ATTENTION DR. RICHMAN!!! - PLEASE READ

[Go Plainedge!]

PLEASE stop telling the people of this community that you had to cut $2.4 million from this years budget.

There wasn't a budget approved for 2005/2006, therefore no money has ever been cut. Infact NO money was cut as the district still received more money than last year. So, what money was "cut"?

You can't cut something that you don't already have.

Please stop the incorrect content in your memos!

[techie]

THANK YOU "GO PLAINEDGE"!!!

This is why some of us had posted earlier equating the BUDGET CUTS to the same as children not getting their "wish list" for Christmas! (or any holiday we may observe, from any denomination)

BUDGET CUTS can ONLY be cut from a PREVIOUS BUDGET.
Refusal to pass a Budget would only happen when the Taxpayers do not want to allocate EXTRA FUNDS for the coming year without a detailed explanation of how "NEW" funds would be spent.

[concerned]

Hey, what memo's are you referring to? I think I've missed something.

[Go Plainedge!]

My child came home with a memo from Mr. Richman the other day and the first sentence stated this false information.

[frawg88]

Can I make a suggestion? Why doesn't someone send the guy an e-mail instead of putting a message here hoping he'll read it? Also, please give the community credit for knowing that when they vote for the school budget they are voting for a PROPOSED AMOUNT - a spending PLAN. We do understand that the $2.4 million cut was from the amount that was PROPOSED. This is not rocket science.

[techie]

fraw88

People have notified Mr. Richman in the past. He has also heard first hand from "the mouth of babes" about questions and issuse.
Perhaps tonight we may find our answers,...
as you always ask.....Where is the love?.....

Maybe we find out tonight, maybe not.

[Go Plainedge!]

Frawg:

Are you assuming that an email wasn't sent in addition to this posting? You really shouldn't make assumptions like that.

As far as giving the people credit for knowing what they are voting for.... You may be right for some people and wrong for many others.

Regardless, the wording is INCORRECT and it's very misleading.

[concerned]

What was this memo all about?

[justfacts]

Dr Richman is having his "Coffee Hour" this coming Monday - the 17th of November. As usual, it's a "Come into my web said the Spider to the Fly" type of meeting where he has already defined what the topics of discussion will be - those that he will listen to. Take a look at the School Web site for the full information.

I believe it is about time that he comes into our web and allows us to tell him what he should be listening to. Informing him by a one-to-one email just hasn't worked. If he is sincere in wanting to respond to us - here is the place to do it. We do know that the Board and the Administration is aware of this site. Let them openly use it and admit its existence. This message will stay visible to all for a long time - to be read and re-read and not be overlooked in a summary of the "minutes".

A Budget mandate or demand, twice over, for a 13.38% property tax last year - is not acceptable. Budget increases that cause double digit property tax increases, will no longer be acceptable. Budgets must be prepared on the basis of what the community can afford, not what Dr Richman would like them to pay.

The cost of some items or "reserve fund" build ups must be stretched out over time, others - such as eliminating meals and refreshments at District meetings, reducing Conference costs (have one Board member go - reporting back to others) etc., have to be implemented before one Program item is reduced.

The fiscal belt must be tightened and Budgets must be non-changing and accurate. Evasive summaries or "preliminary drafts" as Jeff Burns once used to evade responsibility for an error, or misleading combining of accounts and misstatements of what the money is being used for, must be stopped. Budgets must be accurately presented in full detail and open for easier public examination (like State Form SBM-1)


Here's my list of items that the District must pay attention to if they want a better Budget relationship. What is your list?


FIVE POINTS TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT

First and foremost: Accept the fact that, with regard to having a Budget pass, your proven "Grade" from the community is about 50%. You can continue to argue, reject and dispute this fact - as you have done for the last few years - with a continued grade of 50% each year you don't address the cause of this issue. It really is the Community's desire, as well as your's, to bring about a change in that passing grade.

Second: Stop promoting how well you have been doing in the areas that we know that you are getting a passing grade. Academic performance and hard work are not the issues.

Address the main issue in contention: The ever larger property tax cost of doing business with this School District's Administration: measured by a 5 year average increase of 4 times the CPI (10%); compares poorly with other taxing entities that are controlling average increases to 2 times the CPI (4.8%).

Redirection and "spin-doctoring" will not improve the passing grade for the budget. We have noticed that slide shows at recent meetings are all aimed at proving "What a good job we've been doing!" - they are all in the same vein that ignores the community input that says - "For the money we're paying - you are not doing that great a job!" You've got a great many things to clean up on the topic of continued double digit property tax increases before you move into other topics!

Third: Drop to the background the long term issue of unfairness in State funding. It is not working for any School District and just appears to the Community that you want another source for more money.

This translates that you are totally missing the Community's message - "Use what you are getting in the most cost effective way possible - tighten up the financial rigging." In other words, appearing to go after "More Money - More Money" won't change the voter's expressed belief and Hevisie's recent audit findings, that you are not doing as well as you should with the money you are getting.

Fourth: Improve what you are doing towards running a tight financial operation. You have provided enough examples recently of loose financial controls with your: unforeseen fines, poorly documented expense reports, improperly approved invoice payments, changes due to overlooked costs, arithmetic errors and cost center changes; to reaffirm the Community's belief that you can do much better in the area of financial control.

Perhaps the best use of your new Business Manager is to bring her to the forefront in financial presentations and reports to the Community. As a fresh breeze, she could acknowledge the need for improvement, without being defensive, and show her plan for better future controls and planning, followed by regular reports to the Community of things done which meet the goal - thus, leaving the past behind us. Imperative: Restore community confidence in your use of their money.

Fifth: Address the public as intelligent and skilled Adults who do control the annual filling of your purse.

For too long the District's tone in messages and responses to the public have been on the Parent-Child (Teacher-Child) level [See the book, "Games that People Play" for a definition of these terms] Authoritarian responses, especially ones that fault the questioner, ("Obviously you don't understand...", "Your attitude is ...", " I'll pass your ramblings on...", "That's just the way it is!", "You obviously never come to Board meetings...", etc.) only further assure you of a marginal grade in in the subject of passing the Budget.

That method does not help either the Community, or you, to achieve our mutual goal - improve the Budget passing grade for the Plainedge community.

Do change your ways, even if this does mean you have to provide a reduced second budget if the first is rejected! (Don't fight or threaten us over it! Budget "Do-overs" are preferable to Contingency Budgets) The District has to be more open, forthright and responsive to the voters - without slacking off on, or cutting, one iota of what they did for the students in the year just past!

[concerned]

What does the web site say? If it ends up being a meeting that is not truly "open for discussion", I'm certainly not wasting my time to hear more rhetoric.