Report Inappropriate Comments

Mr. Corrente,

We've been down this road before with the Cranston comparisons but let me remind you again. Warwick pays FICA for it's teachers, Cranston does not. That's worth about $5-6 million. In addition, our teachers earn more than Cranston's. Also I believe we have a larger geography to cover so we run more buses than does Cranston and buses aren't cheap. In those three areas is where the vast majority of that difference lies. Look at Cranston's budget trajectory over the past ten years and you'll see that they're quickly closing that gap. We agree that our results are simply not commensurate with what we spend. There is no reason at all that Warwick should consistently land in the bottom third of achievement. That said, to not invest in our school building infrastructure will say more about our community that anything else. Our students and teachers deserve modernized facilities and increased classroom technology. Oh, and I need to correct your insinuations that bond funds will somehow be spent on everything else but capital projects. In a word, they can't so please stop spreading a patently false accusation that somehow that's been done in the past. Lastly, the School budget is audited annually by a thiird party auditing firm chosen by the city and that audit is a public document. .

David Testa