|
Post by Admin on May 8, 2006 21:19:35 GMT -5
I will get the topic started.
I thought it was a good night with some great questions. As far as the format...it was better than last year, but I would like to see some things different.
In my mission to stay neutral, all I will say is that I think some candidates made a better "showing" than others.
I will let you guys debate the details.
|
|
|
Post by devilsrus on May 8, 2006 22:03:58 GMT -5
Interesting evening. Went expecting a 3 course prix fixe; got a 12 course meal instead. Much to digest. Some candidates were clearly better prepared than others. Kudos to the moderator who did a great job. Would like to have seen more interaction with the audience, but that can be worked out.
One point of curiousity.....the District is by all accounts succeeding academically. With that in mind; as a BOE member can a candidate take some credit? Second question; why take a potshot when your opponent has the last word? After a creditable presentation,and I think a 50/50 split, I didn't understand Mr. L's attack.
Much to take in,but the candidates are all to be applauded for their willingness to stand up for the kids of the community.
|
|
|
Post by plainedgewatcher on May 8, 2006 22:45:10 GMT -5
WHAT HAPPENED TONIGHT !!!!??I find it interesting that all the questions basically seemed the same and slanted toward financial answers. Although the budget is clearly the number one issue, there are other characteristics one looks for in someone they vote to represent them. Could the CFL team have been tipped??? Just some food for thought... Steve being the weaker of the 3 CFL team tried to show he was taking notes, but in reality it seemed that he knew what was coming... It's just what I saw. As far as Steve goes, he needs to go home tonight an read up on professionalism... After professing for the entire night and in every answer that the BOE, the administration, and the teachers needed to act in a professional way, he did not. The candidates handled themselves well, until Steve asked for 3 minutes for his closing remarks. 30 seconds to address what HE STOOD for and 2 1/2 minutes to ATTACK Frank. I thought that went a long way in showing his character. I still do not like the format, a 1/2 hour for stock questions followed by an hour of community questions would seem to provide a better look into the candidates.
|
|
|
Post by Go Plainedge! on May 9, 2006 7:46:49 GMT -5
I wish all of the candidates could have answered ALL of the questions. I know it may have made for a longer night, but we miss out on what other candidates feel about certain scenarios.
Mr. Lassman's closing statement did not sit well with me. He set himself up for Mr. Presuto's rebuttal which clearly was well received by the audience members.
I thought Mrs Capone did very well and had well thought out answers. She was direct, to the point and answered the questions. Some of the other candidates skirted the questions and never really answered them.
There was a lot to digest from last night. I applaud all of the candidates for not only enduring, what was probably, a stressful night but for taking the initiative in running for a BOE seat.
Perhaps when the budget passes, we can afford a better sound system in that room(??)
|
|
|
Post by patriot2415 on May 9, 2006 8:23:10 GMT -5
About last night....
I agree somewhat, the questions were too one sided focusing on the budget. I would have liked to hear all the candidates answer all the question also, and for the questions to be more diverse.
I applaud the community for making such a strong showing, and I think this crop of candidates may be the best in years.
However, I was taken back by Mr. Lassman's tirade. Seemed desperate to me.
Go, I agree on the sound system..it's terrible in there !!!!!
|
|
|
Post by dollywood on May 9, 2006 8:40:20 GMT -5
I am new to this board but I would like to add my comments about last nights meetings. Let me start by saying that I went to the meeting supporting Capone Lassman and Fox. I think that this night was so well done. Yes, there were things that could have been done better. Now, on to how I left the meeting. There is no way that I could support Lassman. I found him to be unprofessional. I thought Frank ( I did not know this man from a hole in the wall) handled himself very nicely even against Steve's thoughtless attacks. Frank spoke from his heart. You got the feeling that he really wanted to help make a change. The man won me over, and Lassman just lost me with his speeches on professional behavior then he attacks Frank. He took every chance he could to take the low blow. Raymond/Fox: First of all, I really did not know Mr. Raymond all that well but I could not believe that he was 55 minutes late to the meeting thus only able to answer two out of the five questions and give his three minute closing statement. He had nothing prepared and only mumbled a few quick answers at one point giving the exact same answer that Mr. Fox had just given. His closing statement was not that strong;however for those that know him I am sure you can add more to this than I am able. Mr. Fox If there was one "winner of the evening IMO I would have to say Mr. Fox came through with shinning colors. His honesty and humor was just what the audience was looking for. Everyone weather they agreed with him or not responded well to Mr. Fox. He had creative ideas, he was thoughtful, he presented himself well, he gave his ideas on where he wanted the board to go and he seemed to be able to toss a tad bit of humor in the ring as well. Maryann/Felice: Both of these candidates were strong last night. This is where the real race is IMO. They both had very good views. Maryann has a very strong business back round and I have to say right off the bat she is a friend of mine. However, that being said, Felice put on a great debate He read a letter at the end for his closing statement although everyone could tell where he was going with that letter, I would have liked to here from him and not from his friend of 30 years. But, that letter was very moving. Well, that is just my point of view of last night. So all in all I left there a changed woman. I am now voting for Capone, Presuto, Fox. I can do that right?
|
|
|
Post by patriot2415 on May 9, 2006 8:47:16 GMT -5
Welcome Dolly,
good first post. You can vote for anyone it is America..
( JUST AS LONG AS YOU VOTE.........YES !!!!!) ;D
|
|
|
Post by dollywood on May 9, 2006 8:57:57 GMT -5
Thanks for the welcome. I am interested in what others think about last night. Were you there?
|
|
|
Post by Go Plainedge! on May 9, 2006 8:58:41 GMT -5
Hello Dolly Yes, you can vote for whomever you wish. I know it may seem confusing with the candidate alliances that are formed (although I don't know why they're formed). In the booth, you will see a lever for each candidate. Pull the ones that work best for you.
|
|
|
Post by dollywood on May 9, 2006 9:09:48 GMT -5
That what I was confused about. I did not know if you could split the group. Like I said, after last night that is exactly what I want to do, split the group. I feel like Frank P. won my vote. I just did not know if I could vote for him while voting for Fox and Capone.
If you ask me after last night, Fox and Capone would be best off dumping Lessman. They should start hanging posters with just their names on them. Start wearing buttons with just Fox/Capone. Lassman in nothing more than an albatross around the neck of the candidates.
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on May 9, 2006 9:17:37 GMT -5
Meet the candidates night night has changed. Last night's format was better than last year - especially since there was no seat that was unchallenged as with Pat Z's running last year. The community's interaction with the candidates however, was limited to previously supplied questions. These questions, while bringing out some candidates viewpoints got to be a little too "canned" and led to topics and exchanges, mostly about the Budget process, that narrowed our ability to draw out the candidates viewpoints in many other areas. For instance, "Would you work to alter the Administration if elected? Would you open up general staff contracts to renegotiate their benefits package - make them pay a portion of the benefits cost? Would you work to renegotiate the Superintendent's contract to be more favorable to the District? What about the Secretary's vacation pay lawsuit, would you order it to be settled it as the courts have decided? This Picard/Packard swap - what are you views about why it is or isn't needed. Is it true that the Administration wants it for their new offices? Offices that will cause another Bond issue to come up? Is this Picken/Packard issue on the coming referendum Vote - as recorded it would be in the minutes of one of their recent meetings?
I'm sure "hot-potato" questions like these were submitted - but never made it through the selection committee.[/b] The answers about the budget process from Fox and Lassman sounded like a classroom lecture - almost put me to sleep. It's obvious the neither has done their homework to know how the actual process is practiced in Plainedge. That difference between practice and theory, is one of the causes behind many of our problems. One discussion about monthly "Encumbrances" showed vividly the Candidate didn't know that at the very first meeting of the year (Organizational meeting) ALL FUNDS are Encumbered right out of the barrel! He missed totally, that what's to be monitored is the DISBURSEMENTS against the encumbered amounts. So much for text-book knowledge - so little for practical knowledge.
As noted, about one candidate's prepared negative comment's about the writings of another, That revealed the workings of the "old-time" Board in action. Misdirect and mislead - attack and divide - "shoot the messenger" who has different thoughts than the party-line! To me, we've had enough of that in Plainedge - for that reason alone I personally found I would not vote for that candidate! I believe he "Shot himself in the foot" with that tirade! Yes, I purposely left out the candidate's name - You find out about this yourself from others and make up your own mind! On the plus side - MaryAnn represented herself very well and focused of her abilities with the financial and budget aspects. As noted, few candidates could bring out their other strong points because of the limited focus caused by the pre-cast questions. The same goes for Felice - he seems to be able to moderate and control very well and to have more generalized business experience. A no-nonsense, no fighting, in-control person. Hard to choose between them! In fact, I want both!!![/i] It is too bad that Prop 2 is not in effect now- Running for all open seats - all majority candidates win a new seat! Now we have to choose between MaryAnn or Felice, Raymond or Fox, Lassman or Presuto. That's not the way to do it. In fact - I wish there was another seat or two open! Frank won respect from me in his response to the tirade[/b]. He pointed out that some of the items he wrote that were criticized, were essential new items for this BOE to address and made no apology for his actions of bringing them to the forefront. It looks like the old Administration wouldn't slip much past Frank - a stand up candidate. Mr Lassman exhibited a lot of business knowledge and willingness to commit himself to bringing it to bear on proper BOE work. His discussion of the Business Ethics Policy needed by the Board was on the money. Mr Raymond, delayed by other events came late to the meeting - a negative. But for what he did say he showed a deep knowledge of where the "bones are buried" in past Board actions - and a desire to correct those troublesome spots. Mr. Fox exhibited an openness and sense of humor that was refreshing. He however, stressed once again a focus on the finances and budget. In the overview I wonder if it is wise to have an overcompensated reaction to but one of the major problems in the Plainedge School District - Budgets! He did emphasize that cost controls (as did Mr. Lassman) would step-by-step bring down waste and allow more of a fixed amount of tax dollars to go to the children. None of the Candidates, nor many in the audience, realized however, that the much discussed Official Budget was available a few feet away in the District office! Its presence remained cloaked behind a "You need to file a FOIL request to get a copy" note attached to its cover! The State Education Department (SED) requires the budget to be available to the voter at the District office. There is no requirement mentioned by the SED that a FOIL application is needed to make a copy. The District can charge a reasonable fee for copying costs - but this FOIL nonsense is just that - nonsense by the District. Riddle me this Batman! - Why, in this day and age, isn't the whole FINAL, OFFICIAL or whatever else you want to call the BUDGET - available on the District SITE? We can all look at it there, print it if we want, and have unfeterred access at any time of day or night! What in blue blazzes prevents that open approach by the public to public information? Richman? Lack of imagination? Something to hide?That false FOIL requirement is a shining example of the lack of openness by this administration - one of the leading defects in the administration and the generating cause for mistrust of them by the public. This "cute playing of games" by not making the budget freely open and available to the public and announcing its existence, has probably caused some "fence sitters" about how they'll vote, to switch to a NO vote out of disgust and mistrust. (What are they hiding from me, and why are they making it difficult for me to get the full budget? - Hell! I'll just vote NO and be done with it!) The Administration just made a difficult job a bit harder for the rest of us!Ed. The Tsunami is now visible and it is in motion and sweeping to the shores of the Plainedge School District. It is all over but for the celebration of the changes this will bring for the better! One way or the other, the start of this new school year in July marks the beginning of a revived School District! ;D I just hope that some of the old members on the Board will wake up to how tough this coming year will be for them - and resign early - leaving open a few more seats for the better Candidates we saw last night! ;D
|
|
|
Post by dollywood on May 9, 2006 9:43:19 GMT -5
ED,
I had no idea about the FOIL. I could see where that would lead some to vote NO. I think Mr. Fox said it best last night, if elected his first steps would be to try and start the process of rebuilding trust between the BOE and the community. I believe that Frank P. had a wonderful idea of have a Board meeting without the Administrative Board and just the community. What a wonderful "out of the box idea". We the people could voice our concerns to our elected officials and they can bring the concerns to the ADM.
Yes, Mr. Lassman was right on the money with his answer to the question about the ethics. However, I found this question useless. Here is why. The question went something like this. Would you favor a written code of ethics and would you sign that code of ethics? Why? or why not?
Okay, there were five people there who is going to say NO. OH no not me. I would never put my name on a code of Ethics. Not ME. That was a fluff question. Of course they are all goi ng to say yes. The new guys were able to take a shot and say they thought there should have already have one, and the old guys got to say yes they would. They all got to say how ethical they were and we all got they lecture from Lassman on how he lives his life by a certain code of ethics EVERYDAY( I guess attacking Frank P. did not count -- can you say low blow).
I really did not feel lectured by anyone except Lassman. I have to agree with you I would love to have Maryann and Felice. Like I said that is going to be the real race. They are both good candidates.
Can the BOE renegotiate any contracts? Does the Board have the ability to force the ADM. to settle the contract dispute?
Dolly
|
|
|
Post by patriot2415 on May 9, 2006 10:06:22 GMT -5
Just, I feel the same about the questions. Q. How will you bring back those items that were cut? A. I'm not. I'm going to keep the lights on, the temp set at 72 and cut all Spanish!!!! What do you expect the candidate to answer ?? I really wanted to see more question as to how they would keep the community involved and build on what has happened this year. If they were willing to reach out to experts in the community, maybe on labor laws, oil/electrical conservation, maybe their opinion on a community relations board.. issues like that... So Many questions.. so little time !!!!!
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on May 9, 2006 10:36:21 GMT -5
dollywood
I really appreciate your presence on this forum! Keep up the good work!
Not only can the BOE renegotiate any contracts it can also tear them up! This, of course is drastic and rarely done. But, as they've often said in the entertainment business, contracts are written to be broken. And either side can break them - with the attendant lawyers and court costs, of course.
My contention on one major contract in this district is that it already has been breeched by the employee - and no longer has to be "honored" by the District! However, the details make a long story that'll best be told in the fall.
And as far as the BOE having the ability to direct the Administration to settle the contract dispute - I assume the reference is to the Secretary's case. In that case it is the lack of action by the Board that is at fault.
The Board has the sole and singular authority to authorize the spending of the public's money - the Administration can only spend what the Board directs it to do. The Administration can not disburse money without the Board's authorization - and, if the Board directs the Administration to settle the case, the Administration must do so - unless the Board lacks the necessary guts to follow through!
The trouble in that case - which made overseas Union newspaper headlines with the statement "Whose the bloke that doesn't know that 40 hours is 40 hours?" - is that we've been governed by a Board led by the Administrator, rather than the other way around which is the proper way. The old Board led by Mallow and Dick, has not taken the control of this situation like it is chartered to do!
By the way, the ethics question, and a Board's individual Ethics Policy Statement, is generally centered around the "Conflict of Interest Laws". These are the laws we imagine protect the public against unethical members of a Board giving contracts to themselves, family or firms they work for, at the expense of the public, including the use of "insider information" for personal gain.
These laws actually have very little "teeth" in them - there are too many ways to skirt them. But the "Window Dressing" of having a policy and having Board members sign the policy, is very impressive.
What is more effective - is the Oath of Office that each Board member must take and sign a card about. This card is then filed in the County Offices each year. Although mild in its content, this Oath is more binding than signing a self-generated Ethics Policy. Failure to take and file this Oath each year can give the Insurance companies an out for indemnifying Board members against being sued by the public for unethical or improper practices.
And I agree with you - this whole issue was a pre-selected "goodie-goodie" question of very little merit intended to make one candidate "look good". Only amateur and inexperienced Board members would consider it of value.
Frank P's suggestion of having meetings between the public (the Bosses) and the Board (the representatives) without the Administration (the Hired Hand) was good - even more essential with a weak Board as we now have, than a strong Board. Also essential, something we do at the Library Board meetings - is to ask the Administration to leave the room while the Board discusses points where no input is needed from Administration.
The Administrator should only attend a board meeting in the role of an adviser, answering questions quickly that he Board may need information about. In no way should an Administration conduct, run, or have unfettered comments and exchanges between themselves and their boss's boss - the community that is present at the meeting! This is an anomaly in the proper conduct of a BOE meeting - as often seen in Plainedge!
Again! Welcome and keep with it!
Ed.
|
|
|
Post by rraymond on May 9, 2006 12:14:21 GMT -5
Dolly, With regard to your posting please allow me to respond. First and foremost I have to apologize to you as I did last night to the community for being late but, I did have an unavoidable work issue to address. You state you really don’t know me, please let me tell you a little about myself. I was elected to the board five years ago. At that time I ran on the platform that I would keep a watchful eye on administrative spending while not affecting our children’s academic programs. I am proud to say that during my tenure our children’s scores have increased to levels never before. As for the spending I believe that my actions this year as well as in the past speak for themselves by the way I have scrutinized and challenged ALL the non program line items within the budget. I am as equally proud of the fact that I have never forgotten the promises that I have made to this community for allowing me to serve them and never will. There is much more work that needs to be done with regards to spending and community relations and given the opportunity I am ready to meet those challenges. Please take into consideration my ENTIRE record not just three questions before making your decision. My record speaks for itself. Finally I would like to extend to you, as well as any other community member, the opportunity to answer any questions or concerns that they might have. As the old saying goes, my door is always open. I have listed my email address and phone number below.
Thank You, Ralph J Raymond Email: rjraymondsr@yahoo.com 516-756-9380
|
|