|
Post by justfacts on Feb 28, 2006 9:38:38 GMT -5
To all Plainedge Voters: Stop wasting your time on Budget meetings and discussions!
It is all to no avail![/i] If we are to have learned anything in this life, it is that the Game is played fairly only when the rules of the game are adhered to by both sides! Well, learn this lesson about this Administration - All your efforts, debates, exertions, name calling, fights arguments and etc., to negotiate and have passed or rejected a reasonable budget, even a Contingency Budget, don't amount to the proverbial "Hill of Beans"Take a close look at the 2004-2005 Budget period - and take a walk down memory lane. Remember the first Budget that was rejected? It was a request for $55,835,728. After being voted down and several "listen to the community" meetings, including the famous one in the School Auditorium, the BOE altered their request by about $1/2 Million less to to $55,313,898. The voters accepted this Budget.In the last two defeated Budget requests, and up until now, the BOE has told us that the actual Budget Expenses for 2004-2005 were exactly held to this voter approved reduced Budget number - $55,313,898. Boy!, Did they tell us they had done a good job and did what the public wanted!Now, take a look at the latest Draft Budget. Snuck in, despite previously published District information and previously filed State reports to the contrary, is a new, first time appearing, number for the Expenses of the 2004-2005 Budget! They even re-filed this new figure with the State on February 28th, this year! That's right! JUST TODAY!Is it slightly over the voter approved amount? YES!How much? Anywhere near going up to the 2004-2005 First Budget's rejected amount? OH Yes!In fact, it is more than the amount requested in the first rejected Budget amount! It is now shown as $55,933,372! So tell me, Oh wise ones out there - why did we go through all the agony, agita and expense of the second vote in 2004-2005?Why even bother this year? So maybe that we can feel we, the voters had some impact of the amount of the Budget? Let's not deceive ourselves!It looks like we'll only find out a year or two later that it made no difference. The District levies the tax it wants, maneuvers money via Fund Balances it won't openly report upon - and then spends whatever it wants, "readjusting" the Books and Reports at later dates! Even if they happen to violate Section 1718 of the State Education Law in the process!That seems to be the true rules of the Budget game as played by this BOE and this Administration! And the Commissioner of Education doesn't give a darn!So you can vote YES or NO on the Budget, it makes no difference to this BOE. They'll approve Administration spending - no matter what it is! ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on Mar 2, 2006 14:58:53 GMT -5
A different way to look at the real world.
Last year half of the Plainedge voters believed that the District budget of the year before, where it would be increased by the $2.1 Million added by a Contingency Budget, would be enough to run our school system for the next year. Another half believed this wasn't right - $2.5 Million more than that had to be added to that $2.1 Million, bringing it to a $4.6 Million increase over the year before, This $4.6 Million was necessary in order to do the job as the BOE claimed - or else a catastrophy would follow.
With the ability to look backwards, who was right?[/i]
Well in one aspect, the BOE proved their catstrophy predicition right by using their discretionary budget cutting powers to cut $575,000 ($0.6 Million) from the Sports program. This action by them, focussing on the sports, proved themselves right. It did produce a catastrophy - which by laudible and valient efforts of some of the community was overcome. But - was it necessary? Was the other half of the voters wrong?
Let's find out by looking at some results. Undeniably, there is somewhere around $1.5 Million to $1.8 Million in a Fund Balance this year. That's excess property tax money collected that exceeds allowable expenses of a Contingency Budget. Where did it come from?
Well, it's obvious that $0.6 Million came from the collected tax money the School Budget did not spent on sports![/i]
That still leaves about a Million more public tax funds in the excess funds account of the School District. That fact alone sort of proves the contention that the Contingency Budget gave more than enough money to run the District last year. It looks like those that decided a Contingency Budget gave enough funds were right!
As an aside: Imagine how much fund balance there'd be if the demanded $2.6 Million more was added to the $1.7 Million! A whopping $4.3Million in the Fund Balance! Yep! The Contingency Budget increase provided more than enough money!
Those excess tax funds collected on just the Contingency Budget amount, are about $1.7 Million more than the 2% cap on Unencumbered Fund Balance monies - which in itself, is last year's budget amount ($55.3 million) times 0.02 or about $1.1 million!
The School has reported to the State that, in the last few years, their fund balance average runs about 4.62% of the Budget. For those who don't do math - that means there is an average total of about $2.5 Million in the Fund Balance. Does this average total differ from what we now have? NO! The $1.1 Million of last year's capped value and the $1.7 million of this year's quoted excess amount over that comes to a total of $2.8 Million - pretty much on the mark!
Of course we must consider, if the BOE did not cut out sports, and the community did not raise the money to pay for the sports - where could the missing funds have come from?[/i]
It's pretty obvious. Rather than sitting on a large bank account, the missing money could have come from what is now the total "Fund Balance" account! That would have reduced the Fund Balance to $2.1 Million! Or, if we just used the excess amount provided this year by the Contigency Budget increase, the BOE would have been sitting this year on a net of only $1.1 Million, not $1.7 Million!
Clearly, as those of you who have attended Board meetings can attest, the Board "stonewalls" the public in releasing auditable accounts of just how much is in the Fund Balance.
Occassionally, there is a slip. Like from the newest appointee to the BOE by the BOE. One of his first public comments in a meeting was to want to put a "freeze" on the $1.7 Million in the Fund Balance!
Now, what does that significant statement tell you about the BOE? The word freeze tells me that even the newest appointee reflects a BOE attitude of "collect the public's money - but don't spend it all on the children! - we need to set a lot aside!" This inate desire to collect and set aside funds exhibited by the Administration and BOE should reveal, for one and all, that it is more important to them to have a bank account than it is for them to spend the money on the Children! The Administration has publically said - a 2% cap isn't enough! It should be 4% or even, 5%. For the math disinclined that comes to $3 Million in the Fund Balance - about five times the sports program cut![/b]
That is what half the community recognized last year - and the final results on the Budget score card proved them right. The sports program cut was a discretionary BOE and Administrative vengeful act that was not needed - there are extra funds - even with a Contingency Budget of just $2.1 Million added to the prior year's budget!
When will we cease fighting each other and direct our atttention to where the real problem is? We need a more skillful and sensible management team for our public monies - not one that makes spiteful cuts and wants to hoard "reserves", but one that takes a legitimate and controlled amount of money from taxes in this District and applies those monies to the maximum benefit of the children! And then one that controls the spending so it is best applied to the children - not to cover meal and refreshments costs, Utility Company fines, the Secretary's and Insurance Company Court cases, second audits of decade old BOE expense accounts, etc. that this administration has been allowed to do under this BOE's inattention.
Now - - - let me tell you about the another $620,000 in excess collected tax monies slipped into a past account to bury them from public view! NO!, on second thought, I'll leave that for another time so I won't be accussed of long-winded statements. I'll leave it for the time I'll show where my personal action caused the BOE to say that they'll take a $307,000 cut in administration and put the money into programs for the Children if we go on a Contingency Budget (we still don't know if they lived up to their word and did this!). Can some (or one) of my critics say that their attendance at district meetings accomplished adding $307,000 to children's programs?
Ed
|
|
|
Post by Go Plainedge! on Mar 2, 2006 15:53:46 GMT -5
Can some (or one) of my critics say that their attendance at district meetings accomplished adding $307,000 to children's programs?
Ed
I don't have an answer about the money. However, I have read some of the long winded comments on that other site and find them to be cowardly and hypocritical. Justfacts, I really don't know you nor do I know the others that sent in their statements to be posted on that site. BUT, it would seem to me that they are no different than what they accuse you of. I guess it's easier for them to complain with their keyboard and run than actually work towards alternative and realistic solutions of making this community a great place. Again, it's easier for most to just complain.
|
|
|
Post by plainedge13 on Mar 2, 2006 21:38:14 GMT -5
[/quote]I don't have an answer about the money. However, I have read some of the long winded comments on that other site and find them to be cowardly and hypocritical.
I totally disagree with your assessment of the comments on "the other" site. They are neither cowardly nor hypocritical!
Both this site and "the other" allow residents of this community to vent their pent up frustration with the Administration, the BOE and many other topics. The value of these sites is to give a forum for residents to express them selves - and many are finding that their thoughts are echoed by many others.
The disagreements between commentators on both sites is what freedom of speech is about and the dialog generated could (I am an optimist) create a greater sense of community.
|
|
|
Post by thewildrover on Mar 2, 2006 22:02:44 GMT -5
I can tell both Facts and Go P-Edge that the authors of some of those comments on the other site spent their entire summer washing cars, selling raffles and working their A** off for the betterment of their children and the kids in this community. And I think raised some $575K...... Sounds awfully cowardly to me. It certainly trumps Facts supposed $370K Get this straight........one can find errors galore in the way the school board does its business, but at this point , the only way to effect change is to change the decision makers, I am sure we all agree on that........BUT..............imho, for all the points of order and flaws that Facts points out, it takes away from what was succinctly stated at the end of one of the letters on that other site.......ITS ABOUT THE KIDS!....and a contingency budget for a second year in a row will more than hurt the kids and put a dagger in the heart of P-Town.
|
|
|
Post by Go Plainedge! on Mar 2, 2006 22:18:23 GMT -5
I don't have an answer about the money. However, I have read some of the long winded comments on that other site and find them to be cowardly and hypocritical
I totally disagree with your assessment of the comments on "the other" site. They are neither cowardly nor hypocritical!
Both this site and "the other" allow residents of this community to vent their pent up frustration with the Administration, the BOE and many other topics. The value of these sites is to give a forum for residents to express them selves - and many are finding that their thoughts are echoed by many others.
The disagreements between commentators on both sites is what freedom of speech is about and the dialog generated could (I am an optimist) create a greater sense of community. [/quote Plainedge: I agree with your points about freedom of speech. That was the reason this forum came into existence - after the school shut down their message board. However, my point is the that it's a one sided argument. There have been disagreements on this site and the difference is that there is communication between two or more parties. With that format its a post and run format with no chance for dialogue. Again, this is my opinion based on what I see. If it were to take place in an open forum (like this), I would be fine with it. Thewildrover:This really has nothing to do with who washed cars, who sold raffles, who organized a golf outing, who voted yes or no and who donated money. In my ever so humble opinion, it's not the way to more forward with the business of the business. If it's about the children, what type of message does that send to the kids on how to deal with people? The kids are what they live, right? We are supposed to be the adults teaching them how to communicate with others in a creative manner. We teach them how to negotiate to get what they want. We teach them how to act civil. We teach them how to take a negative and make it a positive. Teaching them to publicly bad mouth others, teaching them to complain about what has been done is pointless. I don't know, I guess I just can't stand seeing that type of negativity in a community that needs so much positive right now. Does that mean everyone should vote YES for the budget? Absolutely not! They should vote their choice based on the knowledge they have obtained. The question and MO should be - How to we change the people (BOE and Administration) that need to be changed? That should be the main focus of this community. Cut the people that need to be cut and lets turn this place around for the better. I think we can all agree on that. The BOE is supposed to be the voice of what the community wants. Right now, they (I should say most of them) are not and haven't been for several years.
|
|
|
Post by thewildrover on Mar 2, 2006 22:54:51 GMT -5
Go P-Edge, With an accusation of cowardice being thrown about, and a question of peoples involvement level, my comments regarding fund raising, I feel were warranted. These were people who took action, in defiance of the powers that be.
Your comments:
"We are supposed to be the adults teaching them how to communicate with others in a creative manner. We teach them how to negotiate to get what they want. We teach them how to act civil. We teach them how to take a negative and make it a positive.
Teaching them to publicly bad mouth others, teaching them to complain about what has been done is pointless."
I strongly believe that last summer the kids in this community learned, or were taught, a valuable life lesson. One they did live, every stinking weekend for 18 weeks, one of determination, hard work, tenacity and not accepting NO for an answer. This was done with a level of civility that would make us all proud to be from P-Town. Certainly taking a negative and making it a positive, don't you think?
As for change, I am 100% down with that and I agree that has to be a #1 priority. And no-one can disagree with wanting to make P-Town a better place to live. Its just the methodology that needs to be tweaked.
I'm also sorry to say I think I'm going to steal this from that other site this as my closing line:
ITS ABOUT THE KIDS!
|
|
|
Post by Go Plainedge! on Mar 3, 2006 9:15:15 GMT -5
Wildrover:
I can tell that you're passionate about what you believe in and I think that's great.
You're right, the kids did learn a VERY valuable lesson over the summer. I think many parents did too.
When the budget was defeated, I felt (in an odd way) it was a good thing. Good only because I always believe change is a good thing. Change allows both side of the argument to learn and grow. I think that this community has learned a lot this past year.
The defeat allowed more people to become more educated about the entire budget process and take a hard look at what's happening in OUR district and where OUR money is being spent and who is spending it. It also served as a wake-up call to our BOE that the people of this community are done with the BS that they dish out. I won't even address our less than super superintendent. Not worth my energy.
All businesses have set backs. If you learn from the set backs and allow them to make you stronger going forward then you will be that much stronger of a company. The same, I believe, applies to this school district. Without taking a temporary step back, we will never learn all we can to leap forward.
I had an English teacher that used to tell me "I've been teaching for 25 years". I would tell him "it doesn't mean you've been doing it right for 25 years". Of course that wise crack got me in trouble.
But I digress.
We will be fine going forward. I'm confident about that. This was a great experience to learn from for ALL parties involved. Unfortunately, it affected some more than others.
We all have the same goals. We need to make it a unified process to achieve those goals.
I hope you stick around. I would bet that you have a lot to offer.
|
|
|
Post by fpresuto on Mar 3, 2006 14:03:25 GMT -5
Dear Fellow Plainedge Residents –
I have been reading the postings on this site, as well as Plaintalkonline, and I truly believe that these forums are invaluable for me in understanding the communities thought process’ and desires.
However, with that said, I believe that accuracy does need to be represented within some of the comments, especially those that are addressing direct quotes.
Ed – As I read your comments and postings, and certainly, respect your opinion, I would like to clarify one specific misinterpretation of yours.On 3/2/2006 at 2:58pm - You wrote –
Clearly, as those of you who have attended Board meetings can attest, the Board "stonewalls" the public in releasing auditable accounts of just how much is in the Fund Balance.
Occassionally, there is a slip. Like from the newest appointee to the BOE by the BOE. One of his first public comments in a meeting was to want to put a "freeze" on the $1.7 Million in the Fund Balance!
Now, what does that significant statement tell you about the BOE? The word freeze tells me that even the newest appointee reflects a BOE attitude of "collect the public's money - but don't spend it all on the children! - we need to set a lot aside!" This inate desire to collect and set aside funds exhibited by the Administration and BOE should reveal, for one and all, that it is more important to them to have a bank account than it is for them to spend the money on the Children! The Administration has publically said - a 2% cap isn't enough! It should be 4% or even, 5%. For the math disinclined that comes to $3 Million in the Fund Balance - about five times the sports program cut!
Your statement and interpretation of what was stated could not be farther from the truth. To clarify – I requested a “freeze” of the additional money over the 2% required in the Fund Balance in order to prevent that money from being designated to a reserve fund. What I also stated at that meeting was I wanted it frozen to be utilized for this upcoming budget. To state that my intentions were not specifically to benefit the children is untrue and disturbing. Being a parent whose first child will be entering kindergarten in September 2006 – the ONLY reason I have become engaged and will run for my current BOE seat again this year is to ensure that the children of this district get the very best education that our tax dollars can provide. Operative words “OUR TAX DOLLARS”. I have as much to lose in the game as anyone else and refuse to let the children down.
In closing, if anyone has any further questions or concerns. I ask you to please email them to me and I will be more then happy to answer them. I do ask that before you make direct statements about my comments that you ask me for clarification first, if you are unsure as to their meaning. Obviously, I recognize that not everyone has the opportunity to attend the meetings to hear the information first hand, however, misunderstandings, like these, are simple to avoid.
Thank you, and please keep these dialogues going. Although I may not be able to respond as often as I would like, I do read them and your voices are heard.
Sincerely, Frank Presuto fpresuto@att.com
|
|
|
Post by thewildrover on Mar 3, 2006 14:47:58 GMT -5
Go P-edge That just might be the most positive outlook I’ve come across through this whole process. It's refreshing!
I agree 100% with regards to the budget defeat being the unfortunate impetus that caused a great number of residents to become better educated, and more importantly, increasingly involved in the process.
That increased involvement could certainly have the effect of putting the superintendent and the non-responsive Board members on notice that this is a whole new ballgame.
How do you propose to WE go forward with a unified approach?
There are very deep divides out there between parties that might ultimately have the same goals. For some there is a gut-wrenching sense of urgency due to the prospect of their children’s last few years in school being conducted under a contingency budget for a second year in a row and they (WE) can NEVER raise those types of funds again.
For others, it seems there is not so much a sense of urgency, but a desire to “stir the pot” and promote the impression (real or not) that the superintendent and some members of the board are incompetent.
I’m sensing that the first group feels that the second group’s efforts give fuel to the eager ears of the “NO” voters. The negative messages being presented could only hurt their kid’s chances of having a full, well-rounded, educational experience.
Those differences, I fear, are the biggest obstacle to going forward with a unified effort
WE need to find the same rhythm to march to. One that will resonate loud and clear to Dr. Richman and the Boards ears. A tune that has this as a verse “Present a fair and reasonable budget” and this as the chorus: “Be responsive to your community”!!!
IT'S ABOUT THE KIDS
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on Mar 3, 2006 16:00:17 GMT -5
To fpresuto
My deepest, my most sincere and my humblest apology is owed to you.
I apologize to you for what I posted about your intentions with the "freeze" I am wrong! Please forgive me and accept this retraction.
I must admit I got carried away and made an assumption that you stated was incorrect. I believe your correction.
There is no "fact of the matter" or other excuse that I offer at this time to justify my error.
I would most appreciate personally meeting with you at a diner for coffee and to extend my personal apology, or at Pallardio's for pizza.
Ed Dowdell edowdell@hoflink.com 516-249-9308 516-694-6440.
|
|
|
Post by Go Plainedge! on Mar 4, 2006 9:58:18 GMT -5
Wildrover:
In my opinion, the first step (which would be the hardest) would be for people of this community to put aside their differences of the past. I'm certainly not suggesting that they forget about what happened, but in order to move forward as a unified group, the group would have to cease the bickering back and forth.
The next step COULD BE similar to the Tax Relief Plan - a letter writing campaign. Except this campaign is targeted to the current BOE and Administration. This letter should outline the community's expectations and goals. I've heard from BOE members that they feel the community doesn't give them guidance or input on what they want. They say that so few people attend the BOE meetings (this is true) and offer feedback. So, this is a perfect opportunity to inform them of what we want and, more importantly, what we expect.
Additionally, WE the community members, need to interview the people running for BOE Seats. It makes absolutely NO SENCE that the school conducts the Meet the Candidate night. These are people that are to represent US not the school. We should be interviewing them and questioning them. Then we report back to the community with a clear outline of each candidate's platform.
BOE Candidates need to know that we expect them to work hard for us. Holding a BOE seat is not for them to think that (in their warped perception) it increases their social status within the community. In my opinion one or two current members think that it does.
I think that by Frank Presuto posting a message here says a lot about him. It says more than his actual words. I applaud him for taking the time to post here. We know the others read what is said here but have yet to make any statements. My opinion of Frank has been uplifted by this simple act. Good public relations goes a long way.
Positive changes will not occur overnight. But with three seats up for election, we could be on to the fast track to perfection. Again, we need to learn from past mistakes.
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on Mar 4, 2006 14:27:26 GMT -5
Posted here is a response to an invitation - and it combines replies to several recent posts directed at me.
If some find that the Lead Post to this thread "Budget Fighters Begone!" is too "long-winded" or takes them more that 5 minutes to read, hey - so be it! Don't read it.
Remain ill informed that all those "late-Bus" harangues and threats, all those threats of cutting out of 30 School band uniforms at $1167 each, that all that community effort that went into a second budget - didn't mean a thing!
If it takes you too much effort to find that while we are saying Yes to a budget because "its for the kids" and then the budget money "doesn't go to the kids" so be it! There are about half of the Plainedge voters that are aware of this and do take the time to read the information.
**************************************** Now to the invitation:
ourtown@plaintalkonline.com wrote: Mr. Dowdell, I do hope that this email finds you feeling better, please get well soon. I read your apology post and I was happy to see your sincere sentiment. It a sort of way that could be our first step at bringing us all together to fix this community. As you see in the Subject area of this email, I have taken on a new rallying cry "working together to bring us together" . . . Yes we CAN! I would like to extend to you and the Planedge Library Board of Trustees an invitation to Thursday night March 16th BOE meeting at 8:00pm. The presence of you and the library board networking with the community at this meeting will send a clear and precise message that change and the Plainedge community is coming together! Please invite all of the people who post opinions and lets all show a sign of unity. Ed, it seems like all the emails and all the information that is now available to us is still not enough to clearly send the message of change. Please strongly consider joining me along with the Board as I personally will facilitate the networking opportunity and will personally keep it amiable. You never know who may end up becoming a candidate for the Board of Education. Best Regards,
Felice Cantatore
******************************************
Felice - There is but one problem with your invitation. Ed Dowdell has been, is and will continue to speak for Ed Dowdell. There is no, I repeat, NO, link between my actions and discussions on these forums and the Plainedge Library and/or the Plainedge Library Board. I will do nothing to re-enforce that mistaken concept in the mind of the Plainedge public.
In fact Library Board members have individually put pressure on me, far more pressure than any other persons have been able to do, to not exercise my freedom to express my views, because of the actions taken by some against the Library as they follow that mistaken belief that I am representing the Library in any way shape of form. I am NOT. I represent myself.
The only Budget item the Library Board has taken any action on is with regard to its own Budget. That activity totally fills it plate.
The Plainedge Library has taken and will maintain a completely neutral position with regard to School budgetary issues. They realize that is completely the domain of the School District. There has been no "campaigning" by the Library - pro or con - in fact that is strictly forbidden by Library Board policy and practice - despite many ill informed persons repeating false stories to the contrary. There is an active removal program for all illegally posted fliers about voting No and about voting YES on the School Budget.[/i]
The next Library Board meeting is the night before the meeting that you opened the invitation for. Until the issue of BOE meeting attendance is put before the Board, the Board has a chance to discuss it and makes a common resolution about it, then vote on the action, there can be no commitment given by anyone as to what will be done. There is no one person or two driving Library Board decisions.
However, there have been Library Board decisions to attend BOE meetings for productive interactions in the past There also has been many Library actions to promote productive interactions between the Library and the School.
These many joint efforts between the Library and the Schools has resulted in awards to the Children of this District for their participation in these joint efforts. The new Library logo was created by a local student. Local students have decorated the windows of the library, show casing their artwork, The student Homework help center and tutoring area, sometimes with teacher participation, sometimes with all student participation has been very successful.
Meetings rooms, no longer available at the School, have been used for Sports sign-up programs - filling the rooms to capacity. There is no animus, only full cooperation, between the Library and the School District with regard to serving the community and the students as best are each able to do - separately and jointly.
There is a recognition by the Library, its staff and its Board that this smaller community resource has a challenge to do the most it is capable of doing for all residents of the community. It is to busy with that task to take on personal agendas and programs that really are none of its business - like school budgetary issues.
******************************************
As to my own response to attend meetings - I have done so many times in the past - I find that my presence serves no productive purpose. I remain as well informed. When I try to make contributions about budget errors and inconsistancies, I have been told incomprehensibly false responses about them - without corrective rebuttals by other Board members present. The effect of my attending is more disruptive than productive, especially in "after the meeting" sessions.
I have also made personal and direct appeals for more responsible and accurate budget information - and been personally told by the Administrator in his office - "Believe me Ed, they can well afford it!" "They", being the taxpayers, "it" being unbounded budget increases.
I have seen Budget results completely ignored - and monies spent in places other than where they were approved to be spent. When I hear the oft repeated phrase "it's for the kids" I realize that is at the core of the problem - many have not read the budgets (it takes time and skill to do that) to truly find out although it's claimed to be for the kids - it is actually not going to the kids.[/i]
I have personally shown you that reports of where and how the money was spent are changed after the fact. These are the issues that I, and I alone, not any Board or other Plainedge entity, will continue to put into public view.
For those that find these posts to tiresome to read - Don't Read them! Continue to claim you're voting YES "for the kids" but don't spend the time and effort to find out that "it's not going to the kids". Don't do anything to bring honest and controlled budgeting into this School District - so the Children can derive the full benefit of the money we all spend on them!
Ed
|
|
|
Post by elphaba65 on Mar 4, 2006 17:25:07 GMT -5
Ed,
Well, well well, it appears that the community in on to you. Perhaps you should spend more time explaining the Library budget and why we are # 9 in Nassau County.
|
|
|
Post by plainedge13 on Mar 4, 2006 19:31:44 GMT -5
I am very glad to see Frank explain his position on what he meant by a "freeze" on the fund balance! The discussion after the audit report was presented clearly indicated that the Administration was seeking ways to create new reserve funds and remove as much of this as possible from unencumbered fund balance! I for one hope that most of the unencumbered funds, in excess of the 2% PERMITTED by NYS, be used to reduce the 2006-2007 budget. Review of the "preliminary" budget posses more questions that it answers - I hope the coffee hour on the 13th is informative!
|
|