|
Post by jdavola on Sept 19, 2005 16:24:11 GMT -5
Hey Go Plainedge!!
Since you've shown us your substantial math skills...I'm going to give you a new handle....Copernicus.
So, Copernicus,...I was speaking with some hard working kids and found out that the Mathletes club has been restored.....give them a call...maybe you can learn something....
And for the kids..."Tuebor..vae victis"
Peace out...Remember...pray for the victims.
Love Y'all,
JD
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 19, 2005 17:22:01 GMT -5
Apparently an adult needs to step in and stop all the childish banter.
This is for everyone - you are not supporting any of your arguments with this childish banter and name calling. Posts will be deleted from this point forward and your IP address will be banned from logging in.
Contribute positively and in an adult manner or simply don't contribute at all!
No wonder why there's a saying that children learn what they live.
Please lead by example.
|
|
|
Post by frawg88 on Sept 19, 2005 19:36:43 GMT -5
Thank you for the clarification “justfacts” - we know that money for library purposes ALREADY VOTED ON and approved by the taxpayers could not afterward be transferred to the schools. My hypothetical point was that if the community voted to CLOSE the public library and it then CLOSED, they would no longer have to fund it because it WOULDN’T EXIST. Therefore, residents would save money on their school tax bill. They would then be willing to spend the tax money saved on the public library for the increase in the school budget that would be needed to restore the sports, clubs, nurses, etc. that were cut. They would continue to pay the same money but it would be going to the schools instead of the public library, and they could have the school programs back (most if not all) WITHOUT an ADDITIONAL tax increase.
On your other point – “From that point, by a several decade old agreement between many libraries and schools, the District would take funds from that account on a monthly basis to meet the library's monthly vouchers - so bills could be paid. This year that agreement has been changed.”
”The School has not passed library funds to the Plainedge Public library as required by NY State Local Fiscal Law. Since the beginning of its fiscal year, the library is using up money in its fund balance…” “…The fund balance has been depleted since July 1 in order to keep the library doors open.”
My understanding from what I’ve heard and questions I’ve asked is now that the school district is on austerity and having to cut programs, they will give the library its money when they get their payments from the town and the state because they don’t want to borrow money and pay interest. Supposedly the law says the school district has to give the library their funds, but it doesn’t specify when or how, nor does it say the school district must borrow it. If that is not the case, can you please quote the section of the law that states otherwise and clarify for everyone?
What I don’t understand in the first place is why the school district would be responsible to pay the interest on money it borrows for the library? It’s not keeping the money - it’s turning it over to the library. If the school district has to put the interest amount into its own budget as an expense item, why isn’t the interest deducted from the library payments before they are made to offset that expense? Or, why isn’t the interest included in the library budget instead (which makes more sense)? If the law that says the school district is responsible to pay the interest, can you please quote that section too?
“The matter is being resolved between the two Boards at the attorney level. We, at the Library look forward to a speedy resolution of this major problem with funding.”
This all seems more complicated than it should be. Is there any reason why the Plainedge Public Library can’t operate on a revenue schedule that coincides with when the school district gets its own revenue? It would still get all of its money (without taxpayers having to pay interest) but at different intervals than in the past. I am assuming other districts do this since your statement says that “many libraries and schools” , not ALL of them, operate under a monthly payment agreement.
|
|
|
Post by elphaba65 on Sept 19, 2005 20:22:33 GMT -5
Yruohk,
Thanks for the vocabulary lesson. I did post a question to you regarding a rumor which you seemed to ignore, along with answering what year the "test scores" were from that you proudly posted and put on flyers. So in case you forgot my questions please read below.
Aside from me paying more taxes for an advisor of a club with just two members , I think I remember a few more things. Didn't you have a big argument at a school board meeting because they would not send your daughter to some BOCE class? (which would have cost me the taxpayer more)? Rumor also had it that you sued the school district ( don't know for what) but if true that also cost me more in taxes.
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on Sept 19, 2005 23:28:46 GMT -5
frawg88 and others readers of this forum - - -
who I recommend read this all the way through! It is long but it should give you a lot of things to digest, interesting things, like how the Board plans to double-dips into our pockets!
Signed e-mail and documents in their own words exist. Nobody can call it misinformation!
Blazing Amazing!
The assumption made that by closing the library "residents would save money on their school tax bill." How so? The School tax bill would remain the same.
In, fact, as some have proposed, some partial Public Library functions would then be taken over by the school, these would become costs ADDED to the School budget.
Do you think there is any sensible taxpayer that could buy into that poorly stated "and they could have the school programs back WITHOUT an ADDITONAL tax increase"? The attempt to add $2 million to the School Budget and not call it a school property tax increase - because you plan to take it from another pocket of the taxpayer - is one that could only arise in a smoke filled room - and I don't mean tobacco smoke.
Just how dumb do you believe your fellow taxpayer's are? That is a very insulting statement to Plainedge residents. I think it calls for an apology.
In no way would the School budget go down - on the contrary, it would go up. And the ratio of how much it would go up is best illustrated by recent approaches shown by the School in planning to hire a librarian.
According to Dr. Richman in recent paper to the Commissioner of Education, the school originally planned that this cost would be about $65,000. Later, when planning Contingency Budget cuts, he "discovered" the cost would be higher - $78,761 because of market place prices. At the open Plainedge Public Library the cost of similarly qualified librarian, with a teaching certificate, is under $36,000.
The School District, formerly having a "Employment Opportunities" section on its Internet site, did not advertise this position so that more competitive responses from the many Librarians in both Nassau and Suffolk might be obtained. There are over a hundred libraries in both counties which have qualified librarians for this function.
Clearly, the community benefits most from the more cost effective employment practices existing in the Library System.
Another cost effective practice in the library has to do with raises. The library has negotiated and adapted a fixed dollar salary increase method, rather than a fixed percentage salary increase as the School District uses. This means the percentage raise decreases during the negotiated period. Because of all working factors considered by the staff in the negotiations, they considered this to be a reasonable settlement. The cost savings are passed to the taxpayer.
As I have heard, but has not been reported, the recent Teachers contract is for a fixed percentage each year for the negotiated term. I'll not quote the percentages and length of contract, I leave that for the School District to report those facts to the public. But I will report that the initial fixed dollar increase at the library negotiation amounted to about 3% of the wage at that time (It is less now)
Further cost effective employment practices at the Library is in the area of employee benefits. They are kept at a reasonable level by both management and staff - because benefits not needed are not taken - and the cost savings are passed on to the public with lowered budget costs. For a prime instance, the Director takes no benefits at all.
She stated that her benefit costs are entirely paid for under her husband's plan - and she will not double-dip into the public's pocket to get added benefits. And , there is no "after you leave" ten year, $10,000 a year cost to the public benefit package hidden behind that "no benefits" package - as it exists in the Superintendent's contract package with the School District.
It seems money management by the school is not done as effectively as some other District services manage their money. Why would anyone want to turn more of that responsibility over to the school? What has been proposed, and you seem to advocate, is that by doing away with a community service, the Plainedge Community would turn to the School to spend more money on some other functions.
There is a financial analysis term called "propensity to spend" I would suggest that those who look at closing the Library as a solution to recent double digit property tax increases caused by the school budget increases each year, get professional advice and pay careful attention to what that term is all about.
What is proposed in your statement is that Sports programs cut this year would not have to be cut next year if you could make the community to give up its library services and turn the money for that service over to the school to meet its spending needs. That's very nice of you to want this from the residents, it amounts to asking them to make a donation to the sports program at the school, a program that "belongs on the School budget" to paraphrase another later statement; and give up their rights to library service to do so.
You desire the residents to bear this loss of appreciated services because the school can't find ways to economize on its fixed budget and alter its thinking about what is most vital to spend money on. The community has attempted to tell the Board some ways to keep what they see as more vital services, but their needs apparently don't match Board perceived needs.
A 1% shift in other costs within a $57,000,000 budget seems to me to be a more rational solution to those budget constraints than looking to close up the voter approved service of the Plainedge Public Library. The transient shot of money from such a one time activity, would not satisfy for long the appetite the School District has exhibited over the last few years for increasing the taxpayer's property tax load.
You will find that the Library, whose entire budget each year is about half of what the School District's increases are each year, will not make up for nor hide, the reasons for the School District budgets to be so tough to pass. Remember, the entire Library budget is but 3.5% of the present School District Budget - and that is during a Contingency Budget period.
That's enough to cover your first paragraph. Other questions and statements about them;
Such things as "when the law says the funds must be paid to the library". State Education law section 259.1 states "payable upon written demand from the Library Trustees" Upon demand means just that - when demanded. Of course, may not know that, but the school's $110,000 a year attorney does know that. Section 259.3 deals with a 60 day period after the beginning of their fiscal year - and later Decisions given clarify that requirement. Look at the Comptroller's Opinion 98-28 which also refers to: Education Law, §2021[21]; Real Property Tax Law, §1318) and quotes: "it should, consistent with the statutory obligation to fund the library appropriation, pay a portion of these funds to the library to assure its ability to operate until tax revenues are received (1977 Opns St Comp No. 77-770, unreported)".
Also as part of that Opinion, there is this quote: "Since tax anticipation notes are obligations of the school district, however, interest thereon is a charge for which the school district, and not the library, is liable (Opn No. 62-978, supra). We are aware of no authority for the school district to charge to the library a portion of the interest expense."
So you don't see why, but apparently when setting up this system the legislators did see why. Since the money comes from the taxpayer's pocket no matter what, the present way has the money passing through fewer hands and it becomes easier to follow the audit trail.
What a waste of taxpayer's money since the Library already has agreed to put this interest money for TANs on its budget and clearly show on the Library budget, that this money is a "pass through" to the School, which still come from the taxpayer's pocket. Now, attorney fees are added to that. Or, do the school attorney's fees come from that same $110,000 annual retainer? The School Board took out a TAN in May for its expenses this year, but did not agree to do so for the Library, as it has done in past years.
Interestingly enough, code # 9760 of the Capital portion of the Budget, which is unchanged under a Contingency Budget[/u], shows that the amount for TAN interest increased from $165,000 last year to $300,000 this year. Neither the School budget nor the Library budget, nor the TAN interest rates increased that amount between the years. Since the Library TAN expenses were in last year's budget, they would seem to be in this year's budget. At least that's what a board member said when she stated in an e-mail : "Therefore, the money allocated in the Debt Service line of the 2005-2006 budget for this anticipated interest can either be used to pay for programs for children or not be spent at all."
This is the best example to date of the Board's intent to double-dip into the taxpayer's pocket!
Enough for now. Let the rest of the readers on this Forum mull over the further information you have brought out on this topic. I'd like to hear what they think about these details. P.S. There is no such thing as an "Austerity Budget" in the Commissioner's Budget Handbook. The proper terms, with all its definitions, clarifications in law and regulations and capped spending limits, is called a "Contingency Budget" Seemingly, that is a term that many don't want to use because it imposes well defined controls on spending. It has the legal teeth that "Austerity" lacks.
|
|
|
Post by elphaba65 on Sept 20, 2005 8:24:03 GMT -5
Ed,
Library talk keeping you up at night? I would love to respond however it will have to wait until tonight. A few quick points:
At the open Plainedge Public Library the cost of similarly qualified librarian, with a teaching certificate, is under $36,000.
The School District, formerly having a "Employment Opportunities" section on its Internet site, did not advertise this position so that more competitive responses from the many Librarians in both Nassau and Suffolk might be obtained. There are over a hundred libraries in both counties which have qualified librarians for this function.
You're not trying to mislead people into believing that the schooll district could hire civil services employees are you? However, if the school libraries stayed open after school hours this could perhaps be negotiated with the teacher's union.
According to Dr. Richman in recent paper to the Commissioner of Education, the school originally planned that this cost would be about $65,000. Later, when planning Contingency Budget cuts, he "discovered" the cost would be higher - $78,761 because of market place prices.
I believe that cost also included an aid, the after hours discussed at BOE meetings mentioned both positions.
As I have heard, but has not been reported, the recent Teachers contract is for a fixed percentage each year for the negotiated term.
Dr. Richman has reported the increase at several BOE meetings, you should try going to one. ( I also think your anti-teacher side is showing)
You say the Director is receiving NO BENEFITS? I guess that will have to be verified. Also to dispel other current rumors- is it true that you are receiving some kind of pension from the library?
Gotta Go!!
|
|
|
Post by frawg88 on Sept 20, 2005 18:48:52 GMT -5
“justfacts”
Let me begin by asking you to please take your own advice and re-read my last post to you ALL THE WAY THROUGH.
Now let me continue by playing along with the word games that you seem so fond of.
“Blazing Amazing!”
I am looking at my school tax bill at this very moment. Please take yours out and read along. It’s titled: STATEMENT OF TAXES – SCHOOL TAX LEVY- 2004-2005. On this bill I am being charged my portion to operate the schools AND the public library. If the library (I repeat, hypothetically) closed, I would INDEED SAVE MONEY ON MY SCHOOL TAX BILL – it would NOT STAY THE SAME! I don’t feel too DUMB assuming that no one in Plainedge gets a separate public library tax bill; that their library taxes are INCLUDED IN THEIR TOTAL SCHOOL TAX BILL. Therefore if the library closed and the taxpayers no longer had to fund it, EVERYONE’S SCHOOL TAX BILL WOULD BE REDUCED BY THE AMOUNT LISTED AS THE PLAINEDGE LIBRARY LEVY.
Now please re-read my posting ALL THE WAY THROUGH again and find where I said if the library closed the SCHOOL BUDGET WOULD GO DOWN. Right, I didn't. What I specifically said was that the tax money saved from closing the library could be used to pay for the INCREASE in the SCHOOL BUDGET that would be needed to restore programs.
So now, if the community (hypothetically) preferred to spend their tax money differently, and invest in school programs that they feel are vital to their children’s total educational experience rather than in a public library, would that make them DUMB? Or would it mean that people have the ability to alter their thinking about what is most vital to spend money on?
Now, read my posting ALL THE WAY THROUGH one more time and find the question I asked you about WHY the Plainedge Public Library CAN’T operate on the same revenue payment cycle as the school district. Wouldn’t it just have to alter its thinking and its accounting practices? (Please answer, but I’m only interested in “facts.”)
Also, you still haven’t quoted anything that says the school district MUST BORROW to fund the library, although I appreciate the one answer that if the school district does choose to borrow, the district and not the library incurs the interest expense.
I believe it’s you that owes an apology - to “administrator.” Based on his/her reply to me yesterday, I am of the impression that he/she truly wants this to be a legitimate information forum. To accomplish that people need to be factual, and your responses to my legitimate questions do not indicate a desire to be factual. You have a PROPENSITY to twist peoples’ words around (not just mine) to suit your own purpose, which always leads back to accusing and attacking the same individuals. That solves or changes nothing. Again, I did not tune into this forum for more negativity.
|
|
|
Post by frawg88 on Sept 20, 2005 19:01:10 GMT -5
“justfacts”
Let me begin by asking you to please take your own advice and re-read my last post to you ALL THE WAY THROUGH.
Now let me continue by playing along with the word games that you seem so fond of.
“Blazing Amazing!”
I am looking at my school tax bill at this very moment. Please take yours out and read along. It’s titled: STATEMENT OF TAXES – SCHOOL TAX LEVY- 2004-2005. On this bill I am being charged my portion to operate the schools AND the public library. If the library (I repeat, hypothetically) closed, I would INDEED SAVE MONEY ON MY SCHOOL TAX BILL – it would NOT STAY THE SAME! I don’t feel too DUMB assuming that no one in Plainedge gets a separate public library tax bill; that their library taxes are INCLUDED IN THEIR TOTAL SCHOOL TAX BILL. Therefore if the library closed and the taxpayers no longer had to fund it, EVERYONE’S SCHOOL TAX BILL WOULD BE REDUCED BY THE AMOUNT LISTED AS THE PLAINEDGE LIBRARY LEVY.
Now please re-read my posting ALL THE WAY THROUGH again and find where I said if the library closed the SCHOOL BUDGET WOULD GO DOWN. Right, I didn't. What I specifically said was that the tax money saved from closing the library could be used to pay for the INCREASE in the SCHOOL BUDGET that would be needed to restore programs.
So now, if the community (hypothetically) preferred to spend their tax money differently, and invest in school programs that they feel are vital to their children’s total educational experience rather than in a public library, would that make them DUMB? Or would it mean that people have the ability to alter their thinking about what is most vital to spend money on?
Now, read my posting ALL THE WAY THROUGH one more time and find the question I asked you about WHY the Plainedge Public Library CAN’T operate on the same revenue payment cycle as the school district. Wouldn’t it just have to alter its thinking and its accounting practices? (Please answer, but I’m only interested in “facts.”)
Also, you still haven’t quoted anything that says the school district MUST BORROW to fund the library, although I appreciate the one answer that if the school district does choose to borrow, the district and not the library incurs the interest expense.
I believe it’s you that owes an apology - to “administrator.” Based on his/her reply to me yesterday, I am of the impression that he/she truly wants this to be a legitimate information forum. To accomplish that people need to be factual, and your responses to my legitimate questions do not indicate a desire to be factual. You have a PROPENSITY to twist peoples’ words around (not just mine) to suit your own purpose, which always leads back to accusing and attacking the same individuals. That solves or changes nothing. Again, I did not tune into this forum for more negativity.
|
|
|
Post by Go Plainedge! on Sept 20, 2005 19:09:32 GMT -5
“justfacts” Let me begin by asking you to please take your own advice and re-read my last post to you ALL THE WAY THROUGH. Now let me continue by playing along with the word games that you seem so fond of. “Blazing Amazing!” I am looking at my school tax bill at this very moment. Please take yours out and read along. It’s titled: STATEMENT OF TAXES – SCHOOL TAX LEVY- 2004-2005. On this bill I am being charged my portion to operate the schools AND the public library. If the library (I repeat, hypothetically) closed, I would INDEED SAVE MONEY ON MY SCHOOL TAX BILL – it would NOT STAY THE SAME! I don’t feel too DUMB assuming that no one in Plainedge gets a separate public library tax bill; that their library taxes are INCLUDED IN THEIR TOTAL SCHOOL TAX BILL. Therefore if the library closed and the taxpayers no longer had to fund it, EVERYONE’S SCHOOL TAX BILL WOULD BE REDUCED BY THE AMOUNT LISTED AS THE PLAINEDGE LIBRARY LEVY. Now please re-read my posting ALL THE WAY THROUGH again and find where I said if the library closed the SCHOOL BUDGET WOULD GO DOWN. Right, I didn't. What I specifically said was that the tax money saved from closing the library could be used to pay for the INCREASE in the SCHOOL BUDGET that would be needed to restore programs. So now, if the community (hypothetically) preferred to spend their tax money differently, and invest in school programs that they feel are vital to their children’s total educational experience rather than in a public library, would that make them DUMB? Or would it mean that people have the ability to alter their thinking about what is most vital to spend money on? Now, read my posting ALL THE WAY THROUGH one more time and find the question I asked you about WHY the Plainedge Public Library CAN’T operate on the same revenue payment cycle as the school district. Wouldn’t it just have to alter its thinking and its accounting practices? (Please answer, but I’m only interested in “facts.”) Also, you still haven’t quoted anything that says the school district MUST BORROW to fund the library, although I appreciate the one answer that if the school district does choose to borrow, the district and not the library incurs the interest expense. I believe it’s you that owes an apology - to “administrator.” Based on his/her reply to me yesterday, I am of the impression that he/she truly wants this to be a legitimate information forum. To accomplish that people need to be factual, and your responses to my legitimate questions do not indicate a desire to be factual. You have a PROPENSITY to twist peoples’ words around (not just mine) to suit your own purpose, which always leads back to accusing and attacking the same individuals. That solves or changes nothing. Again, I did not tune into this forum for more negativity. I think you may be PARTIALLY right. Taking the library budget out of the school tax would cause our taxes to decrease. However, the budget for the school would definitely increase as there would be operating costs associated with the school taking on the library and ultimately, in my opinion, it would be a wash - at the very LEAST. I would be willing to bet that the school budget would still continue to rise 8%, 10%, 12% year after year! That initial savings would be lost immediately. Now to earmark that money to pay for programs wouldn't work either because of the costs associated with operating the library. There would be any money to put towards programs. Then IF the library were to be taken over by the schools and the money saved is realized on your tax bill, wouldn't you want that money for yourself? It's similar to the BOE figuring YOUR Star Exemption into the school budget. Why should I have to give up my Star Exemption to the schools (as little as it is)? I will decided how to spend that money. I don't see how this would serve the community in a positive way. Put aside the money portion for a minute, do you see a benefit to losing the public library to the school district?
|
|
|
Post by frawg88 on Sept 20, 2005 20:27:18 GMT -5
Go Plainedge
It would be a wash, which was exactly my point. What you save on one hand would go to restore what you lost on the other. But that becomes a value judgement on the part of the community. Where do they feel they'd get the most return for their investment? That answer would differ with each person. Under optimum circumstances no one would want to (or even suggest) doing away with something that already exists for the community's benefit. However, just like in our personal lives, you only have so much money and you have to prioritize your spending.
Losing the public library to the school district would not be as bad as losing it altogether. Library services would still be available, just in a different way. Of course we know that there would be some cost to the school district to expand use of the school libraries to the whole community, however that cost would have to be reasonable so that you're still able to restore as fully as possible those things you chose in lieu of the public library. (I think someone suggested then renting out the library building, so that revenue could help offset that cost.)And yes, undoubtedly the school budget expenses would continue to rise the same way they rise for us at home. If the unforseen gas prices are taking a toll on our pockets, imagine what the impact is to fill the gas tanks of all those school buses. And if our home heating bills go up by a large percent, imagine how it will affect the school budget to heat six large school buildings. Just these two examples, (not taking anything other expenses into consideration) translates into more of a tax burden for us already.
The bigger issue here is that this community has to fight for a larger share of state aid to fund our schools. There is no where else to get money. If we don't, we (and our children) will continue to lose more and more. I know this was talked about a lot during the budget votes, but I get the feeling that most people really don't take it seriously. People already make too many excuses for not coming out to a meeting or coming out to vote, so it don't feel optimistic that enough people will mobilize to fight this kind of a large-scale fight. Maybe a section should be set up on this forum to encourage people to sign up to lobby Albany for state aid. What do you think?
|
|
|
Post by concerned on Sept 20, 2005 21:21:42 GMT -5
Frawg88-I agree with you that setting up a forum to easily notify Albany of our desires for them to rethink State Aid, etc. is necessary. It sound like you are familiar with this area, so why not start it up? I always find when it requires a simple click of a button or the address of who to write to is easily available I will lobby. If it requires doing it on my own, I would imagine that myself and others have good intentions but don't always get it done.
Again, this is a step in the right direction of using the forum for good things.
I'm wondering too how we can utilize Tom Suozzi in this fight. Afterall, he's fighting for his re-election and he needs votes and we need assistance with lobbying Albany.
|
|
|
Post by Go Plainedge! on Sept 20, 2005 21:24:44 GMT -5
Frawg88:
Of course this is all based on speculation. We don't really know that this would happen. We don't really know if there would be a savings or a wash or, for that matter, an added expense. I think this library issue has more layers to it than just discussing the tax burden/advantage. The logistics, as from what I can see are a bit overwhelming. This always then translates to $$ in my eyes. ;D
As far as the oil situation, this district, as far as I'm concerned made a very GRAVE error by not securing a per gallon price at the end of last season. We were told at the last meeting of August that there was a price locked in. Then in September we learn we're not locked in and only one bid was obtained. This potentially put the district $55,000 over budget (more program cuts). That is poor planning. But I digress from the topic. You can read my BOE meeting notes on one of the other threads and pray for a mild winter.
As far as State & Fed Aid - we received more funds this year which will pay for the new K teacher at West. I seem to remember a video of Meet the Candidates where one of the, now current, board members said she would lobby diligently for more state funding. Perhaps it worked this year. Although Mr. Richman didn't say that was why we received more.
I hate to keep pointing towards the BOE, but if they are to represent the community and it's needs, I would look to them to start some type of community campaign to obtain more state funding. Isn't that why we voted them into that roll.... to represent the masses?
This would even serve as a "fence mending" project for the people that are not pleased with the BOE. It would allow the BOE to prove that they are on the side of the people and are working hard for us as an ENTIRE community. Maybe, I'm just too far fetched in my thinking.
|
|
|
Post by techie on Sept 22, 2005 15:34:06 GMT -5
The Library Board meeting was last night and unfortunately no school board members showed up to ask about the Director's benefits or all of the benefits the Trustees get.
But, not to worry as one of our School Board members sent a letter to the Director of the Plainedge Public Library wanting to know the Contract of the Director, and all benefits.
This letter was responded to and should be in the School Board members hands the latest Monday. The response also included facts about salaries of other employees and the payment (or lack thereof) to the Trustees. Since this School Board member is also a member of this forum, I would hope that they would post the entire response here for the community. If not, I'm sure we could obtain a copy and post it . This would be possible but I hope that the Board member will post what they have received in answer to their inquiry.
|
|
|
Post by yruohk on Sept 22, 2005 19:04:02 GMT -5
As I looked over my Statement of taxes for 2004-05, my library tax was $279.12. Let's see, if the library is removed from the tax roll, that would save us $.76 per day. That's SEVENTY-SIX CENTS! A trip to MacD's, for a child's meal, is approx.$3.00 and who only buys one meal?
I'm sure that it would cost much more than that per day to house the entire Plainedge Library's books, reference books and all the inventory from there in the schools. Where, then, would the savings come into play to put sports back in the budget by abolishing the public library? Doesn't make sense. Eventually, it would come back to the administration still cutting sports to make their point of cutting expenses and we start all over again!
If the library hours are cut down by being housed in the schools, as it would be disruptive to have the "public" coming in and out during the school day, the cost would not be cut down but increased by some of what's been mentioned in other posts. If the cost is increased with less hours then it's like buying a smaller Snickers bar today for more money as opposed to years ago buying a larger bar for less money.
We now have great service at the library and it only costs $ .76 per day. How could we possibly do better and serve the community and the children by even considering the elimination of the Plainedge Library?? In the long run, we would have less service and more cost, TAXES, to the detriment of the whole community!
|
|
|
Post by frawg88 on Sept 22, 2005 21:37:04 GMT -5
To “concerned” and “go plainedge”
I don’t think it’s far fetched at all to think that everyone can be on the same side working for the community and the children. Plainedge’s only identity is as a school district – we don’t have our own zip code and we’re made up of pieces of other towns. So, since life here really centers a round the schools, then everyone needs to band together in the true spirit of cooperation to preserve the quantity and quality of educational and extracurricular programs that we want for our children.
At one of the June meetings the BOE asked for people to sign up for the lobbying effort to get more state aid, so I think that’s an indication that they are both willing to do it and asking for help to do it. But let’s not kid ourselves - this will not happen with just a few dozen people. People need to come out in numbers and be SEEN and HEARD by the legislators, because I don’t think they’ll pay attention to generic letters and e-mails. This requires more than clicking a button if we want them to take us seriously.
I think a good place to start is to find out at a BOE meeting what the game plan is, the timeline, and how many people will be needed to make this an effective campaign. (Does anyone know if this is a planned topic at one of the coffee hours?) The next thing to determine after that is HOW to get people to commit to do this. I think at that point the word needs to be spread, both through the schools, and through the community to recruit people. If this forum could be used as a tool to recruit people and pass along all the details of the campaign, then it will really be doing the community a service.
|
|