Have your kids learn to measure people by the size of their hearts and not the size of their bank accounts.
Do you think you know what children want the most from their parents? Toys? Vacations? Money? Time together? Surveys show that children want for their parents to be less tired and stressed. This response beat out spending more time with their parents and wanting a bigger allowance. If you can reduce your stress and exhaustion, you may improve your relationship with your children.
Another public relations consultant model that some school systems are using are similar to the Concord-Carlisle Regional School District method. As opposed to hiring an independent consultant at inflated hourly charges, they pay an in-house consultant an inflated yearly salary. This is instead of the time-honored tradition of the Superintendent of Schools telling the truth directly to parents. In Concord-Carlisle Regional School District’s case, they pay a PART-TIME communications manager $40,000 per year. Other local hires include Newton Public Schools that hire a Communications and Community Engagement Coordinator for $60,000, Marlborough Public Schools that employs a Communications Liaison for $65,000 and Brockton Public Schools with their Communications Officer making $70,000.
When a crisis flares up, many school districts turn to overpriced public relations consultants to spin the school system’s point of view to the public. Some school systems follow the Lexington Public Schools model by hiring an independent consultant that works for lots of different schools every time there is an embarrassing situation. In Lexington, they pay their public relations consultant an initial retainer charge of $5,000 for 20 hours of work. Then starting with the 21st hour of work, Lexington pays the consultant $300 per hour.
Lexington Public Schools in the past hired a public relations consultant at the above pay rate several years ago when some parents complained about the school system using and promoting a book on same sex families. Last fall she was hired to speak to the public about a calming time-out room that was written about in a newspaper. Now they are back at it again hiring the same consultant to defend the school system’s handling of a controversial athletic director who was placed on unpaid leave. Again the $177,000+ salaried Superintendent and the $150,000 Assistant Superintendents are “too busy” to include communicating with the public as a part of their job description. Tune in tomorrow for entirely different way these money-wasting public relations leeches are bleeding the school systems dry of your children’s tax dollars.
Do not accept unacceptable behavior.
A great pleasure in life is having your student do what others including the know-it-all “experts” say your student cannot do.
Most schools comply with the new low calorie limits (650 – 850 depending on grade level) by giving out smaller portions. Kids complain that after they eat lunch, they are not full. As a result of schools putting caloric limits on school lunches, some students have started to protest. Students in Kansas made a spoof video on YouTube called “We Are Hungry”. Many Wisconsin students boycotted school lunches and started to bring in food from home.
With a high school calorie limit of 850, they are not taking into account a student’s weight. For example an 85 lb freshman and 280 lb senior each get the same portions by law. Some students have to purchase 2 meals just to get full. To get the equivalent of the amount of lunch kids got last year, they would have to spend about $6 – $7 now.
These smaller lunch portions were created with the assumption that all students are getting a full and filling breakfast at home before school. Unfortunately in the real world this does not always happen. For some students this scaled back lunch is often the main meal they rely on to get them through the rest of the day. In fact this meal is supposed to hold athletes over until their late night dinner after sports.
In order to comply with the new forced limits on grains, protein, sodium and fats; schools have begun to act silly. For example Minuteman Regional Vocational Technical High School in Lexington, MA has removed its SALAD BAR!!! One would assume that salad is healthy however not the government. Being afraid that the school could not control the portions of protein or grains the students would take out of the salad bar, they decided to remove it all together. In Shrewsbury, MA they decided croutons on a salad added too much grains to the meal so they banned them. Also on the Shrewsbury hit list and now banned from their salad bar are hard-boiled eggs and turkey slices because the nanny state can not regulate how much protein one will take. Whole-wheat pasta salad is also a no-no because the nanny state says that kids may get too many grains. After all of this Shrewsbury silliness, the school system brought in $10,000 less in September 2012 lunch sales than in the same month 2011.
After the new federal rules designed to help kids eat healthier, some schools are reporting fewer kids are buying lunch. The new rules limit the amount of grains, protein, sodium and saturated fat that school lunches subsidized by the US Department of Agriculture may contain. Trans fats are banned and calories per meal are capped. Many students have been upset with smaller portions. For example in Brookline, MA, students have been upset with smaller less filling bagels due to these rules. They report that across the school system about 30% of Brookline students buy lunch, down from 35% last year. This is a drop of 5%. Minuteman Regional Vocational Technical High School in Lexington, MA reports a drop of 35% fewer students buying lunch this year since the new regulations went into affect.
Stay tuned here for hilarious yet frustrating stories of how schools are banning certain foods one would consider to be healthy, simply to comply with these new regulations dictated to them by the government. Also we will report on clever ways students are taking matters into their own hands to fight back against the nanny state.
The Massachusetts Department of Public Health regulations for schools were set to take effect on August 1, 2012 that would prevent the sales of several foods and drinks including cupcakes, cookies and brownies within 30 minutes of the start and end of school. The reason for these regulations is to fight childhood obesity. This would ban bake sales in schools. Many parent-teacher organizations and school clubs use bake sales as fundraisers to support various school causes. Is this a case of a big government “nanny state” telling you what is best for your family or a valid way to fight childhood obesity?
Since the announcement, this controversial issue has been discussed on radio, TV, and newspapers throughout Massachusetts and the United States. The uproar has been such that a Republican state representative sponsored an amendment in the Massachusetts House to lift the bake sale ban. The legislation would give individual school districts the choice to allow or ignore the bake sale ban regulations. The Massachusetts House and Senate adopted the amendment striking down the prohibition. The Public Health Commissioner later said that the department would reverse the bake sale ban before it is set to take effect. The ban will however, stay in effect for sweets sold at school cafeterias during the school day.