Well, that didn't take long for him to lose his own past election team come this November.
Not to worry though - there's still has one groupie left following the Leader-less Shi.
Anyhoo, could it be his charming personalty or maybe his insistence that he can't be bothered listening to Residents & Fellow Board Members who don't agree with him?
Well, just saw the list of candidates running for the Edison School Board come November. There are 8 candidates running for 3 seats, which includes 2 Incumbents with 1 Incumbent (Mohin Patel) Not seeking reelection.
Seems Jerry 'ReferenDumb' Shi, aka Mr. Shi-shed is running for his 4th term on the Board. Geez, if there ever was a person to point to for the dire need for term-limits or Forced Retirement - it's Mr. Shi-shed.
He is, arguably the worst thing to ever fill a Seat on the Board of Mythomania, aka Board of Ed-Dems, Board of Hoarders, Board of Delusion and Board of Dysfunction - much less Lead it. His leadership was inept, his inability to properly address the Overcrowding for years as well as his inability to work with the Public and other Board Members is infamous. He makes bogus claims of 'Saving the taxpayers' millions when he never saved a dime for the taxpayers. He's always open to the opinions of others, as long as they agree with him. More of a self-empowering mini-dictator than an effective communicator and team builder needed to move the School District forward.
This guy needs to be Permanently Voted into Forced Retirement come November.
Haven't seen such an abuse of the Residents & Taxpayers under his 12 years of 'Wasteful time' on the Board since a Former Board President extended a then Super's contract after only 13 months into a 3 1/2 contract - and we ended up paying some $500,000 for that Super to Sit at Home.
There's more to say about his time on the Board but enough for now.
Be that as it may, here's the list of Board of Ed Candidates:
Well, how low can this guy go to try and make himself look good? Apparently, there's no limit for someone who comes with a lack of credibility and trustworthiness and has an anomoly with the truth.
Guess we'll have to give him another name - Mayor Sam 'The Big Lie' Joshi, aka Mr. Shrink-flation, Big-boy pants, the Weathervane Millennial, the Malleable Marionette, the Event Planner and Sam the Flim-flam Man.
'The Big Lie'
Anyhoo, who does such a thing to the People they're supposed to be Representing?
Well, this $170.2 million Muni-budget passed last night by a Vote of 5 to 2. Unfortunately, there was never any doubt that it would pass, no matter how Ridiculous it may have been or who it really serves, with Joe 'the Florist' Coyle on the Council.
Be that as it may, you can always question on the merits why the majority voted as they did but what you can't question is how they turned a Blind-eye to Joshi's Big Lie that resulted in the taxpayers getting scammed with an inflated 3rd Qtr tax bill and carried that scam into his 2023 Budget Presentation - just to try and hide his 3% tax increase.
It's one thing to go along with Mr. Shrink-flation's Out-of-Control $pending Budget for political reasons but it's quite another to close your eyes to the Big Lie that negatively impacted the Residents and Taxpayers that they're supposed to be serving.
Was it really necessary to erroneously increase the 3rd Qtr tax bills by approximately $250,000 just so Mr. Shrink-flation could hide his 3% tax increase from the Residents & Taxpayers?
Anyhoo, remember who Voted to turn a Blind-eye to the Big Lie and are up for reelection come November and how those not up for reelection have now joined Mr. Shrink-flation's Big Lie Club.
Well, couldn't find a video of the meeting but did see this slide presentation that's about as helpful as he is in informing the Public about what he's doing. Blah..blah..blah here's the numbers he wants you to see.
Take for example Salary & Wages of $74.9 million (which represent some 44% of the total appropriations) and are up $4.0 million or 5.7% over 2022. Nowhere will you find a proper reconciliation of the dollars and headcount by department which bridges the gap between 2022 and 2023. They don't show you what caused the increases. How much was salary increases, new hires and other additions or retirements, resignations, terminations or other deductions. So, you have no way of understanding what that $4 million was for or if it makes any sense. The only thing they show you is a summary staffing schedule which doesn't even add up for 2022.
Kind of interesting how he puts up a whole bunch of numbers about his budget and neglects to show you what the individual tax rates are and hides the only tax increases in the total property tax bill are his tax increases. It's deceptive and misleading, just like his stewardship.
Here take a look at this slide:
Notice it just shows you what the total dollars you would pay if you live in that imaginary home assessed at $182,400 but not the individual taxing entity rates. If you do the math with these numbers, you find it adds up to a total of $10,404.09 and on the assessed value of $182,400 - that equals a total rate of $5.704.
Now, if you continue doing the math, here's what you find is in the $5.704:
There are a few things wrong with these numbers.
First of all, you need to recognize that the only increases in these rates from 2022 are with the Muni-tax of $1.441, which is up $3.9-cents or 2.79% and the Library tax of $.088, which is up $1-cent. All the rest of the taxing entities have reductions in their tax rates from 2022.
Second, the School tax rate is overstated. The School tax rate for 2023-24 isn't $3.191 - it's $3.184, which is down $1.3-cents from last years $3.197. The numbers used in this presentation are just plain wrong as they were in the numbers they used in the 3rd Qtr. Estimate tax bills which erroneously inflated the amount of money going into the township coffers. The School tax rate of $3.191 used in this presentation is overstated by $.007 - 7/10's of a penny, and a penny is worth approximately $738,000.
Third, there's a claim that 'Our 2023 budget projects the first property tax cut for Edison homeowners since 1988.' Now, here's an example how you can be truthful, yet misleading.
Yes - the $5.704 total of all the taxing entities is less than last years $5.705 but No thanks to the Mayor Sam 'Shrink-flation' Joshi, aka Big-boy pants, the Weathervane Millennial, the Event Planner and Sam the Flim-flam man's Muni-budget, which has tax increases.
Fourth, the total tax rate should be $5.697, which is a reduction from the $5.704 used in this presentation and in the 3rd Qtr Estimate and you should see a reduction in your tax bills in the fourth quarter for that amount - and if the Council reduces that Muni-tax rate of $1.441 in this presentation, a further reduction of the $5.697.
Here's the Slide Presentation:
Saw this piece in Patch Across New Jersey here about salaries for superintendents, principals and other admin positions making $150,000 or more within New Jersey schools for the 2022-23 school year.
There are over 3,200 administrators who made over $150,000 during the 2022-23 school year - an increase after 2,556 did so last year.
Downloaded their data file and put into an Excel Table file. This site can't upload Excel files with drop down boxes so the info below is in pdf format. The excel file allows you to drill down to anything you want to see by the column heading and anyone who wants that file can just drop me an email and you're welcome to it.
Here are the Top 100 in New Jersey making $150,000 or more in pdf format:
Here are all those in Edison making $150,000 or more in pdf format:
Well, here we go. Looks like they'll be voting on this at their Retreat on Saturday. Part of that piecemeal plan that won't solve the overcrowding but just waste more time and money, as evidenced by the actual costs coming in that far exceed the costs used in this dubious plan the Board adopted.
Lease purchase agreements are the worst if you're a taxpayer - they avoid having to get voter approval for capital additions and don't get any state-aid for renovations or new construction.
Saw somewhere that this particular piece came in approximately $11-12 million over what was used in their original plan. A plan, by the way, that couldn't support the numbers used or justify the funding sources.
Trying to get a breakdown of the financing costs for this 5-Year Lease Purchase agreement and will share as soon as I get it.
Here's the agenda:
