March 17th Involvement Wonderful, Even if Not Completely Informed

[Elwood Community Network commentary distributed 3/21/11]

Overview:

The March 17th Board of Education Regular Meeting proved to be another evening which demonstrated that people do care about their schools and their community. Very much like many of those who spoke at the March 10th Budget Work Session, those who spoke during Resident Remarks were focused upon areas of the budget of personal concern, and on March 17th it was not merely "many" -- who on March 10th spoke about primarily the Athletics program -- but "most" who on March 17th spoke about the music and arts programs, with a fair number speaking on behalf of all three after-school activities.

Full Description:

For the sake of time (yours as well as mine) I am making the assumption that it is unnecessary to repeat the Background analysis and summary which I included in the March 15th commentary titled "Well-Attended Budget Work Session, March 10th."

Once again, however, many of those who spoke demonstrated that they had either (1) not attended many, and for some not any, Board Work Sessions, or Budget Work Sessions, or Regular Meetings at which the 2011/12 budget had been previously discussed; or (2) that they were not familiar with State law or regulations governing school districts; or (3) that they did not realize that much of their concerns about programs or activities "at risk" were about potential effects under a Contingent Budget scenario, rather than actual plans.

However, very much like comments at the March 13th Budget Work Session, the remarks of those focused upon a particular beloved portion of the activities of the Elwood School District, even if not completely on track with actual plans or potential modifications, did provide a service to the community because they provided additional perspective to the Board and to the Superintendent.

As more than one person has suggested supplementing District revenue with "fees" to participate in certain after-school activities, so that these activities would be more affordable for the District's budget, it is important to realize that the State does not permit what is sometimes called "Pay to Play," which is a procedure used -- according to information provided at the March 10th Budget Work Session -- by about twenty-five states, but which is currently illegal in New York State. As was also made clear on March 10th, it is permissible for the District to accept donations to make some programs more affordable, but there cannot be a binding tie of the District's hands on how such funds would be used, and it is also illegal for school districts to have an athletic program which discriminates on any basis, including gender.

There are also restrictions on what school districts can do with regard to things like "naming rights" or other tie-ins, but I am presently less informed on these points or whether there is some alternative way to accomplish this kind of fund-raising objective.

A second set of suggestions was related to reducing the costs of transportation, and it was clear that some of those who commented may not be familiar with State law relating to transportation. But there are also a number of more subtle but complex issues related to providing bus transportation for the District. Those who have been attending Board meetings and work sessions for the past eight or so years might have remembered a transportation study done by a subcommittee of the Citizens Finance/Budget Advisory Committee, which discussed several issues regarding differing perceptions about bus transportation, versus many realities incurred as a legal obligation, such as what one might call "the empty bus syndrome."

State law requires that school districts provide transportation to students at a minimum distance from home to school, and varying by grade level of the student, but school districts are permitted to transport students closer than the State minimum standard, provided that has been approved by the voters of such district in a public referendum. Once established by such referendum, those stipulated distances may not be changed until such change is also approved by voters in another public referendum. So, while some may suggest achieving savings by reducing bus transportation, that really becomes a long range issue rather than part of an immediate solution for the 2011/12 budget.

Moreover, the hands of a district are really tied with reducing transportation availability, as you may note in the following State Education Department requirement:

Parent Waiving Right to Pupil Transportation - A school district may not request that parents voluntarily sign a waiver of their right to pupil transportation services for their eligible children. You may not waive what you have a right to under the law. Even if a parent should sign such a document, the school district would still be bound by Education Law section 3635 and be required to provide pupil transportation on any school day that the child is present at the bus stop or school and requesting transportation service.
(http://www.p12.nysed.gov/schoolbus/Parents/htm/parent_waiving_right.htm)

In summary, finding legal ways to meaningfully increase revenue, or to decrease expenses, is a complicated challenge.

Comments and Questions By Residents:

As was noted in the March 18th community commentary, where the big headline of the evening was discussed, there were forty-five residents who addressed the Board and District Administration in the First Residents Remarks period. Many of these addressed a number of topics, so a quick run-down by subject might make it seem as if even more people had spoken, But, forty-five people is still impressive, simply because too many people seldom get involved in anything.

The challenge, as I see it, is to make sure that people become more fully informed over time, and that a way be found to somehow channel this new energy and caring, this amazing involvement, so that we can remain united as a community in fostering the best school district which we can create and sustain, while also maintaining true concern and positive compassion for the personal financial restrictions on neighbors who may be much less fortunate than the more wealthy members of our community. We also have to remember that all of this is taking place at a time of an ever-tightening fiscal noose being executed on school districts by our Governor and much of the State Legislature.

Before proceeding, I did a background count (based upon information provided by each speaker) of the residents who spoke: (a) twenty identified themselves as current students (nearly all at Glenn); (b) nine identified themselves as Glenn graduates; and, (c) sixteen were other residents, most of whom have students currently in Elwood Public Schools.

Now, on to comments and questions:

First, here is a simple tabulation of support expressed for various after-school activities, or educational programs, or other aspects of the Elwood School District offerings:

Music 13
Music & Art 3
Music & Art & Athletics 2
Music & Athletics 7
Athletics 1
Art 1
General After School Activities 3
Science Research Program 4
Foreign Language Program 2
Full Day Kindergarten 2
Class Size 2

Among the comments, aside from specific support for one or more program aspects, here is a fair sampling of the more significant ones:

"The problem is in Albany, with the mandates."

Gov. Cuomo is cutting taxes for the wealthiest New Yorkers, while cutting $1.5 billion from education.

After school activities are important for college applications.

"Students need well-rounded experiences."

"Colleges are looking for well-rounded applicants."

If there was no sports or arts, then there would be no scholarships to college.

One resident, currently in the college application process, reported that he received an interview from Harvard, and they were most interested in talking about what he did in terms of after-school activities; they were impressed by the extent of his involvement in the music program, and particularly impressed about the original research he had done in Glenn's Science Research Program.

"We're in a Global Society; how can kids compete if they only speak English, or if they were never captain of a sports team?"

The District should charge fees for after school activities.

"Fill every single bus seat."

After mentioning the bus driver who was arrested for an improper approach to a student (Note: You may recall that it was an employee of Huntington Coach Company, and not the school district, who was suspended as soon as the event occurred, and before the police acted), one resident suggested "do away with the buses."

If your kids are in music or sports programs, then they are not using the buses.

Transportation cost is too high; instead car pool or walk to school.

"Transportation cuts may need consideration."

One resident, concerned about possible cutting back from Full Day Kindergarten, suggested "you might as well disband Kindergarten rather than go to Half Day Kindergarten."

"I'm willing to dig in a little deeper so our kids can maintain the education they have; go a little bit higher [in the tax rate.]

"Please let the Board of Education know how much you are prepared to support; personally, if this budget [i.e., in terms of tax increase] goes up 15% I don't care."

"There can't be just an option of a 13.33% tax increase, or a 3.74% tax increase."

One resident objected that copies of a personal letter from a resident was on the "Greeter's Table" at the entry to the auditorium. The resident also objected to the content of the letter complaining about the fields, and instead pointed out how money was diverted from the capital projects program of ten or so years ago, and that $4 million was taken off the top to build an auditorium at Boyd, and then shoddy work was done on the fields by the contractor.

"If you want to solve a problem, you have to take the emotion out of it."

Comments By Trustees and District Administration:

After at least half of the approximately 400+ residents had departed, the Board proceeded with the remainder of its Agenda, but the most material point of the evening was the one made by Superintendent Peter Scordo regarding his generous offer to freeze his own 2011/12 salary at the current 2010/11 level. That announcement, and its deeper meaning for the District, was covered in the community commentary transmitted on March 18th. For reference, you may access that at:
http://elwoodilluminations.blogspot.com/2011/03/superintendent-leads-way-towards-budget.html

Mr. Scordo later spoke about two potential reorganization issues, one related to Glenn, and the other to the District's Kindergarten program possibly being reduced from Full Day to Half Day. As to Glenn, he noted that Principal Vincent Mulieri and his staff have been making wonderful progress on some alternative approaches, and that he wants to give them a bit more time to complete their work.

On the matter of Kindergarten, Board Vice President Joe Fusaro asked what the full savings would be if the District converted to Half Day Kindergarten, and Ass't Superintendent for Business William Pastore advised that the classroom savings (4.0 FTE) would be about $260,000, and the transportation savings would be about $40,000, and that there would be an additional 1.5 FTE reductions for related FDK positions such as library and music, and that would add about $118,000 of additional savings, for total savings to the District of about $418,000.

Trustee Dan Ciccone wondered if a modification could be made to a Half Day program so that more literacy training could be provided to kindergarten students. Part of his concept would be to have a short assessment period in the Fall to determine needs, and then allow one full-time reading teacher to carry out the required additional support. The District Administration will do a cost analysis of Mr. Ciccone's suggested possible modification.

Trustee Andrew Kaplan noted that even Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke has expressed a view that pre-school and kindergarten programs are very valuable to American education. Mr. Kaplan wondered what enrichment program associations the District might be able to work toward fostering, to allow parents to supplement a Half Day program, if they choose to do so.

Second Period for Comments and Questions By Residents:

It was nearly 11:15 PM when the Second Residents Remarks period began, and at that point perhaps one-fourth of the original audience remained in the Middle School auditorium. Only six residents, of whom four had not spoken in the first Residents Remarks period, elected to address the Board at that time.

One opposed going to Half Day Kindergarten.

One asked if we could instead return to the District's original Extended Day Kindergarten.

One suggested user fees, and, noting that there needs to be shared sacrifice, asked the Board to "come up with an option between the 13.33% (the projected tax levy increase for the hypothetical "rollover budget") and nothing."

One expressed support for music, and noted that we even have students qualifying for Harvard yet they started in Elwood with a Half Day Kindergarten program.

One said that standards have changed "since these kids went to kindergarten."

One said that a loss of education strength would be "disheartening."

Final Commentary:

Shared sacrifice should be easily understood by any student, by any teacher, by any administrator, by any parent, and by any resident whose own children are no longer in Elwood schools.

We can't all have what we want, and we have to think, and act, for the greater good.

Our Superintendent has led the way with his dramatic and most gracious offer, and it is now up to the teachers union and other bargaining units to do something financially significant to preserve whatever we can of our programs, and to consider what we need to do to get even better in the future.

We also need to do whatever we personally can to stop the lies coming from the Cuomo administration, and some complicit State legislators, who keep trying to get us to take our eyes off the Albany-created and controlled problems, and instead waste our time arguing with each other over more minor local matters. However, we also have to be realists about the probabilities about restoring aid to even last year's already-reduced levels. And that means we have to plan for a future of making do, as best we can, with even less.

But, in doing that, we have to keep up the pressure on the disingenuous Albany cabal, so that we can come to a more equitable funding basis in the future.

My favorite quote of the evening, I must say, was from the resident who wisely stated, "If you want to solve a problem, you have to take the emotion out of it."

To that I loudly say, Amen.