Children Services’ artificially low wages deserved to be increased

Children Services’ artificially low wages deserved to be increased

I am writing this letter to try to provide some facts to balance the vitriol being written by The Vindicator Editorial Page staff. I am a retiree of Mahoning County Children Services and a recipient of a pension from the Public Employees Retirement System of Ohio. I both understand and, in some instances, share the feeling of your staff relative to excesses in government spending. Government employees are also taxpayers.

Further, I understand the role of the press in society and its responsibility to keep the public informed and its need to sell its product to continue that responsibility.

What is less clear is the apparent need of The Vindicator to constantly fan the flames of discontent about county government, in general, and taxes, in particular. Bertram de Souza, for example, seems to write an inordinate number of his columns about government pensions and the secrecy around those pensions. We all understand that public employees and their retirements are paid from public funds. However, there is no secrecy regarding the amount of those pensions if one knows salaries of public employees (a matter of public record), and is able to add, divide and multiply (pension formulas are codified and available to the public).

The taxpaying public might want to know that public employees are not eligible for Social Security benefits, a fact never mentioned in these articles. Also, I hope The Vindicator staff understands that the bulk of the cost of service programs is the staff providing the service. Failure to fairly compensate these individuals will ultimately lead to constant turnover and less seasoned staff in positions that often require a high degree of expertise.

As for the case of Mahoning County Children Services, this agency has been an exceptional steward of taxpayers’ funds for all its history. Salaries have been kept artificially low for decades. All caseworkers (degreed individuals who make all-important decisions about the safety of our county’s kids) who have been hired in the past eight years have been frozen at under $30,000 per year. It is patently unfair to talk about the percentage raise someone receives without the context of what their salary is.

Salaries of all positions at the agency are substantially lower than positions at all other Mahoning County agencies. Increased costs over the past decade relate to specific line items in the agency budget. Perhaps the staff of your paper could spend time exploring those issues; we Vindicator readers might like some new stories.

David E. Arnold, Canfield

Youngstown was not worthy of the talents of Superintendent Hathorn

My deepest sympathy to Youngstown’s Schools Superintendent Connie Hathorn. He has the qualifications to perform his job properly. The school board tried to micro- manage his every decision perhaps with questionable credentials. What level of education does the school board bring to the table?

I remember a while ago Superintendent Hathorn called for a parent-teacher meeting to solve some problems concerning the students. Not one parent attended. I believe that says it all.

Last year, my 8-year-old granddaughter, to celebrate Halloween, walked around the parking lot of Hilltop Elementary School in Canfield just one time with other students to show their costumes.

All parking areas were filled to capacity. Parents and grandparents parked as far as two blocks away. What does that tell you?

I know some people will say that I don’t know what goes on in Youngstown; oh but I do. My wife and I both grew up on the East Side, graduated, receiving the education that spurred us on in life and attended college for further education in our chosen fields. Times have changed.

Good bye Connie Hathorn. Youngstown didn’t deserve you.

Richard Colonna, Poland

South Range must prove fiscal restraint before trying levy again

First I wish to thank The Vindicator for keeping the public, most of all the voters of the South Range school system, abreast of the “shenanigans” and the wool pulling regarding the school board’s actions. Had it not been for The Vindicator’s in-depth reporting, there would have been another “back room” deal pushed through. The only thing missing was the smoke-filled room.

In regards to the vote by the school board to install Amy White, who I am sure is a fine individual, I highly question its choice. At a time when the taxpayers of South Range school system are stretched far beyond their limits of shelling out any more funds for a new levy, the board should have looked for a person not affiliated with any school system.

Amy White, a teacher at the United Local School District, is not someone who I believe would be able to look over the financial picture and needs of South Range and not be impartial to the teachers and their union.

As the South Range school superintendent had stated how badly the recently defeated tax levy was needed, maybe the new appointee for the South Range School District should have been a person with a business background – one who would not be afraid to make cuts where needed, and until the economy makes a huge turnaround, maybe look into concessions from the teachers union.

If the school budget is so tight, why in the world did the school board vote to once again place this new levy on the May ballot at a cost of $12,000? The voters had already turned this levy down by a vote of 70 percent in the last election, which I might add was at no cost. I guess when the funds are not coming out of their pockets, who cares?

Please listen to the voters who have already spoken and do what we voters do – live within a budget. When the economy improves and you can show us you are financially responsible with our monies, which you have not, then come back with a new levy proposal – but not until then.

Dale Rhinehart, Canfield

To give peace a chance, give women a chance at presidency

In my 82 years – 83 by the next presidential election in 2016 – obviously every president has been male. During these 82 years, there has not been one president who has not had a war, some of which were inherited from previous administrations. By this record, it is also obvious that we are a warring nation rather than a nation of peace.

To cite Dennis Kucinch’s question: With all of the government departments this nation has that are war-oriented, why not a Department of Peace? What a novel and innovation idea that is.

It must be taken into account how deadly and costly wars under all of the presidents have been. Two of the most costly were Daddy Bush’s “Desert Storm” and Son Bush’s wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which he would not include in the budget as they were off the books to hide the monetary costs. It is apparent another Bush wants to be president. In no way can this country afford another Bush to put us even deeper in debt by another war.

How can anyone support the latest Bush who wants to be president, by overlooking the wreckage wrought by his Daddy and brother? Talk about blinders and would be sheep followers! Such lemmings would really put us over the precipice.

Because all these males support wars, it is past time for a female, whoever that may be, to be president of the U.S.

Females by nature are more into care taking and nurturing than murder by creating wars. Wars are a rather barbaric form of population control. Where are the pro-lifers in terms of continuous wars?

Give a woman a chance to try to right our nation. Perhaps she could work with other countries’ female leaders, such as Angela Merkel, who has not had a war. Follow the histories of women in executive powers and make a comparison between male and female wars.

Shirley A. Bartlett, Austintown