|
Post by techie on May 18, 2006 5:40:41 GMT -5
But voter approval should not be seen as green light to maintain status quo
May 18, 2006
Does Tuesday's overwhelming approval of Long Island school budgets signal the end of the Tax Revolt of 2004-05, which saw record numbers of spending plans go down to defeat? Maybe. But the well-organized education lobby that campaigned hard for approvals - the school boards, administrators, teachers union and parents groups - shouldn't believe it's now immune from taxpayer anger. That's still simmering. And in a region with one of the nation's highest local tax burdens, it should be.
If educators at Nassau-Suffolk's more than 120 school districts don't keep pressing for significant savings - even as they push for additional aid and other relief from Albany - they will ignite another revolt that will make the last one seem like a love letter. And they will deserve it.
This week, Long Islanders made an intelligent, self-interested choice - at least the relatively small percentage who showed up at the polls. Taxpayers realized that a no vote might end up costing them, as well as the region's children and economy, more than they might get back in their pockets. Districts on austerity are required to honor all personnel contracts, which account for the brunt on spending, so the savings are often minimal.
But the voters also rewarded many districts for trying harder this year to hold down costs. Average tax and spending increases came in sharply lower. And many of the budgets that went down were way out of line with neighboring districts. Unfortunately, many of them were poor districts whose children already make do with less than their fair share of state and local resources.
Still, annual tax hikes at double the rate of inflation are impossible burdens for many homeowners and an unsustainable drain for the economy - even one so reliant on the quality of its schools to boost property values and attract businesses. It's time to stop killer taxes.
Officials at all levels of government must feel the pressure to continue to rein in spending. Study groups convened by the county executives, Nassau's Thomas Suozzi and Suffolk's Steve Levy, and stocked with first-rate educators and fiscal experts, have come up with a number of useful ways that districts might save by sharing services. Good.
But it's not enough. Taxpayers must push their leaders to be bolder. As we detailed Sunday, they must actually merge districts, shift more of the funding burden to the income tax, and force state lawmakers to give school boards not only a fairer share of aid but more clout in contract talks.
Don't wait for another tax revolt. Copyright 2006 Newsday Inc.
|
|
|
Post by techie on May 21, 2006 8:47:28 GMT -5
Two tacks to smaller property tax
May 21, 2006
The size of the property tax issue is so vast that the Suffolk County Legislature has one commission looking at alternate revenue sources and another to be formed, to examine ways of cutting spending. This week, the public has the first chance to air its views before the revenue commission. Citizens who care deeply about this issue should show up and join the debate.
A new report from State Comptroller Alan Hevesi shows the property tax burden in New York growing three times as fast as inflation from 2000 to 2005. On Long Island, every time a politician walks up to a voter's door during the campaign, complaint No. 1 is most often high property taxes.
So Presiding Officer William Lindsay (D-Holbrook) and Legis. Lynne Nowick (R-St. James) put together a bipartisan commission to explore other possible revenue sources to replace the regressive and oppressive property tax.
This won't be the first study of alternatives, such as sharing revenue from commercial property among school districts or replacing residential property taxes with an income tax. In fact, Harvey Levinson, chairman of the Nassau County Board of Assessors, has advocated the income tax for many months.
At the revenue commission's first meeting May 2, Lindsay acknowledged that other groups had studied many of the alternatives that his new commission will examine. But he also argued that solutions rejected six or seven years ago might not be so unacceptable now, with angst about property taxes so high. He might very well be right.
One way for the commission to find out is to hear directly from the public, starting with a hearing this Tuesday night at 7 p.m. at the legislature's auditorium in Hauppauge. Further hearings are scheduled for June 28 in Selden and Aug. 23 in Riverhead. Meanwhile, Legis. Louis D'Amaro (D-North Babylon) is working on legislation to create another commission, with representation as broad as the Lindsay-Nowick group, to look at ways of cutting costs, especially in school districts. County Executive Steve Levy has already met with a group of superintendents to brainstorm on cost savings, but D'Amaro's commission would bring together superintendents and other stakeholders to meet over a period of months.
There are no guarantees, but at least Suffolk is making a good-faith effort to wrestle with this vexing problem. Copyright 2006 Newsday Inc.
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on May 22, 2006 6:44:12 GMT -5
Another District with a $66+ Million BudgetHere's Newsday's latest on the mess in Roosevelt's District. *************************************************Roosevelt still troubledState audit says the school district suffers from overspending and fiscal carelessness, blaming top managers.BY JOHN HILDEBRAND, Newsday Staff Writer, May 22, 2006 Top school managers in the financially troubled Roosevelt district set a bad example for subordinates through needless purchases including travel packages to South Africa, Argentina and Antarctica, according to a new state audit that cites more than 60 examples of fiscal mismanagement and more than $2.4 million in overspending. Four years after its unprecedented takeover by the state, Roosevelt continues to be plagued by irregular spending, sloppy bookkeeping and lack of proper financial controls over millions of dollars in extra state aid, the audit finds. For example, the report cites more than $120,000 in state reimbursements for school construction that were delayed more than two years, because of the district's slowness in submitting required forms.However, the audit's most biting criticisms are aimed at the district's top administrators, past and present. "The examples of unreasonable, unnecessary and inappropriate expenses incurred or approved by Roosevelt's senior managers do not establish the proper tone at the top," the audit concludes. "Senior managers need to clearly set the tone for ethical behavior in Roosevelt." The district's finances hit another critical point last week, when local voters rejected a proposed $66.7 million budget that would have raised spending 15.01 percent.Roosevelt officials say they're scrambling to fix weaknesses pinpointed by the audit, which is due to be reviewed publicly for the first time this morning at a meeting of the state Board of Regents in Albany. Newsday obtained an advance copy of the audit, which covers the past two fiscal years ending in April 2005. Other state reports accompanying the audit say Roosevelt is making progress in reconstructing schools, providing better building security and adding college-level courses at the local high school. The reports add, however, that student attendance at the high school remains low, and that 44 percent of teens graduated on time, compared with a statewide rate of better than 70 percent. The audit was particularly critical of district Superintendent Ronald Ross, who has served since July 2004. The report recounts an incident last year when Ross won school board approval of a 13-day, $6,010 educational trip to Argentina and Antarctica, then canceled his travel plans in the face of community opposition. Costs of the trip were not refunded, according to the audit that also criticizes other transactions, such as a former school official's use of a district vehicle for commutes home. Ross, a veteran administrator praised and criticized for his efforts to turn around other troubled districts, including Mount Vernon in Westchester County, rejected the state's criticisms in a phone interview yesterday. He said the Argentina/Antarctica trip was sponsored by a national educational group, that he had been honored to be part of a small group invited, and that he had canceled only because of more pressing commitments. The superintendent added he agreed with many of the audit's broader findings of fiscal mismanagement, and had recently hired an interim business manager with an eye toward making improvements. "I'm not backing down," said Ross, who has three years remaining on his superintendent's contract. "I've taken major steps to turn the business office around, and I think I have. The bottom line is that Roosevelt has been a failing district over 20 years, and the state has been there 10 years, and I am trying to clean things up."State officials themselves face increasing pressures to show progress. Albany first stepped into Roosevelt in 1995, when it set up a review panel to help straighten out the district's tangled finances and poor academic performance. Seven years later, the state took direct control of Roosevelt - the first and only time it has done so in a school district. Since then, State Education Commissioner Richard Mills has appointed district school board trustees and superintendents, including Ross. Despite the changes, the 2,800-student district still suffers from many of the same academic and financial troubles it faced before the takeover. This is not because of lack of money alone. With the help of extra state financial aid, Roosevelt spends more than $17,000 per student - 10.8 percent above Nassau County's average. Rather, the main problem detailed by the audit is weak management. The report finds, for example, that Roosevelt maintained at least 18 different bank accounts, including some not authorized by the school board. An auditor's note says the district complied with a state suggestion that it identify accounts to be closed, but had not yet done so.Audit pinpoints weaknessesHere's a sample of financial weaknesses identified by the state's Roosevelt schools audit, which district officials promise to correct.[/b] Roosevelt's budget status report for March 2005 showed 50 accounts overspent or over-encumbered for a total of $2.4 million. School board members did not receive such reports, preventing them from effectively monitoring finances. A former district treasurer did not perform most duties required of him, leaving cash reports incomplete and unreconciled. "This provides little assurance the balances are correct and all funds are accounted for," the audit said. Roosevelt has three building projects where state aid of more than $120,000 will be delayed more than two years because of the district's failure to file required reports on time. The district failed to comply for at least the last two years with regulations requiring state approval of contracts of $25,000 or more. District officials approved expenditures that were "unreasonable, unnecessary or inadequately documented." These included a former administrator's $2,500 trip to a South African training conference and a current administrator's $6,010 trip to Argentina and Antarctica that was eventually canceled but not refunded. ***********************************************Don't some of the Report issues sound familiar? Inadequately documented Expenses, expenditure information not presented to board ($8.1 Million in the Plainedge report), reports not filed on time (Added Bond issue cost), weak management controls, etc. I wonder what a Hevisie Audit of more than just Administration and Board Expenses would have revealed about us? What about an Audit of the Middle School Bond finances now that it is almost complete? How about looking at just the everyday expenses and financial controls - which were not examined by Hevisie? Ed. Let's get started on getting more of the Budget dollar to the children - 70¢ on the dollar is not enought!
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on May 25, 2006 16:45:17 GMT -5
The next to latest from Newsday -------------------- Shift on income tax for schools -------------------- BY JAMES T. MADORE, Newsday Staff Writer, May 25, 2006 Enacting an income tax to pay for public schools may no longer be taboo on Long Island.Nine of the 26 people who have testified so far before a Suffolk County commission looking into education financing said they would welcome a local income tax, because rising property taxes have made the area unaffordable for young people, the elderly and others. Speakers also suggested a higher sales tax, casino gambling, luxury-goods tax and taxing land values as alternatives to the current property-tax system for underwriting schools. "Solutions that were rejected five, 10 or 20 years ago, I think are more acceptable now," Legis. William Lindsay, co-chairman of the Suffolk County Homeowners Tax Reform Commission, said yesterday. "People are very much afraid of the escalation of the property tax ... There is a lot of frustration with the system and I think the system is ripe for change." Lindsay (D-Holbrook) is the legislature's presiding officer. In the first of three public hearings before the commission, taxpayers on Tuesday night debated school-funding schemes while also criticizing the wages, medical insurance and pensions given to school administrators and teachers. Ernest Amato, a retiree from Deer Park, called for restructuring school districts to eliminate many administrative jobs, and to have budgets and purchasing overseen by BOCES. "School spending is way out of control and sooner or later, Long Island will be a ghost town," he said. Echoing the comments of others, Bohemia resident Robert Donato, 56, said, "The tax should be on income because it's fairer for everybody ... The property tax is punishing people who have succeeded" and have large houses. Last summer, 55 percent of Long Islanders answered favorably when asked about reducing the property tax by two-thirds and instituting an income tax that could be as high as 9 percent for the wealthiest households. Thirty-four percent of the 1,215 people surveyed for the Garden City-based Rauch Foundation opposed an income tax. These results were in stark contrast to the blistering criticism Gov. Mario Cuomo received 13 years ago after suggesting that school districts be allowed to replace a portion of their property tax revenues with an income tax of up to 25 percent. The districts, not counties, determine school taxes. But times have changed, and the hopelessness that some residents feel was evident in 2 1/2 hours of testimony before the 17-member commission. "My husband and I are comfortable, but we earned everything we have ... and we are being taken advantage of," said Lois St. George, 65, of Bay Shore. "Please help us. I beg of you, give us some sort of relief." Instead of new levies, some speakers argued for cutting the property tax and generating more revenue from the state lottery or casinos. "If people want to gamble their money away, why not have it fund our kids' schools?" said Yolanda Lipari, 45, of Lindenhurst. The 60 or so people at the Hauppauge hearing came from throughout Suffolk, except for the East End towns, and were evenly split between retirees and those in their 40s, 50s and 60s. One man was from Nassau, which hasn't yet established a similar study group. Commission officials said a local inheritance tax and a Long Island lottery were among the alternatives being considered. Final recommendations will be released in September. Accountant Steve Garofalo, 51, of Ronkonkoma, cautioned in his testimony against simplistic solutions. He said,"It is easy to say 'yes' to an income tax, but all that does is shift the burden from one group to another." Two More Hearings The Suffolk County Homeowners Tax Reform Commission plans two more public hearings for ideas on alternatives to the property tax for funding public schools. June 28: 6 to 8 p.m., Suffolk County Community College, Babylon Student Center, Montauk Point Room, 533 College Road, Selden Aug. 23: 12:30 p.m., County Center, Maxine S. Postal Auditorium, Riverhead Copyright (c) 2006, Newsday, Inc. **************************************************Ed. Anyway they get it - make sure that more than 70¢ on the dollar goes to the children! ;D
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on May 25, 2006 16:52:07 GMT -5
Now for the latest from Newsday!-------------------- Talk of the towns: property taxes -------------------- Joye Brown, May 25, 2006 Something remarkable happened on Long Island Tuesday night as resident upon resident stood on a podium in Hauppauge and - gasp! - volunteered a willingness to swap an income tax, sales tax or some combination of new taxes to replace the property tax. "They're getting feisty in there," a woman warned me as I hustled from the parking lot to join the audience at the first-ever meeting of the Suffolk County Homeowner's Tax Reform Commission, which was formed by the County Legislature earlier this year. She had rushed to her car for something and almost got back to the legislature's hearing room before I did. She didn't want to miss anything. Inside the room were about 60 Long Islanders, some angry, some serious, who wanted to sit and talk about ways to reduce the property tax burden in the county, perhaps the single most contentious issue facing homeowners in Nassau and Suffolk. They included business owners and a CPA, a school board member and working mothers. All were oh-so-thankful for the opportunity to talk about property taxes, which homeowners have been saying for years are forcing people to leave Long Island for parts of the country where the burden is less severe. For most, the session seemed genuinely cathartic - so much so that residents stayed after the hearing to talk among themselves and kick around novel ideas. The group managed to be both thoughtful and giddy at the prospect of joining the commission's quest to find solutions. Among them was Robert Orosz of Garden City, who made a 27-mile trek to testify, lamenting that Nassau County had no similar commission. "I'm so desperate," Orosz said after the hearing. "I'll go all the way to Albany if that helps get something done." The surprise idea of the night was "income tax." About one-third of the speakers uttered the phrase. They were referring to using income taxes as an alternative to property taxes. No one would have done that five, or even three, years ago. The group also demonstrated once again that residents are smarter than most politicians think and more willing to confront this issue. They zeroed in on school costs, many suggesting that the political panacea of more state aid will mean nothing unless districts also are required to justify their expenses. The crowd offered other suggestions, too, including hiking sales or gasoline taxes to fund school costs. And they came up with a few surprises. Yolanda Lipani of Lindenhurst noted that tens of thousands of Long Islanders gamble. Why not keep their money here with, say, a Long Island-specific lottery that would raise funds locally and keep the proceeds locally, with all of it going toward the schools? "If prostitution was legal and people were willing to pay money for that, why shouldn't it fund our schools?" she asked - jokingly, of course, to the crowd's applause. Some of the 26 speakers complained that the hearing room of the County Legislature was not full. They wondered why more residents had not turned out to offer suggestions to the commission. But, by meeting, the crowd made history. People came from Deer Park, Huntington, Islip Terrace, North Great River, Oakdale, Bohemia, East Patchogue, West Islip, Setauket, Mastic Beach, Ronkonkoma, Manorville, Holbrook and Garden City. Long Islanders for years have complained about property taxes, which are among the highest in the nation. Tuesday was the first time a group of residents publicly signaled their willingness to meet, knock around ideas and search for solutions. Orosz and others said they would attend all three of the commission's public meetings. Let's see who else shows up. joye.brown@newsday.com Copyright (c) 2006, Newsday, Inc. **********************************************Ed. OK New Board - by now you know we want to see more that 70¢ on the dollar going to programs next year! Any thoughts on how you are going to do that?
|
|
|
Post by techie on May 28, 2006 4:44:19 GMT -5
Town eyes gov't teamwork to cut costs
BY COLLIN NASH Newsday Staff Writer
May 28, 2006
With a backdrop of mounting taxes and angry taxpayers, North Hempstead officials last week launched an initiative designed to promote partnerships to help local governments and special districts in Nassau County cut operational costs.
"This is about sharing services, but it's also about dialogue, talking to each other to see how we can get the biggest bang for our taxpayer buck," North Hempstead Supervisor Jon Kaiman told about 150 guests Thursday at the Intermunicipal Partnership Workshop at the Harbor Links Golf Course in Port Washington.
North Hempstead recently created an Office of Intermunicipal Cooperation to coordinate partnerships between government entities.
The complexity of delivering services for less money calls for governments to work together, Kaiman said, pointing to the town's "considerable" pool of resources.
Town services, he said, are varied: from filling potholes, paving roadways and snow removal to horticultural services and cooperative purchasing.
Others emphasized that tapping into the town's workforce and utilizing its buying power is just one way to slash costs.
Trimming the fat is equally as crucial, said Nassau Comptroller Howard Weitzman.
There is a "vast disparity" in taxes among the 300 to 400 special districts in Nassau, Weitzman said. Based on how they are constructed and historically operated, residents in neighboring villages with similar demographics can pay vastly different amounts for the same service, he said.
One reason for the disparity could be attributed to whether the community has a commercial tax base, Weitzman said, adding that in some special districts, "authority is falling through the cracks."
Linda Cohen, a member of the board of trustees at the Village of Great Neck's main library, attended the workshop and said she learned some ways to trim costs, such as having the town create signs for a branch library instead of contracting out for that work.
"All of us live here and pay taxes," she said, "so we all have a vested interest in trying to hold costs down." Copyright 2006 Newsday Inc.
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on Jun 8, 2006 21:40:01 GMT -5
The latest opinions and actions of changing the Tax base for funding schools ~ from a Newsday article.
-------------------- Fund schools with income tax --------------------
Poll finds that more residents would prefer to shift the cost from their property taxes to ease the expense
BY MICHAEL ROTHFELD, Newsday Staff Writer, June 9, 2006.
As frustration with high property taxes mounts on Long Island, more residents than not would prefer funding schools with a local income tax instead, a Newsday/NY1 poll has found.
Long Islanders favored the idea 41 percent to 33 percent -- making the region the most supportive in the state.
"The property tax basically hits people who don't have kids any longer," said Stephen Lahey, 59, a co-op owner from Rocky Point who has no children himself but added that he believes in education. "There are older folks, and the burden on them is very heavy."
Across New York, 957 suburban and upstate voters polled June 1-5 by Blum & Weprin Associates were split, with 39 percent each in favor and opposed and roughly 22 percent unsure. New York City voters were not surveyed because the city has an income tax already and a different school funding system.
Upstate suburban and rural voters favored a local income tax, 40 percent to 36 percent, while upstate urban voters opposed it, 50 percent to 32 percent. Political party was not a factor, and men were more supportive of the change than women.
"Our community is poor," said Vera Giasi, 70, who runs a bed-and-breakfast in Rock Stream, in rural central New York, and opposes an income tax. "If you take that and put it on the wage earners, that might be very difficult for a lot of the poorer people."
On Long Island, it is not surprising that people are more receptive to an income tax as their property taxes soar, said Mitchell Pally, a vice president at the Long Island Association, a business group.
"Some people believe that just shifting from one tax to another tax will be an easy solution to the problem," he said.
Pally said the implications are not clear, and his group is studying the issue. It is also under review by a Suffolk County legislative commission. Income tax supporters say it is more fair than property taxes, because homeowners can't necessarily afford to pay.
Nassau Assessor Harvey Levinson supports a countywide system combining property and income taxes. "It's a really politically difficult issue for most elected officials to deal with," he said. "They're simply dead wrong."
In the governor's race, Democrat Eliot Spitzer, the front-runner, endorsed gradually moving to a local income tax before business leaders in East Meadow on Jan. 26, calling the property tax "a fundamentally bad tax."
"What we have to do over time is shift from a property tax foundation to an income tax foundation," Spitzer said. "Because then the tax at least is imposed upon the revenue people are getting. Most people agree it is more equitable."
Nassau County Executive Thomas Suozzi, also a Democrat, says he would cut state spending and increase education aid to reduce property taxes, but he does not support "new or alternative taxes." Republican John Faso opposes an income tax, a spokeswoman said, because it would "simply be shifting burdens."
Staff writer James T. Madore contributed to this story.
Copyright (c) 2006, Newsday, Inc.
|
|
|
Post by Go Plainedge! on Jun 9, 2006 8:47:30 GMT -5
The problem with the income tax theory is that the schools with lower income households would then suffer. Would the state would have to make up the difference.
I'm all for lowering my property tax but then does the school district suffer?
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on Jun 9, 2006 11:53:45 GMT -5
goplainedge!
The possible problem with the objection you have to lower average income Districts not being able to provide adequate funds via a County income tax to support the District - thus requiring additional State Aid - is that this is a constraint that would also apply to the property values in such a District.
Lower average income, lower average home prices. The limits of the "ability to pay" works for both cost of schooling as well as the cost of a home.
Of course, under the present system of property tax, this financial constraint could be, and has been, ignored by just raising the desired tax funds anyway - all it takes is to have a higher tax RATE imposed on "poor" Districts as opposed to "rich" Districts to make up for the lowered assessed values of the homes. This gives rise to a major inequity in that the "ability to pay" for a service or product is ignored.
In an income tax funding method the boundaries of a District could more easily be avoided and the tax base could be spread over a wider region to provide some equalization in education that is not constrained by the particular District's ability to pay.
A fairer and more uniform education can be provided to children that is not as dependent on where their parent's could afford to live.
If the income tax were based on income in Nassau County, or Nassau and Suffolk Counties, then District income level differences could be made to disappear and the School costs equalized all over one or both counties.
"Rich" districts would contribute more money to "poor" Districts than they presently do. Controlling the expenses of each type of District would then require County intervention on the costs within individual Districts so one would not be able to "pig out" over another District.
Salaries and benefits, the major portion of all District costs, would have to be controlled on a County wide basis (like Civil Service is) rather than on a District by District basis.
That might be beneficial in the overall scheme of things - but I'm sure that the various unions involved would object to this.
What is the best plan - property tax or income tax, or a combination of the two? I have no idea - the issue is too complex for the little amount of factual information available, and it has had more political based discussion than philosophical. However, it is obviously a subject that is best NOT resolved by the result of "polls".
Ed.
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on Jun 18, 2006 8:49:24 GMT -5
The Latest Salary InfoHere's the most recent info about what Salary plus Benefits are for a Superintendent's position. The existing "interim" person at Roslyn is getting an amount far under what they are planning to give a "permanent" Superintendent. They're adding $100,000 to the package for "Benefits". That's a pretty hefty amount for a non-sports and non-entertainment job. And the school size is not enormous - just 3,300 students. That comes to a Superintendent cost of about $100 per student. ;D Say!, that also comes to just 27¢ per student per day! Guess that's not too expensive after all! ************************************************Roslyn reels over proposed $340G superintendent pay BY JOHN HILDEBRAND, STAFF WRITER; Staff writer Karla Schuster contributed to this story. June 18, 2006 Even before Roslyn's last school board meeting, residents of this affluent but financially beleaguered district were skeptical about school budgets. They said as much last month, when they narrowly voted down the district's first spending plan of $86.8 million. Then earlier this month, the board presented residents with a revised $85.4 million budget for a revote. The budget cut some programs but boosted the superintendent's pay package by $100,000, bringing it to a total of $340,000. And skepticism turned to anger. "You wonder how many other financial excesses they have in the budget that you don't know about," said Ron Bernstein, a marketing consultant and father of two. School officials deny the package is excessive. They said they have posted the raise on the district's Web site, along with the rest of the budget. They offer this explanation: The 3,300-student district now is run by an interim superintendent, David Helme, who took over two years ago, shortly after his predecessor, Frank Tassone, was driven out by an $11 million financial scandal. As a retired administrator from another district, Helme gets a $240,000 salary, but no benefits. The district now is negotiating to hire a permanent superintendent, and must add money for the replacement's benefits to the budget. Stanley Stern, the board president, said last week that the district's candidate for the job is Martin Brooks, superintendent in Plainview-Old Bethpage and a former president of the Nassau County Council of School Superintendents. Brooks declined to comment. Stern, a retired New York City principal, defended the $340,000, which would rank sixth in total compensation for Island school chiefs. "I don't think we're out of line," he said. Staff writer Karla Schuster contributed to this story. Biggest earners The top 10 2006-2007 compensation packages for Long Island school superintendents: DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT SALARY TOTAL COMP.* Syosset Carole Hankin $306,721 $410,960 Hewlett Les Omotani $256,250 $366,867 Levittown Herman Sirois $292,642 $358,765 Commack James Hunderfund** $282,905 $356,142 Great Neck Ronald Friedman $289,167 $341,295 Roslyn Unnamed *** $340,000 Rockville C. William Johnson $295,000 $336,976 Jericho Henry Grishman $251,875 $330,979 Huntington John Finello $232,612 $318,174 Hicksville Maureen Bright $220,000 $306,481 *Includes salaries, fringe benefits such as employer contributions for Social Security, employee life, health, unemployment and worker's compensation insurance and pension plan. Figures also include annualized compensation that includes employer expenses for additional insurance and/or annuities, housing or moving allowances and the personal use of a vehicle and/or residence. **Hunderfund is scheduled to retire on Aug. 31. James Feltman has been names to replace him. ***Under negotiation. SOURCE. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Copyright (c) 2006, Newsday, Inc. ************************************************Did you notice that the Board President who defended the amount of Salary and Benefits at Roslyn was a NYC School Principal?Ed. Were Schools really created and funded for the Students? Or were they created for the Staff and their Benefits?
|
|
|
Post by Go Plainedge! on Jun 18, 2006 8:58:57 GMT -5
In my next life I want to come back as either a network weatherman or public school superintendent.
What other job can you screw up so much, get paid a lot of money and still be employed?
****not to say all superintendents are screw ups.
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on Jun 20, 2006 20:38:02 GMT -5
Some did have a second vote!
Here's the latest on School Budget votes - the second time around.
*********************************************
Rallying the troops, again
[]iEighteen school districts make a second attempt at getting their budgets passed on Tuesday[/i]
BY JOHN HILDEBRAND AND MARYELLEN PEREIRA, Newsday Staff Writers, June 18, 2006
School-budget supporters and their opponents are battling to the finish in East Islip, Roslyn and other districts, as Long Island heads toward its first-ever single-day revote on Tuesday.
Much is at stake. Eighteen districts that lost budget votes last month are coming back to voters with $1.19 billion in proposed spending - up an average 7 percent from last year, and well above the metro-area inflation rate of 4.8 percent.
Many districts warn that budget rejections would force cutbacks. These could trigger larger classes and the loss of varsity sports, clubs and full-day kindergartens. Taxpayer groups call the warnings "blackmail."
Against a backdrop of widespread resentment over high property taxes, several districts are also trying to undo the damage done this year when they were forced to operate under austerity conditions because of budget defeats last year.
One such district is Patchogue-Medford, where parents and other boosters raised more than $300,000 this year to save many sports teams.
"People have been calling me, e-mailing me, saying we can't stand to be on austerity two years in a row," said Michael Mostow, the district superintendent, who voiced optimism about Tuesday's vote.
"We can't dally," he said, referring to changes in state law that have ended the old practice of spreading revotes over several months. "And when you're under that kind of pressure, I think you do a better job."
For its revote, Patchogue-Medford is proposing a $137.6 million budget that is down $2.1 million from the plan narrowly rejected last month. The revised version would boost spending 7.9 percent and taxes 14 percent.
Confusion over taxes
In Southampton Town, five school districts holding revotes have been caught in a wave of confusion over townwide property reassessments. Because taxable values of some properties still are being negotiated, school officials have been telling homeowners they won't be able to calculate the exact impact of their budgets on taxes until after Tuesday's balloting.
One sign of confusion: Bridgehampton's $9.8 million budget was voted down last month, even though it represented a zero spending increase. Now, the district is making a second attempt to explain the situation to its frustrated residents through two newsletters and personal appeals by school officials.
"They were just reeling," said Superintendent Dianne Youngblood. "What we've been telling them is that based on our estimate - and we've made it very conservative - we're looking at a 4 percent [tax] increase or less, and I think it's going to be much less."
Single-day revoting is the latest in a series of changes enacted by state lawmakers since 1995 to streamline school elections. Initial budget votes, formerly scheduled throughout May and June, now are held the third Tuesday in May.
Revotes are scheduled a month later, all on the same day. Under old laws, districts were allowed multiple revotes, with some held as late as September.
School-board representatives have complained that the changes restrict their freedom, especially in years when they have trouble calculating budget figures because the legislature is late in approving school aid.
Debates on spending
With revotes now scheduled on a single day, many recent school-board meetings across the Island turned into debates over spending. In East Islip, for example, older homeowners angry about their tax bills have clashed with younger parents worried that their children might lose school services.
The district's revised $88.3 million budget would raise spending 6.53 percent and taxes 13.78 percent. It includes a $600,000 legislative grant that will allow continuation of full-day kindergarten that originally had been marked for elimination. The district can spend the grant money even if the budget fails, however.
One East Islip parent, Jeannine Murphy, says she's not happy with the double-digit tax increase. However, she is relieved by the planned restoration of full-day kindergarten and feels that parents of young children now have an obligation to support the budget to save services for older youths.
But Andrea Vecchio, a longtime activist in the watchdog group TaxPac, says supporting the budget will simply encourage local school officials to grant a lucrative contract to teachers to replace the contract about to expire.
"I guess it doesn't matter to these parents that they're being blackmailed," she said.
Back under consideration
The following school districts are to decide the fate of their budgets for the next school year.
DISTRICT PROPOSED BUDGET INCREASE FROM 2006-07 PREVIOUS YEAR
Hempstead $126,152,679 4.79%
New Hyde Park-GCP 28,341,543 7.98
Roosevelt 66,755,332 15.01
Roslyn 85,400,446 6.12
West Hempstead 48,548,512 5.34
Westbury 85,304,983 9.37
Bridgehampton 9,822,386 0
Center Moriches 30,164,900 7.33
East Islip 88,300,000 6.53
East Moriches 20,215,270 8.88
East Quogue 18,224,008 8.36
Hampton Bays 32,509,096 11.07
Patchogue-Medford 137,609,311 7.93
Riverhead 93,152,740 6.28
South Country 87,268,696 6.48
Southampton 46,314,058 2.74
Tuckahoe 12,794,065 9.21
William Floyd 174,298,100 6.15
Copyright (c) 2006, Newsday, Inc.
*********************************************
Ed.
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on Jun 22, 2006 2:58:45 GMT -5
Ho! Ho! Ho!
Don't some of the comments made in this Newsday story sound like comments made in the Plainedge District! Especially the ones about the intelligence and sight of the State Auditors and the applying of slurs to community residents.
Sounds like some remarks made about Plainedge Residents being "the Jerry Springer Crowd" and "the people in Albany are dumb!" Both comments coming from a "leader" in this District!
************************************************
Wyandanch school district woes eyed
Mismanagement of funds, missing laptops and other issues found in a new state audit of district
BY JOHN HILDEBRAND, Newsday Staff Writer, June 22, 2006
A new state audit of the Wyandanch school system finds that one former board trustee arranged a donation to a local school of more than 170 laptop computers and other equipment that later disappeared, while another ex-trustee was awarded $130,000 in school contracts after he was ousted from the board for official misconduct.
The audit by the State Comptroller's Office released yesterday also reports that at least four school staffers, and possibly dozens more, were hired after July 2002, without proper background checks, and that more than $600,000 in professional service contracts were awarded without proper bid requests -- in one case to a contractor with a criminal record.
State Comptroller Alan Hevesi yesterday commended Wyandanch's current administration for agreeing to correct the problems identified by his agency, but stressed the urgency of follow-through.
"More work must be done to ensure that money is being handled properly and contracts are being awarded fairly to protect the taxpayers' interest," Hevesi said in a prepared statement.
In a response contained in the audit, the current board president, Bishop Michael Talbert, and the district superintendent, Sherman Roberts, .described the review as "a most valuable service to the Wyandanch community."
The two leaders accepted the state's recommendations to improve tracking of finances and hiring, but contended that many recommendations were not legal requirements during the period covered by the audit, from July 2002 to June 2005.
For years, Wyandanch, which enrolls about 2,200 students, has been torn by political struggles for control of the district's patronage hiring and its budget -- now $48.5 million. The focal point of the infighting is the seven-member school board, where trustees frequently accuse each other of corruption and nepotism. Wyandanch was one of 15 Long Island districts chosen to be audited by the comptroller's office two years ago, after corruption scandals unfolded in the Roslyn and William Floyd systems.
One former trustee criticized by the audit is Andrew Gill, who was removed from the board in 2002 by other members who charged him with official misconduct. Gill had been accused of calling the board president a "thug" and of applying racial slurs to community residents, and had responded at the time that any untoward remarks were provoked.
After his removal, according to auditors, Gill was awarded two contracts for $65,000 each to serve as a district consultant in obtaining money for school construction. Auditors concluded that Gill's contracts were ambiguous on the services to be provided, and that fees were paid "without receiving any value in return."
Yesterday, Gill, a retired former state legislative staffer, called state auditors "stupid and blind." He blamed the district for not following up on his recommendations for obtaining the construction money.
Another ex-trustee, Henry Bacon, also was singled out for criticism. According to auditors, Bacon, while still a board member in 2003, arranged for more than 190 computers and other technology equipment to be donated to the Martin Luther King Elementary School through state surplus-equipment programs. Bacon picked up the equipment, state records show. In March, 2005, auditors checked state lists of donated equipment against the district's inventory, and found more than 170 laptops, monitors and computer hard drives missing. Bacon did not return repeated calls to his Wyandanch home seeking comment.
The audit also mentions Daryl Matthews, owner of a Wyandanch graphics company that the district hired last year to provide photography services and monthly issues of a sports newsletter. The auditors report that the district did not check Matthews fingerprints, as is required for anyone spending sustained time with students, even though Matthews had been imprisoned for assault and robbery. Matthews yesterday declined comment.
Copyright (c) 2006, Newsday, Inc.
************************************************
Imagine if Plainedge had had a full audit instead of just a narrow check into the financial procedures followed with Administration and Board Expense reports as was done on the prior audit. The one where only $6,000 of expenses by two administrators could be properly documented - leaving $10,000 in undocumented expense reports "swinging" in the breeze!!!
The BOND issue and construction contract expenses on the new school, Contracts for regular school services, whose related to who on the District payrolls, who shows up half-days and gets paid for full days, etc., etc.
Ed.
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on Jun 22, 2006 22:24:45 GMT -5
Suspend? A Board can do that?
Here's another late breaking story from Newday about Schools!
*************************************************
N. Babylon school head suspended
BY JOHN HILDEBRAND, Newsday Staff Writer, June 23, 2006
North Babylon's school board has suspended its superintendent, Randy Bos, after months of mounting disputes over management actions, including the installation of dummy cameras in student rest-rooms to stop vandalism.
Bos, who was hired last summer, vowed yesterday in a phone interview to fight his suspension. This would mean arbitration hearings within two months, unless feuding parties negotiate a buyout -- the usual way such disputes are settled.
"They do not like the manner in which I operate the school district, and all I can say is, I disagree," said Bos, who has two years remaining on his North Babylon contract. He formerly served 17 years as a superintendent in upstate Waterloo and in Michigan.
Temporarily, the 5,200-student district will be run by Joseph Laria, a retired administrator brought in as acting superintendent. Laria has 26 years' experience as a superintendent in Elwood, South Country and Connetquot, and now serves as educational adviser to Suffolk County Executive Steve Levy.
On Wednesday night, board trustees voted 7-0 to suspend Bos and hire Laria. Bos will continue collecting his annual salary of $180,000; Laria will be paid $950 a day.
In a letter drafted for North Babylon residents and school employees, the board states that its decision "though regrettable, is in the best interests" of the district. While the letter does not describe the dispute in detail, board members have objected to a number of Bos's actions.
This included the decision last fall to install the restroom cameras at North Babylon High School. While no pictures were taken, students assumed they were under surveillance, and some parents took their objections to the school board.
"I agreed that it was outrageous," said the board president, William Harrigan.
Bos characterized that issue as relatively minor, saying larger disputes were over whether subordinates could communicate directly with Harrigan, rather than through him. Bos added that he had the cameras installed on a subordinate's advice, and they were removed after a few days.
"Vandalism stopped during those days," he said.
Copyright (c) 2006, Newsday, Inc.
************************************************
Ed.
|
|
|
Post by Go Plainedge! on Jun 22, 2006 22:38:10 GMT -5
Suspend? A Board can do that?On Wednesday night, board trustees voted 7-0 to suspend Bos and hire Laria. Bos will continue collecting his annual salary of $180,000; Laria will be paid $950 a day. Ed: This brought a thought to my mind. This district is now paying two salaries....a shame.....especially the $950 a DAY!!!! However, in the professional sports world, teams have insurance policies on player contracts in case of season/career ending injuries. Do such policies exist for administrative contracts likes this? Can a policy be taken out on a Super's contract so that in cases such as this, this district is then covered and doesn't lose that money?
|
|