--You mentioned in your previous email that this past year off the board has given you a different perspective. What have you learned in that time and why would you like to return?
Sometimes, one becomes too close to an issue to be able to see all sides without bias. One of the best things that could have happened to me for my continued Board service was to take the year off and see the district from the outside looking in. As a Board Member, you are privy to so much information, documents, and decisions that the community cannot fathom. One of the things I always tell people who talk to me about running for the board has been the old, “Be careful what you wish for, you may get it.” Too many people run for the board either not understanding anything about being a board member or not understanding enough about the district.
This past year I had the opportunity to see the District as most members of the community see the district. That is not a privilege sitting Board Members enjoy. I did not have access to inside information. I did not get the back story on any issue. I think it is clear to anyone who looks, that the district does a terrific job with the teaching and learning. I am proud to say I was on the Board and instrumental in the hiring of Dr. Ackerman and the approval of most of her new team. But, what has become clear to me is that the district can improve itself in many other areas.
For example, approximately 52% of the households in the district do not have children in the district schools. The district does a great job of taxing this majority segment but does not do a great job communicating with them or addressing their concerns and needs. The district has some of the highest tax rates, not just in Westchester or NY State, but in the entire country. Yet, this year, with the economic crisis in full swing during budget development, the Board could have acknowledged the no student households and made further reductions to the tax increase they are proposing this year. To be clear, the Board is not making any cuts to the budget. They are increasing the budget and raising taxes.
I also think we should try to include all the households in the school district community. I saw it with my own family. When my children graduated, as a parent and resident I was suddenly dropped from all communication. Why not have more community forums where senior citizens or other groups can have an open and frank discussion with the board and the administration?
I found during the year on the other side of the table that the district could do a better job of being consistent on certain issues. This year, like most years, there is a group of elementary school parents advocating on hiring an additional teacher to keep class size down to district practice size. The district has rarely allowed class size to increase to the amount allowed by contract with the teacher bargaining unit.
The district says its priority after safety is teaching and learning. Why would the Board and the Administration then not commit to this additional section while at the same time hire another administrator and continue to raise taxes? I support hiring the teacher for the elementary school and finding other cuts to the budget to pay for it. Apparently, the Board does not feel the same. I do not think the Administration and the Board appreciate the mixed message they are sending by not making the decision now.
--The Chappaqua School District has long had a stellar reputation, but what areas would you like to see improvement, either in the academic program or elsewhere?
I believe that what makes a long-term successful organization is a constant internal assessment of that organization’s capabilities, strengths, and weaknesses. Teaching and learning is not a static concept. Educators are constantly learning new ways to reach students. My point being that while the District should accept the compliments associated with the district’s stellar reputation, it should also be constantly looking at ways to improve.
I am hopeful that the district’s current initiative to review and possibly revamp the Special Education area will yield a fresh perspective on how to help and reach our students requiring special education. I fully support inclusion in our district, but I am hopeful the study finds way to reach the students and streamline the process. As most parents of students with special needs learn, the process is unnecessarily adversarial.
As important, I would like to see improvement in reaching our general education students. Too often, the student that is not academically gifted nor in need of special education get lost in the middle both academically and social emotionally. I would like to see the district become a leader in reaching all its students.
Finally, I would like to see more transparency in the budget process. Having watched it from the other side of the table for the first time in 13 years, I found it exceedingly frustrating getting timely and accurate information. For example, to get a copy of a contract that was talked about and approved at a meeting, I was required to FOIL it. The FOIL Officer, John Chow, will consistently take the statutory maximum 5 days to acknowledge the request and then the statutory maximum 20 business days to fulfill the request. For most FOIL requests, there is no reason that the response cannot be timelier. The contract I requested was on the agenda. It is a public document. It is readily available to the FOIL officer who, in fact, negotiated that very contract. No research was needed to get it and reply, yet I am still waiting for it.
--There is a looming threat of some loss of state aid, perhaps as much as 20 percent, if you believe comments from the governor. If that were to occur, what areas could be cut that would have the least impact? Or would you use fund balance or a combination of cuts and reserves to close that gap?
I do not think there is any question that the Governor will reduce funding to education. To think otherwise is to have your head in the sand. I also think that the District’s own estimation of sales tax revenue and other revenues is grossly overstated.
Throughout the budget process, even before the board itself acknowledged publicly that they would have to make cuts to the initial proposed budget, I advocated both at meetings and via email for them to reduce the proposed increase in anticipation of the economic crisis the State and country faces. It was clear that the revenue assumptions made by the district were grossly overstated. While they did eventually address the budget increase, in my opinion they did not go far enough. To be clear, the budget and the tax levy is increasing this year. The budget on the ballot asks for a 1.65% increase. Compare that to neighboring districts such as Byrum Hills which has a proposed ZERO budget increase, Katonah-Lewisboro which is proposing a ZERO percent increase in their tax levy or even Scarsdale, everyone’s favorite comparison, which is proposing an approximate 1% budget increase or 30% less than Chappaqua.
When the Governor reduces State Aid to the district and when the sales tax revenue is much less than the district forecast, I think the cuts will have to be surgical and precise this year. When approximately 75% of your budget is in personnel compensation, it will be difficult to find mid-year cuts. Dr. Ackerman, with tacit approval from the Board, at one of the Board meetings, suggested that there might have to be mid-year teacher and staff reductions. I happen to think that would be a big mistake. The best solution for the short-term would be to use fund balance to make up much of the short fall. I would look for ways to reduce discretionary spending, I would use fund balance, and I would avoid the Administration and Board contemplated mid-year personnel layoffs.
--What are your thoughts on how the district has handled distance learning these past two months and where can improvements be made? What other areas related to technology can enhance education?
I think the district has done an outstanding job with distance learning. I give credit to first, the administration, Dr. Ackerman, Dr. Pease and especially Josh Culwell-Block. They were proactive in preparing for distance learning in terms of both having an infrastructure in place and doing the professional development necessary to have our staff ready, willing, and able. Second, I give credit to the teachers for making it work. Of course, there are hiccups along the way, but the district’s teachers have had a smooth implementation during a difficult time. NY State has even recognized the district for its outstanding work. Finally, I give credit to the students and the parents of the students. None of this works without them. From the elementary schools to the middle schools to the high school students have embraced the situation. Teaching and learning have always been bolstered by support from parents, care-givers and everyone in a home. Now, more than ever, that support has been evident and quite frankly taxing on the adults.
--Assuming there are in-person classes come September, how prepared is the district to have a smooth return to school in the fall?
I am not privy to the details of the district’s preparedness to effect a smooth transition to a return to the classroom in the fall should that be allowed, but I am quite confident that the district will be ready and ahead of the curve. Preparedness starts with planning. I am aware that the administration has been thinking about how to affect a safe transition back to school. I know they have had several team meetings on the issue. I know that their priority and greatest concern is the safety and well-being of the students and the staff. I also know that they are awaiting guidance from the State on what a return to the classroom might look like or entail. I would add that I also have the utmost confidence in Joe Gramando the Director of Facilities and his staff to make any changes necessary to ensure the safety and well-being of everyone who comes into the district. The implementation of any plan will be reliant upon the district’s facilities, maintenance, and custodial staff.
--Many advocates for Westchester and Hudson Valley schools have long argued that this area's districts do not receive as much state funding as similar districts on Long Island. Do you share that view and what, if anything, can a board of education do to help update the funding formulas more equitably?
I was not aware that that fact was in dispute. The school district’s in Westchester DO NOT receive a proportionate share of state funding. This is not a new issue. It has gone on for decades. It is politics at its worst. It is the state legislature playing politics with our children. Having said that, I think there are hundreds of districts in NY State that could argue they are not receiving their equitable funding. What is equitable? What is fair? To some extent, the questions are bigger than any one school district. Should wealthier districts help support less wealthy districts throughout the state?
The way public education was set up in NY and for the most part in the United States, it was local. Local control over education is a bedrock concept in public education. With local control comes local funding. Over 90% of Chappaqua’s budget comes from local taxes. The Board of Education here in Chappaqua can lobby our local representatives and lobby the State and even our Governor who lives (or is it lived now that he broke up with Ms Lee?) in our district, but even with a tweak in the formula, we are still going to be funding close to 90% of our budget locally.
I happen to hold the view that I was, and hope to be again, elected by the residents of the CCSD and my obligation is to them rather than to public education in general throughout the state. I will tirelessly advocate for our district, our residents, our taxpayers. We have regional organizations such as the Westchester-Putnam School Boards Association (WPSBA or West-Put) that should be working to effect general change in the State.
--Four years ago the district's voters approved a $42M facilities bond. Have you been satisfied with how it's been executed?
For the most part, I have been very satisfied with how the $42.5 million facilities bond has been executed. While there were some inevitable delays, the final product is both well thought out, innovative and forward thinking even within the context of the Covid-19 crisis. I hope the community has taken the opportunity or will take the opportunity to visit all six schools and see the completed work.
I think the district would do itself a great service if it produced a short documentary or short video on all the work done and how it is improving and expanding teaching and learning in the district. A virtual tour of the facilities both empty and in action would be a great opportunity to showcase the district and thank the voters for the approval.
The part I am concerned about is not in the execution and subsequent use of the facilities, but in the way it is being funded. As a prelude to the vote on the bond, the Board, on which I sat at the time, committed to the community that the bond would not raise taxes. The district could do all these upgrades without raising taxes. Through sales of property, through the expiration of older bonds and through other sources, the district and the board made verbal commitments that the bond would not cause taxes to be raised. Quite frankly, it was one of the reasons, as a Board Member, I voted to put the bond up to vote by the taxpayers.
I found that the bond DID in fact raise taxes. While trying to recreate the tax levy calculation during this year’s budget process, by taking out the bond from the calculations for the last three years, it became clear that whether it was inadvertent or intentional, the bond did cause the tax cap calculation for the tax levy to rise by $1.8 million. I pointed this out to the Administration and to the Board prior to them committing to a final budget proposal this year with the hope that they would address and correct the issue. They did not. In fact, they stonewalled me on even acknowledging the issue. To be fair, one member, speaking for themselves and not for the Board did say that they would investigate the issue. I am still waiting for their answer.
One basic tenant of good board governance is the continuance of board practice and policy regardless of who is on the board. Of course, a board can, and often does, vote to make changes to policy, but in the absence of a vote, one should assume continuance. If my fellow candidates who are on the Board and the other Board members are going to abandon that commitment to the community to not raise taxes because of the bond, I think transparency and good governance requires that they openly disclose that change in policy to the community on a timely basis. I am sorry that this disclosure must come from me, now.
--How would you evaluate the district addressing the emotional and mental well-being of its students?
It is a tough area to evaluate. How do you measure success in addressing the emotional and mental well-being of a district’s students? Besides the privacy issues, there is really no baseline measurements that can be used for comparison. I believe the district understands the need to address the emotional and mental-well being of its students and quite frankly, its staff for both safety reasons and humane reasons. I believe the district has been allocating resources, time, personnel, and money to the issue and will continue to do all that it can to address the issue.
--Is there anything else that should be done to ensure the safety of the school and staff in the district's schools?
At one of the Board meetings early in 2020, Dr. Ackerman indicated that she had intended to put another bond of approximately $10 million or whatever the cost would be to create a single point of entry to the high school. I oppose this for several reasons.
One, the administration has yet to clearly define what risks they seek to mitigate by spending the $10 million. The only answer they have ever given is to improve safety and because that is what their lone security consultant recommended. Two, the ability to achieve an effective one entry to the building is questionable too. There are many doors, not to mention hundreds of windows, that open to the outside that would easily eliminate the one entry protocol. Three, the design proposed several years ago actually created a security issue. By funneling the students into one glass hallway between the gymnasium and the current front door, you are creating a much larger target. Four, you are sending a psychological message to the students that there is a reason they need to be enclosed, it changes the culture of the open campus that makes Greeley such a terrific learning environment, and it creates an atmosphere of fear.
Better use of taxpayer monies would be to increase perimeter security, increase the use of technology, and increase mental health services and intervention.
--Is there anything you would like to tell the voters and why should they return you to the Chappaqua Board of Education?
I said last year and I repeat this year that experience matters. I have more experience than all the other candidates combined. What also matters is perspective and having a diversified in thought Board. The role of a board member is the budget and policy. While it is critically important for the Board to support the administration, it is also critically important for Board members to remember that they represent the community, the voters, the taxpayers not the administration. As a Board Member, I ask the simple question, “Why?” No Board Member is an expert in everything the collective administration is. It is my view that my role is to make sure that decisions made by the administration have been well thought out, have solid reasoning and logic behind them and that they understand the context of the entire community when they are making decisions. Group think on a board, any board, can be dangerous and myopic. The Board of Education is not an operating board. It is an oversight board. I take my fiduciary duty to the entire community, those with students in the schools and those without. I make sure that all points of view are heard. I offer considered thought and evaluation as well as diverse thought to the decision-making process and to board service. I offer common sense with an uncommon commitment.
