Note to the School District

[justfacts]

Hi - This is a Message Board for the residents of Plainedge concerned with School District issues. It's run by a resident and not the school. We are assisting each other to bring about a better understanding of School District issues, which will allow us, hopefully, to get better responses to the community's needs from the School Board and its administrators.

To date, the responses to the community from these two functions has been less than satisfactory to an increasing number of residents. Thus, this Board. It would not exist if the District's responses were satisfactory to a greater number of voters.

We have to remind ourselves regularly, that our purpose is not to sling mud, or harp and carp - but to bring about a better system so our children's education is the best we can supply within our capabilities and limitations. We need the help of the Board and the Administration to do this. They also need our help to achieve these goals.

However, the tough job that both these functions do is often under appreciated. Mainly this comes about because of the methods they've used in responding to community inputs and questions. It is often seen as autocratic, evasive and overly defensive. I personally can't blame them for being defensive in such a sensitive hot-spot of activity. It's not easy.

But I can blame them for not presenting a more caring response to many of the questions that the public has put to them recently. A bit more understanding of the public's need for answers and patience in responding to them would go a long way toward rebuilding the resident's confidence in the Board and its administration. In other words, a better PR interface is needed, as well as a change in heart and methodology.


Here is how responses to our questions seems to some of us (from our side of the questions);

To frequently, the responses to an e-mail query from the public results in an attack on the questioner. "Obviously you don't understand how to do such and such" is not the proper way to response to a person who is confused over what appears to be an error in the information supplied to them by the District. Nor is the comment "You seem to be a person who has made up his mind and will find the facts to fit your decision", the proper way to respond to a "hot-collar" issue. In other cases, no response is given, nor receipt of message acknowledged or a long, classic, "harried" response (I'm so busy now), instead of the short answer to the direct question.

Yet, these are but a few of the ways Dr Richman has responded to some questions from our residents.

During meetings we have been given answers to questions that absolutely do not ring true. Additionally we have been presented with budgetary information that looks slipshod in its accountability and has very fundamental, almost rudimentary, math errors. Major amounts of money have been "overlooked" or put into the wrong category, only to be corrected in response to questioning from the residents in a seemingly indifferent, non-apologetic, non-embarrassed way. Requirements for equalized contingency cuts have been ignored, until formally challenged.

Your intense Budget work is nullified by its presentation to the public. Other Districts present a more professional looking and checked out product that instills confidence.

Compliance with the new standards for accounting practices and proper code categories is poor at best. Form SMB-1, an excellent tool to present preliminary budget information, is hardly used. Accounting for Fund Balance details is non-existent.

Questioned costs and salaries vary almost with the time of day. Contingency budget numbers for costs don't match proposed budget numbers for these same costs. Some expensed items when looked at in detail, like Band uniforms, seem to be well beyond the costs found for like items on the Internet. Small cost "hot-button" items are threatened for cuts, while lumped large expense items change in total by a greater amount than the small detailed item (Late Buses last year, Mathletes this year)

Answers to questions about these variances seem to be ad-hoc contrivances, rather than reasoned responses and an explanation of why the new costs were not used in the original budget considerations. Why now and not before? How good are any of your budget projections if they can vary so much?

Your answers to our questions often lead to more questions because they, in themselves, seem impulsive, questionable and defensive, rather than responsive. They often don't even use the "I'll look into that and get back to you" approach which would instill some confidence in the reply being reasoned and well thought out.

Frequently, off-hand autocratic answers been an insult to the intelligence of the general audience, inherently showing a disrespect for their life experiences and common sense reasoning, as well as their ability to check answers on the Internet. (Oh!, you've gotten misinformation, the Superintendent's salary is in the lower Quartile), meanwhile the questioner's Internet facts show it to be in the upper Dectile. Stop, check the questioner's "facts" and sources first, for they may be accurate. Defend salary and other decisions if you must, but with truth, not "distortions".

Members of the board have to often challenged individuals (sometimes even in a physically intimidating manner) after a meeting for asking rational, or even what appears to be irrational, questions. At times with quite a visible chip on their shoulder. They forget that the public is not as aware as they are of all the ins and outs of the subject at hand and a great deal of patience is needed to moderate their views or understandings.

"Forgive them, don't insult them" should be the motto of the Board. And, heavens no, don't start arguments with them, for they are the ones you need on your side at Budget time.

Board and administration, when you fail to satisfy the residents who question you, when you insult and anger them, when you alienate them, when you make disparaging remarks about them, or single out persons for "blame" in a public meeting, that is not the road to success, it is the road to failure.

Your's is a very tough road to travel, why make it harder for yourself as you have done recently? The Plainedge public is really not your adversary.

[justfacts]

Here's a copy of an e-mail that a Board member sent to Joe Chaloupka prior to his writing an Appeal to the Commissioner. He found many responses to his questions did not reflect the reality of his experiences.

Joe has given his OK to pass this information to the community as the e-mail writer requested.

I have highlighted certain areas in italics and enclosed some editorial comments in brackets [xxx], in order to promote thought and discussion on those particular areas which struck me as "open for another viewpoint"

======================================

Dear Mr. Chaloupka,

I read your letter and thought that since I’ve had more history on the Board than my colleagues, I might be able to better address your concerns. I will respond to your points step by step in the same order you presented them. Sorry that this will be long, but it will be very informative.

JC Comment: Community residents who attended our meetings and were in support of the budget represent less than 1% of the community.

Response: I can’t vouch for the accuracy of that percentage, but I agree that there is very poor attendance at our meetings. We begin the budget development process every January, and this year because we used zero-based budgeting, we began in December 2004. The community has ample opportunity at regular Board meetings, Superintendent Coffee Hours and Budget workshops over a 5 month period to voice their concerns or give input into the budget. We are away from our families countless evenings to be available to answer questions and provide rationale for budget decisions.

My question is, “why doesn’t anyone but the -1% show up?” How can we address the masses when we only hear from them in the final hour? And how could we have assumed before May 17th that there was so much opposition if, except for a small minority, we were only seeing and hearing from the people who obtained all the available information, asked all their questions and then gave their support?

[Do you, dear reader, concur with these statements about being able to ask all your questions, saying you were giving your support, the board failing to see that there was opposition, that dissenters only spoke in the final hour? Or did you have other experiences?]

JC comment: In every meeting and statement we fail to address the issue of inappropriate raises to CO administrators and non-union employees – we are out of touch with the real world.

Response: I, for one, know the real “business” world all too well. My husband was laid off from Sprint after 16 years and then went to work for the now infamous Worldcom. To make a long story short, we lost EVERYTHING – retirement savings and college tuition savings for my kids.

With one son in college and [another child] starting in Sept. 2006, I really have to prioritize my spending, and I feel the tax bite as much as everyone else. (I can’t image what tuition will cost when my 12 year old gets to college.)

However, in the real world of education, when we think of return on investment our bottom line is not profit or stock prices – it’s kids. Every personnel decision we make must relate to the outcome we want for the students. The fact is good administrators, especially Superintendents, are becoming harder to find.

Districts actively try to recruit good administrators away from each other on a continual basis so we must remain competitive. We’ve made significant progress in the last few years in our state test scores. Since that data is published in the newspapers, recruiters know exactly where to look. School Administrators do not work 9:00 – 3:00 jobs or even 9:00 – 5:00 jobs. These people spend countless nights and weekends at meetings, coffee hours, school events, award ceremonies, graduations, etc. as part of their job duties.

There are only 5 people in Central Office for a school district of 3,612 students, and about 400 employees. Where in the business world do you find that kind of ratio of management to employees? I’d like to offer my perspective on why the good people we have are worth the money they are being paid.

Superintendent
Being on the Board 9 years I have lived through 3 Superintendents. The first Superintendent, in my opinion, was an “empty suit”. He was being paid a lot of money, but I and the community did not know his true salary and benefits because it was not a state requirement then to disclose all information to the public.

[It is the Board that sets, and approves, a Superintendent's salary, no one else!]

In 2000, when the board changed over* and we could finally get information that had always been previously withheld, I discovered that in 1992 Dr. Barter was given a 5-year contract which gave him 8% per year, plus other annuity benefits, an all-expense paid automobile (gas, insurance, repair), etc.

No one knew this because all of his increases were not added to his base salary but paid out separately, so the community believed he took a salary freeze. His salary and benefits in 1997 when he left came to about $250,000.00, and for all of this he had to do absolutely NOTHING! There was no written criteria that linked his raises to performance.

[Again, it is the Board that either gives, or does not give, any salary or benefit changes to the Superintendent. These changes do not happen out of thin air, or at the Superintendents discression. Also, since separation pay oftens includes unused sick days, vacation time, etc., the salary number itself is something less than what was quoted]

When Dr. Barter left, Gene Grasso, the then Assistant Superintendent for Business, was promoted to Superintendent and to save money, the Business position was not filled. Grasso did not have a Doctorate in education, but he was already a long time employee. He held the Superintendency for two years, until he retired in 1999. His raises were based on what the surrounding district Superintendent’s received; again, no link to performance.

[These criteria were what the Board accepted at that time when they accepted Mr. Grasso as the Superintendent. Is this a second guessing of the Board's decision? Also, Grasso's "retirement" was when an incident occurred over Board claimed unauthorized loans made by him against an insurance policy. This led the Board to proclaim - pay back those loans and retire by the end of the month or else we pursue legal action. He "retired"]

Fast forward [no wonder the fast foward from the Grasso incident!] to last year, and the 10 year forensic audit we had done (which is posted on the website). That, plus the scandals in Roslyn & William Floyd make it imperative that we have a Deputy Superintendent in the Business Office as well as a Superintendent who are honest and ethical people.

In 1999 Dr. Richman was hired. When the board changed over* in 2000, we decided that the Superintendent’s compensation must be merit-based, and needed to be linked to student performance (among other things), so we spent hours at night and on Saturdays to develop a new comprehensive evaluation instrument. The Superintendent is now evaluated using a weighted point system in 7 categories, the most important being curriculum and instruction. The amount of his annual raise [plus cash up front bonus] is determined by his score in these areas.

(* The Board changeover I am referring to is when Rich Mallow, Tom Dick and Don Risucci unseated long time Board members Josephine Reder, Keith Wilson and Rhona Vitagliano.)

Dr. Richman came to this district soon after the long, drawn-out “black shirt” days. Besides having to address all of the curriculum issues his predecessors neglected, and align what we teach to the newly released NY State Standards, he had to deal with 20+ years of animosity between teachers, administrators and the community. Let me assure you this was no small feat.

But the fact that we have a completely different climate and culture in the district today, and the new teacher contract was settled without spending THOUSANDS of dollars on attorney and arbitration fees, as in the past, says a lot for his leadership abilities. He has also brought Plainedge into the top ten Nassau County school districts for the first time ever. If you’ve checked the website, you’ll also see that compared to $642,600.00 last year, our high school students received $1,889,650.00 in scholarship money this year. My daughter and your son will both be seniors next year, and hopefully they will be beneficiaries of scholarships as well. This is where our investment pays off.

Dr. Richman has also done a lot to bring additional revenue into the district and to effectuate cost savings wherever possible. Here is a four year history:

Revenue Obtained

Bullet Aid from Senator Kemp Hannon 2000-2001 $ 400,000.00
Bullet Aid from Senator Kemp Hannon 2001-2002 $ 25,000.00
Bullet Aid from Senator Kemp Hannon 2002-2003 $ 75,000.00
Cablevision Grant for Robotics Competition $ 10,000.00
Money to pay for AED’s (Defibrillators) $ 25,000.00
and staff training mandated by NY State
Kindergarten Conversion Aid $ 380,258.00
Federal Title I Funds (never received before) $ 143,056.00

SUB TOTAL: $1,058,314.00


Cost Saving Actions

- Renegotiated Retirement Incentive $ 400,000.00
(plus avoided $9 million deficit by discovering
insurance policies were underfunded and loans were
taken against them).

[These loans amounted to over $800,000, and there continues to be no excuse for the Board not having control over the procedures that allowed them to be made and not reported upon. "Discoveries" of this nature are not left to "just happen", controls are required]

- Town of Oyster Bay paid for refurbishment of H.S. $ 325,000.00
Tennis Courts
- Revised bus transportation limits for KG through 6th Grade $ 75,000.00
- Replaced BOCES “Sun Valley” System with Power School $ 210,000.00
Data Management System
- In-House Central Print/Copy Center $ 125,000.00
- Non public school textbooks moved to BOCES $ 47,000.00
SUB TOTAL: $1,182,000.00


TOTAL: $2,240,314.00


ALL OF THIS IS THE RETURN ON YOUR INVESTMENT, WHICH MORE THAN COVERS HIS CUMMULATIVE SALARY INCREASES SINCE HE’S BEEN HERE!



Deputy Superintendent
Jeff Burns not only has kept our district financially stable, but has successfully managed all of our construction projects on top of all of his other duties, where most district hire a construction manager to do this. His integrity has been impeccable, and he will be a tough act to follow. I don’t know where you got the figure for his replacement, but the salary that was approved for her was $135,000.00 (not $149,000.00), which is at or below the competitive market rate.

[Deputy Superintendent Salary/Benefit listed by the State from District supplied data: 02/03 - $140,400/$18,037; 03/04 - $163,350/$11,200; 04/05 - $174,785/$12,182.

The new listing for an Assistant Superintendent in 05/06 - $135,000/$14,315 or a total of $149,315. This makes both of these statements "right". But whose "right" statement most clearly reflects the true cost to the taxpayers of this position?]

Again, referencing Roslyn and William Floyd, you must have someone you can trust watching over the money. All of the programs in the world mean nothing if the district is not financially stable and cannot fund them.


Assistant Superintendent and Assistant to the Superintendent
We already went into detail on Chris P’Simer and Joan Ripley in our original letter to the community but I want to emphasize that the ratio of just TWO people overseeing all K-12 curriculum and hiring and evaluating teachers and principals is unheard of in other districts.
Again, where do you find that kind of ratio in the business world?

I also want to stress the importance of the teacher evaluation process. As with the Superintendent, the teachers have a new and very comprehensive evaluation rubric and professional development plan which has been implemented by these two women. Twenty years ago people got jobs and received tenure (even if they weren’t qualified) because hiring and evaluation procedures were lax. Once teachers get tenure after three years, they are here for life! It is critical that we hire the best candidates and thoroughly observe teachers in the classroom before awarding tenure. This is directly related to our kids’ performance on state tests, and since our test scores have increased steadily over the past few years, we are seeing the return on our investment here too.

Chief Information Officer
Cynthia LaPier is the person who handles all of the technology, our wide-area network, and all communication systems in the district. Before we hired her, we used to contract with BOCES for the services she provides. Since BOCES costs have increased as well, it was actually cheaper to pay her a fulltime salary and benefits as a direct employee. Not only did we save money,

[Noticeable absence of how much in dollars]

but now she is in-house and at our immediate disposal, whereas before we were subject to BOCES priority schedule.


JC Comment: The hiring of the librarian at $65,000.00 is another poor decision by the board – we already have a community library and their budget passing also affects our taxes.

Response: You are correct – every year the Plainedge Public library budget passes

[Could there be a good reason for this, like residents being satisfied that a good job is being done? This year it was passed by the largest margin of any library in Nassau County]

which constitutes about $250.00 per year of our tax bill. Out of their approximately 2 ½ Million dollar budget, $1,400,000.00 is for salaries – much more than what is spent on books,

[Is this not similar to the situation in the School? More dollars for all the salaries than for all the books?]
yet no one questions their expenditures. In addition, they only have 3 computers in their children’s section for a district with 3,612 school-age children.

[That's not the amount of children that visit the library each day. Also all three computers are rarely fully occupied, nor are the more than a dozen other desktops in the Adult section of the library. The library buys what is needed and used, not on a per capita or largess basis]

They do not publicize their meeting schedule,

[when poined out to Board member that the meeting schedule is on monthly fliers mailed to each home, the response was; "Oh! I never read that!"]

so community members do not have the same opportunity they have with school board meetings to find out how their tax money is being spent and why.

In addition, the school district borrows the money to fund the public library which costs the taxpayers about $13,000.00 in interest expense each year, which is included in the school budget, not the library budget.

[As it is required to be by Local Fiscal Law for NY State and as clarified by the State Comptroller in Opinion 92-28]

And, if you were to ask most school aged parents in our community, you’d find that the majority of them go to the Farmingdale Public Library because they offer more.

[If there is no Plainedge Public Library, then you have to buy a Library card from Farmingdale at $300+ per card. Plus, Nassau Library System statistics show that the Plainedge Library has made more patron loans to other librarys than they have made to Plainedge]

We have just built 5 brand new, state-of-the-art libraries complete with laptop computers for entire classes to use at one time.

[Desktops are 1/2 to 1/3 the cost, last longer, and can use mouse/keyboard replacement items at low cost. Whereas laptops become "throwaways" for those defects. Approximately 1/2 of last year's laptops are defective according to students.]

Hiring the librarian will give students more time to utilize the facilities we have paid for them to have. Right now, when the HS librarian takes her lunch and prep periods, the library is closed, thereby prohibiting students from using it during those periods.

[This describes a part time need - $65,000 for part time work need? As a Student I filled in for high school librarian during her breaks and lunch period. Why not give our students the same chance for experience? This would lower the now further elevated to $78,761 cost of filling a part time need]

If the hours are expanded, students can use it more hours during the day and before and after school plus have the added benefit of being able to access all of the district’s systems and data banks in our own computer network – something they cannot do at the public library.

[The Library's data banks are shared throughout Nassau County and NY State and are more extensive than what is in the School system. This is obviously an unchecked statement tossed out - But then again, why does the District not share these school data resources with all of the community? Cost and licensing agreements, that's why]

And senior citizens, as taxpayers too, could also have access to the school library.

[Weren't senior citizens complaining how much harder it was for them to get to the single school to vote - because the District changed its procedure on one day in the year due to "SECURITY CONCERNS"? They access the Library by means of the Hicksville Road bus on a 9am/9pm daily schedule that exists for many more days per week and per year than the School is open.

If seniors can go there, then so can any other member of this community or other communities as required by law. And you thought SECURITY was a problem just on Budget vote day? How do you feel dear reader, about anyone and everyone having access to the schools during the day or evening as this Board member thinks could be done? It this rational thinking or not?]

In my opinion, (and this is [ME] as the private citizen and not [ME] the Board member speaking), we are not getting the same return on our investment with the public library as we would get using our high school library - $65,000 for an additional librarian vs. $2.5 million dollars for the public library.

[And just in what room does the librarian sit, lit by what lights, heated or cooled by what facilities, surrounded by what books, tables and chairs, paid by what office staff, using what computers, etc.,etc., etc. Is this the type of person that is qualified to make value judgements on your behalf?

The Board member did not even add in the different books, tapes, CDs, DVDs, etc. that would have to be purchased, stored, cataloged, displayed, etc. for fulfilling the general publics needs as opposed to a collection focused on the needs of students. Or is the school collection focused on student needs?

Then there is the matter of meeting rooms, which the school has an ample supply of but declines to let them be used by the public as had been done in the past. And the non-existent adult education classes, and the "Mommy and Me" meetings, where would they go in the school - and when? When the busses are inactive only? Or when the parking lots are empty?]

JC Comment: The State’s system of funding education is broken and somebody has to say enough is enough.

Response: You couldn’t be more right, and we should be on the same side in doing so! The members of the Board of Education are community residents also, and pay the same taxes as everyone else. We are not the “enemy”! We are trying to give the kids what they need under almost impossible circumstances. We have all made a choice to live in a community with very little commercial property. (In fact, over the years Plainedge residents have attended numerous town meetings to successfully block the building of office buildings, condos, etc. in our neighborhood.) The Board also gave the community a choice a couple of years ago to consolidate with other districts to save money, but that was voted down because people want to keep Plainedge’s identity intact.

[That was actually an exit poll survey, not a vote. No one voted it down! And most residents I heard from considered it to be a veiled threat at budget time, not a sincerely researched and considered plan that had sufficient detail and actual preliminary negotiation with neighboring district(s) in its presentation to the community]

We have explored all possible cost savings but it seems that people only want to see cuts in administration without taking the time to ask or understand how those people affect student performance. We have 6 less administrators now for 1,000 more kids.

[See prior post, "Long time School Board member speaks out" for the facts about the last nine years. and "1,000 more kids" than when?, the time of the 24 administrators, or when there were four more schools in the system?, or just when?]

That has already been a cost savings. Just as with everything else, “you get what you pay for.” I hope I have shown you that we are indeed getting our money’s worth.

People still have a choice of a budget over austerity. We are not trying to “threaten” any particular groups because any cuts to education will affect OUR OWN KIDS as well. I hope that when you go forth to “educate anyone in this community of the Board’s actions” that you will share the information I have provided. I also hope you will join the list of people who have signed up to tell our legislators in Albany that “enough is enough.”

Sincerely,
[Signed by Board Member]