5 annual Holidays off, no vacation until after the first year, then one week vacation for the next 4 years, then 2 weeks vacation until the 10th year, for a maximum of 3 weeks vacation. It varies, some get more, many get less. My wife works at a place than has no paid vacation, (or any benefits), and that is not uncommon either. Working 10+ a day is pretty normal stuff for most folks. Working weekends? We have a saying around here; if you don' work Saturday, don’t even bother to show up on Sunday., thsas 2011-02-01T19:27:23Z clcsacto comment-44853 2011-02-01T18:39:05Z 2011-02-01T18:39:05Z I started teaching in 2005, as a second career. I am contracted to work 185 days, and my schedule depends on my school site, but was 8-2. I stayed every single day from 7am until 9pm for the first year, and until 7pm the 2nd year. I worked every single sunday in my classroom, until my principal told me i couldn't in the spring of my 3rd year. I left a good career, with 3 weeks off and 13 holidays (private company), and that amounts to 232 days worked per year; at 8 hours/day that's 1856 hours. SO, i worked 804 hours MORE in my first year teaching. I worked 434 more hours my second year, and by my 3rd year i was ONLY working in my classroom from 7am-5pm, so i worked 64 more hours that year than when i was in private industry. I left a job that paid me $129K my last year, and took a job for $40k so I could try to encourage this generation to get the most out of their education and succeed . My pay has SOARED to $60K because I have 5 years experience and 90 (countem 90) college units post grad. This year I am 40% part-time: 40% of my private company job was 92.8 days (after holidays and vacation). When i consider the time i spend in my classroom and at home prepping for classes and grading papers, and attending professional developpment workshops (which I pay for) and doing adjunct duty (how many other employers can tell employees they have to show up on Saturday night for 5 hours for free?????) and after hour meetings, I will again be working MORE than if I was back in my old 6-figure job, by 24 hours actually! In private company terms that is $1700 more dollars that I am giving up for the privilege of teaching our youth. And I do mean privilege. Don't tell ME we aren't getting our money's worth!!!! (I'm a taxpayer too) clcsacto 2011-02-01T18:39:05Z thsas comment-44842 2011-02-01T17:38:19Z 2011-02-01T17:38:19Z Are teachers working full time, as in 40-50 hours a week, 50 weeks a year? I know as little as 4 years ago, they were not. Seems like we should make sure we get our money’s worth first before we grab more. thsas 2011-02-01T17:38:19Z Calicosmo21 comment-22706 2010-02-28T05:01:41Z 2010-02-28T05:01:41Z They need to keep the Arena in Natomas. The Arena is what makes this side of town a desirible area. Plus its easy to get to for travelers coming there to an event. Down town is already a nightmare driving there ... that will just make traffic absolutely worse. Even may cause accidents because of the location that people will not be used to. I believe if the arena was relocated this town would fall apart. Most of the stores and restaraunts get there business from the arena and lots of places would close if that happend. I think this town would turn low class and I do not want to see that happen its a nice area ideal for the Arena Calicosmo21 2010-02-28T05:01:41Z HonestAbe comment-20853 2010-01-22T17:45:07Z 2010-01-22T17:45:07Z Welcome or unwelcome, agreeable or disagreeable, whether we shall spend another penny on this tiresome plan to waste the public's money, is the issue before us. HonestAbe 2010-01-22T17:45:07Z beerzie comment-20852 2010-01-20T02:58:13Z 2010-01-20T02:58:13Z Would this be the same Tretheway who has fought against light rail going up Truxel Boulevard and thus making the current and any potential arena more accessible? beerzie 2010-01-20T02:58:13Z The Parrhesiac comment-20826 2010-01-19T03:22:19Z 2010-01-19T03:22:19Z In the end taxpayers are going to be forced to pay for this piece of crap arena... I don't care what they say, there is not one private company who is going to pony up all the cash without loan guarantees from the City. Johnson and his cronies will come out and say that whatever proposal will be 100% privately financed. But wait until you read the fine print, it will not be built without loan guarantees or municipal bonds. Loan guarantees = tax payers paying...within 5 years, the new arena owners (probably an LLC of Maloof's and the Greek Mob) will go bankrupt, the tax payers will be left holding the bag, and the City will give the arena to the Maloof's and/or the Greeks for next to nothing, while we get to pay for it for the next 30 years. There is simply no way in hell that the tax payers are going escape paying for it. The Parrhesiac 2010-01-19T03:22:19Z cogmeyer comment-20823 2010-01-18T23:50:56Z 2010-01-18T23:50:56Z I could care less where the arena goes, or for that matter if there is an arena at all. But at a time when we need a city council actually working on behalf of all Sacramentans for this important and costly decision, we have Trethaway lurching off on a "Save Natomas" gambit. What's next, a Rob Fong led rally in favor of locating the arena in the duck pond in William Land Park? cogmeyer 2010-01-18T23:50:56Z Rhys02 comment-20821 2010-01-18T21:15:03Z 2010-01-18T21:15:03Z Tretheway would be backing this... We finally have some world class (well at least one w/ financing) proposals. Tretheway and his backers claim that all Arco needs is a can of paint. What is forgotten in this debate is the number of conventions Sacramento loses every year, because of Arco's current location. Conventions over and over again have backed out...they will not deal with the hassle of busing to Arco. Natomas should back the move... with the massive increase coming into the city coffers, there will be more money for city services.. For the Natomas Chamber of Commerce to claim that retail activity grew up as a result of Arco...go back to school and learn a little economics. Except for one or two businesses, all of the retail growth has been following the rooftops, NOT Arco. Rhys02 2010-01-18T21:15:03Z jsf8278 comment-20798 2010-01-18T19:46:05Z 2010-01-18T19:46:05Z Have you actually ever been to the Staples Center? Obviously not, b/c if you had, you would know that it absolutely DID revitalize that area of LA. No it didn't revitalize the entire downtown LA area, but no one claims that it did. jsf8278 2010-01-18T19:46:05Z rick comment-20784 2010-01-18T01:36:16Z 2010-01-18T01:36:16Z The Natomas area and people have nothing but helped and supported the downtown area. Not sure how you could think they have not. The vast population of Natomas has shopped in the downtown area, ate in downtown restaurants and supported events in the downtown area. Do you think other outlying areas do that? Do people from Roseville support the downtown area? Elk Grove? I would think not. Fact is --- Natomas has been good for downtown. I have been to most of the other cities in the US that have a sports arenas in their downtown and to be honest, most have not worked out well. Has The Staples Center revitalized the downtown LA area? NO. Still high crime and too many homeless. Indianapolis RCA dome? NO -- in fact it was moved away from downtown because it was not working. Denver -- ok yes but their downtown was much better situited that ours is. Oh and they moved their new football stadium further away from downtown. Hmmmmm. Seattle? NO - the Supersonics left Oakland? Oh yes that worked. OKC -- yes that one worked. No really it did. I could go on... but I think I made my point. Just because you build a new sports area in a cities downtown, does not make it a good deal for that city. Yes, Natomas is a better fit than downtown for a sports arena. Yes, Ray Tretheway is a bone head. But I hope he can keep the arena here in Natomas. rick 2010-01-18T01:36:16Z bbbbmer comment-20782 2010-01-17T22:48:29Z 2010-01-17T22:48:29Z ARCO can be exapnded outward and upward using the existing structure enhanced with new superstructure for a build out. You clearly have never engaged in rehabbing, renovation, or retrofitting buildings... Apart from that, your 'analysis' is merely ephemeral and aesthetic at best, at a time when we can't afford gold plated doilies for sport... bbbbmer 2010-01-17T22:48:29Z Mark comment-20779 2010-01-17T22:17:39Z 2010-01-17T22:17:39Z Of course, the Natomas Chamber of Commerce is going to be against what's good for the whole city -IF they feel it will in any way threaten their member's profits. Never mind that the Natomas sprawl has for many years done significant damaged our downtown's economy. Here is the problem with our out-dated council district system -city councilman Ray Tretheway represents both Natomas and the northern chunk of our downtown where new arena is proposed. Now can you guess how many voters live in the downtown section of District 1 compared to how many live in the suburban Natomas. We will have to wait and see how this will affect his support of the land swap. Mark 2010-01-17T22:17:39Z William Burg comment-20776 2010-01-17T21:28:00Z 2010-01-17T21:28:00Z The reason why everyone is in midtown is because Midtown has housing, thus there are enough people in the neighborhood to make it not feel like a ghost town. This draws visitors from the suburbs. Downtown is a ghost town because it has a severe lack of residential units. The residential units there are limited to SRO hotels, senior housing, 2-3 apartment buildings, and the main jail. The entertainment district is currently receiving its kickstart, around 10th & K. William Burg 2010-01-17T21:28:00Z John Boyer comment-20775 2010-01-17T20:56:29Z 2010-01-17T20:56:29Z You have no such accurate remembrance of a country you have driven through, as you gain by riding a bicycle. --Ernest Hemingway, 'Battle for Paris', 1944 I like the idea of people coming to the stadium by foot,bike and train. John Boyer 2010-01-17T20:56:29Z John Gladding comment-20773 2010-01-17T19:51:16Z 2010-01-17T19:51:16Z Unfortunately, though many cities have done this, this is why it's actually more expensive: 1) You can't expand to add another level of luxury boxes (all arenas these days have 2 rows of luxury boxes - they bring in the most revenue) 2) The walls of Arco are only so wide. The already slim concourse around the arena can't possibly be expanded without knocking down 2 walls and a roof. 3) The dressing rooms for entertainers (whether they are Britney Spears of the Kings) are already way small. 4) The pipes for icemaking are laid in concrete and need to be ripped up In essence, you'd have to knock down 2 walls and a roof to do this, and you're basically starting over. The Kings would have to play in Oakland for 3 years or Memorial Auditorium (which seats maybe 3000), which would kill revenue. We don't have the luxury of having old arenas nearby. I'm not sure where people get this "least cost" option. None of this takes in to consideration that you don't want to pay for it either - you'd rather shoot down a great plan that's paid for. As for downtown needing housing - it already has housing. Not sure you have been to downtown on a weekend or weekday night lately but it's a ghost town (everyone is in midtown). It needs something to kickstart an entertainment district. The Railyards is where it needs to be. It's next to the train stations, right off the freeway, and oh yeah... it's paid for. John Gladding 2010-01-17T19:51:16Z rick comment-20764 2010-01-17T06:23:16Z 2010-01-17T06:23:16Z If you build it, they will come. Keep the new arena in Natomas. rick 2010-01-17T06:23:16Z bbbbmer comment-20760 2010-01-17T03:26:30Z 2010-01-17T03:26:30Z An ARCO retrofit is the least cost option, at a time when we have far more pressing needs than doling out cash on behalf of overpaid players and ostentatious owners who have no chance of fulfilling their 'commitment' announced in the 'land swap' deal... As for downtown density, this is an amenity??? The downtown needs housing -- not an arena... bbbbmer 2010-01-17T03:26:30Z Reno comment-20732 2010-01-16T18:59:23Z 2010-01-16T18:59:23Z Continuing the practice of spreading the civic amenities into the suburbs will only add to traffic congestion and continue the planning practice of the 70’s and 80’s. We need to address the issues of not realizing an environmentally friendly city and I feel this is the first step towards that goal. Natomas does not have a light rail link or an Amtrak station or even a bus stop to the stadium. By moving the entertainment facility into the rail yards we can take the first step towards creating a new dense downtown environment that is successful for the environment and the city. Reno 2010-01-16T18:59:23Z