Rosario announced that he recommended taking the closing of an elementary school off of the table for this year to allow more time to explore school consolidations that include the entire district.
The BOE agreed.
One Battle Won.
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Budget Meeting Tonight
Tonight in the High School Gym:
VI. AGENDA ITEMS - SUPERINTENDENT
1. School Consolidation
2. Budget Discussion
- Technology Discussion.
- Athletic Discussion.
- Custodial & Maintenance Overtime Discussion.
- Update on Budget.
V. Public Comment
VI. AGENDA ITEMS - SUPERINTENDENT
1. School Consolidation
2. Budget Discussion
- Technology Discussion.
- Athletic Discussion.
- Custodial & Maintenance Overtime Discussion.
- Update on Budget.
V. Public Comment
DO Administration Comparison
I requested to see what documentation Rosario provided the BOE to support the claim that Rondout's administration is not different from similar sized districts. Until then, I did my own research with help from many friends and came up with this. What I noticed:
1) Our overall administration is larger by 3-6 people compared with like sized districts.
2) Our structure which makes District Office admin positions a certified administrative position (meaning a six-figure salaries rather than a five-figure salary) shows us exceeding not only like size districts but also larger districts.
(Note: If you notice any errors let me know, it was not easy to pull this information together. Also, the enrollment is not exact; everywhere I looked the numbers were somewhat different)
1) Our overall administration is larger by 3-6 people compared with like sized districts.
2) Our structure which makes District Office admin positions a certified administrative position (meaning a six-figure salaries rather than a five-figure salary) shows us exceeding not only like size districts but also larger districts.
(Note: If you notice any errors let me know, it was not easy to pull this information together. Also, the enrollment is not exact; everywhere I looked the numbers were somewhat different)
Monday, March 28, 2011
Now is a Good Time to Let the BOE Know How You Feel
There is a budget meeting tomorrow. If you can't come to the meeting and feel strongly about something, please take time an send a message to the BOE today or tomorrow. Silence sounds like acceptance. Even if you commented before, please do it again.
http://www.rondout.k12.ny.us/administration/board_of_education/send_a_comment_to_the_board_/
http://www.rondout.k12.ny.us/administration/board_of_education/send_a_comment_to_the_board_/
Sunday, March 27, 2011
True Concessions
Rosario announced at the last meeting that he and his administrative team have agreed to a salary freeze for next year. For some reason, although he said this was a concession his team was making, it was also still under negotiation so I am not sure what that means.
Anyway, while it nice that Rosario is freezing his 175k salary, and I am sure if he did not the Union would never agree to any discussions about teacher benefits and salaries, personally I think that this is not nearly enough.
Len Berg informed the public in December that salary freezes were not the answer since they are just a temporary fix. On this one point I agree with him. What happens next year? Now, if the administration normalized to really match other districts, moving 2-4 administrative positions back down the ladder and make them non-certified administrative jobs, giving more responsibility to those who stay on the top of the administrative ladder and we reduced the administration in the Middle and High School then this year, next year, and the years after we would feel the reduced financial strain due to this administrative design.
Do not stop insisting on consolidations and real concessions from the administration. Those who make 95k and over can not be insulated ever, let alone during these difficult financial times.
Anyway, while it nice that Rosario is freezing his 175k salary, and I am sure if he did not the Union would never agree to any discussions about teacher benefits and salaries, personally I think that this is not nearly enough.
Len Berg informed the public in December that salary freezes were not the answer since they are just a temporary fix. On this one point I agree with him. What happens next year? Now, if the administration normalized to really match other districts, moving 2-4 administrative positions back down the ladder and make them non-certified administrative jobs, giving more responsibility to those who stay on the top of the administrative ladder and we reduced the administration in the Middle and High School then this year, next year, and the years after we would feel the reduced financial strain due to this administrative design.
Do not stop insisting on consolidations and real concessions from the administration. Those who make 95k and over can not be insulated ever, let alone during these difficult financial times.
BOE Budget Meeting March 29th
This is posted on the BOE's page:
Special Board of Education Meeting
"Budget"
High School Gym
March 29, 2011
6:30 P.M.
"Budget"
High School Gym
March 29, 2011
6:30 P.M.
Hopefully the quotes around the word budget means that the BOE plan to talk about the budget issues in detail. Will this be just a presentation or will it be a discussion so that we understand where the board members stand? Come to the meeting to find out.
Thursday, March 24, 2011
How Do We Get the BOE to Respond
It is clear that a large part of the frustration so many community members have with this budget process is due to the perpetual silence on the part of both the BOE and administration regarding issues that have been put in front of them for months.One BOE member, in response to a question about the web forum where people can post their comments pointed out that she had over 600 in her mailbox and that they were working on a way to electronically post responses.
In all honesty who wants to wait for this technology and why should we? The forum for responses are the publicly attended BOE meetings. I do not mean that the BOE or Rosario need to respond to each of our points, comments and questions as they come up in public comment. However, it IS THEIR RESPONSIBILITY to include their responses to consistently asked questions in their agenda. As examples:
Top Heavy Administration
People have been asking publicly and through the web site for the BOE to take a harder look at administration and ways to consolidate/reduce the budget there. So far, in December, Gail said that the BOE did look at that but provided not further detail and last Tuesday we were only told that Rosario provided evidence that we are no different from the other districts in the County. Besides these responses obfuscating or falsifying the reality of our top-heavy administration, why is it three months after the first public mention (that I am aware of) of this issue has the BOE not presented any of these findings related to this issue in response to the public questioning?
Protection of TA's and Paraprofessionals
There has been numerous public comments about the protection of those in our district who get paid the least but yet are instrumental to the children's educational experience. Is the BOE and the Administration doing all it can to protect as many of these workers as possible? We do not know because they never make mention of this issue publicly.
Line by Line Auditing
Another consistent question is how much of a line by line auditing is the BOE doing. We get a two-faced response where neither face says anything at all. Len Berg says the BOE is doing a zero-based approach (start at nothing and add only needed items) - but there has been no documentation or further discussion of this. On the other side, another BOE member said that this is not their job, that they trust Rosario and his administration to do this. Yet we are shown no evidence that Rosario is working on the budget with this type of detail either.
I do not know how to get the BOE and Rosario to publicly respond, to provide transparency, to address these issue directly and in detail. I do know that until they do, the public will only become angrier and angrier with them.
In all honesty who wants to wait for this technology and why should we? The forum for responses are the publicly attended BOE meetings. I do not mean that the BOE or Rosario need to respond to each of our points, comments and questions as they come up in public comment. However, it IS THEIR RESPONSIBILITY to include their responses to consistently asked questions in their agenda. As examples:
Top Heavy Administration
People have been asking publicly and through the web site for the BOE to take a harder look at administration and ways to consolidate/reduce the budget there. So far, in December, Gail said that the BOE did look at that but provided not further detail and last Tuesday we were only told that Rosario provided evidence that we are no different from the other districts in the County. Besides these responses obfuscating or falsifying the reality of our top-heavy administration, why is it three months after the first public mention (that I am aware of) of this issue has the BOE not presented any of these findings related to this issue in response to the public questioning?
Protection of TA's and Paraprofessionals
There has been numerous public comments about the protection of those in our district who get paid the least but yet are instrumental to the children's educational experience. Is the BOE and the Administration doing all it can to protect as many of these workers as possible? We do not know because they never make mention of this issue publicly.
Line by Line Auditing
Another consistent question is how much of a line by line auditing is the BOE doing. We get a two-faced response where neither face says anything at all. Len Berg says the BOE is doing a zero-based approach (start at nothing and add only needed items) - but there has been no documentation or further discussion of this. On the other side, another BOE member said that this is not their job, that they trust Rosario and his administration to do this. Yet we are shown no evidence that Rosario is working on the budget with this type of detail either.
I do not know how to get the BOE and Rosario to publicly respond, to provide transparency, to address these issue directly and in detail. I do know that until they do, the public will only become angrier and angrier with them.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Capacity if we have Two Elementary Schools
It looks to me like we can't fit into 2 schools without a minimum of 23 kids per class (k,1) and 26 kids per class (2-4). You be the judge. Click on image to enlarge.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Median INDVIDUAL Income
It was suggested that I made up the fact that our median individual income is only 32k and that tax payers who are voting for a budget that protects so many administrators making well over 100k might have a bit of a problem with this. Here is my source. If you can't read the number click on the image and it will enlarge.
Why is the BOE so Defensive?
It is interesting how the BOE has made those of us who speak up (myself at the forefront) their enemy. Tonight the BOE, minus a few members were either bored or defensive in reaction to public comment. BOE members, rather than consider the information in front of them chose to look for flaws so that they can disregard the information. Why is that their reactions? Shouldn't they be pleased that we are working hard to provide them with this information?
Did they hear what we said or were their inner voices talking over us tell them how annoying we were?
Some good point that were made (read up BOE in case you missed it).
1. It IS the BOE's job to make the budgetary decisions and to make Rosario explore all areas for cuts.
2. The Administration does have fat to cut and everyone looking in sees that.
3. Closing a school is bad idea for more reasons than it is a good idea.
4. Cutting those at the bottom (like paraprofessionals) while insulating those at the top is wrong.
Gail accused us (me mostly probably) of being condescending. It is funny how it is o.k. for the BOE members to look at us as we speak and look bored and disinterested while it is not o.k. for me to call them on it. It is like the older sibling taunting the younger sibling until the younger sibling reacts outloud and then the younger sibling is reprimanded.
Did they hear what we said or were their inner voices talking over us tell them how annoying we were?
Some good point that were made (read up BOE in case you missed it).
1. It IS the BOE's job to make the budgetary decisions and to make Rosario explore all areas for cuts.
2. The Administration does have fat to cut and everyone looking in sees that.
3. Closing a school is bad idea for more reasons than it is a good idea.
4. Cutting those at the bottom (like paraprofessionals) while insulating those at the top is wrong.
Gail accused us (me mostly probably) of being condescending. It is funny how it is o.k. for the BOE members to look at us as we speak and look bored and disinterested while it is not o.k. for me to call them on it. It is like the older sibling taunting the younger sibling until the younger sibling reacts outloud and then the younger sibling is reprimanded.
Monday, March 21, 2011
Why You Should Come to the Meeting Tomorrow (3/22)
If you have NO children in the district: You should come because there has been a tremendous amount of evidence revealing that your money is not being spent wisely. If you want to know if you can support a tax levy increase come May it is paramount that you not only know what the BOE are thinking of doing to save money but it s important for them to know whether you think the BOE is on or off target. For example, the Blue Stone Press has no idea what it is talking about when it publishes that at least 900k can be saved if a school is closed. Do not believe what you read, experience for yourself.
If you have children or grandchildren in the Middle or High School: Many of your children's teachers and teaching assistants are on the chopping block. This will impact their educational experience now and in their futures. Yet, the administration refuses to consider real cost savings among administrators. Come learn about this bottom up approach to cost savings our BOE is engaging in.
If you have children or grandchildren in an Elementary School: It is possible, despite the hard work of the advisory committee finding that there is no clear picture of the real costs, savings and educational impacts of closing a school, the BOE may still rush forward and permanently close a school. If this is not o.k. with you please come and let this be known.
If you are a teacher or staff member in the district: The bottom up approach of the BOE impacts your job whether you are on the chopping block or not. You understand the real educational impact class sizes of 26 will have in the elementary schools. You understand the need for teaching assistants. Please help the BOE, who focuses primarily on the bottom line, understand this.
TUESDAY 3/22 7:30 @ KES
If you have children or grandchildren in the Middle or High School: Many of your children's teachers and teaching assistants are on the chopping block. This will impact their educational experience now and in their futures. Yet, the administration refuses to consider real cost savings among administrators. Come learn about this bottom up approach to cost savings our BOE is engaging in.
If you have children or grandchildren in an Elementary School: It is possible, despite the hard work of the advisory committee finding that there is no clear picture of the real costs, savings and educational impacts of closing a school, the BOE may still rush forward and permanently close a school. If this is not o.k. with you please come and let this be known.
If you are a teacher or staff member in the district: The bottom up approach of the BOE impacts your job whether you are on the chopping block or not. You understand the real educational impact class sizes of 26 will have in the elementary schools. You understand the need for teaching assistants. Please help the BOE, who focuses primarily on the bottom line, understand this.
TUESDAY 3/22 7:30 @ KES
Friday, March 18, 2011
STAND and DELIVER
Tuesday March 22nd will mark a significant moment in this school budget process as the BOE voices their response to the advisory committee's report on closing an elementary school.
7:30 KES
PLEASE COME. PLEASE COME IN DROVES.
PLEASE BRING 3 FRIENDS.
PLEASE PACK THE HOUSE.
There is only a few ways to let the BOE know where you stand. One way is to stand. Another is to take a stand. Please do both.
STAND
at the 3/22 BOE meeting - bring your friends, bring your neighbors, your parents. You do not have to speak. Just stand there looking disapproving.
TAKE A STAND
Speak out at the meeting and/or sign the petition: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/rvs_district_audit/
Do not believe this is a done deal. If the BOE sees the level of disapproval they are more likely to respond.
If they do not see you they will not believe you care.
Thursday, March 17, 2011
If I Could Have Answered the BOE's Questions
1. JUST REDISTRICT AND THEY WILL FIT??
BOE Member: "If we close a school KES will be nearly at maximum capacity. This would is problematic."
BOE Member: "Why not leave KES and move RES into MES?"
Rosario response: "We can look into that"
The real answer - Because MES can't absorb over 200 more kids.
BOE Member : "Can we redistrict to make the two schools even?"
Rosario response: "We can look into that"
The real answer - Already in the "North Campus" class sizes are projected to be from 24-27 kids. Moving more kids into this school will make this even worse.
The two larger schools, KES & MES are used to having about 260-290 kids per school. RES for the past four years is about 230. This means 230 kids at the minimum would need to fill into the remaining two schools. If it is done evenly then we would need to place 375-400 kids in the remaining larger schools.
This maxes out both schools when we account for classrooms needed for Special Education and Life Skills (which MES does not currently have but would need to if RES closed).
This means class sizes 25 or more when 18-20 is the recommended size for educational wellbeing.
2. USING THE EMPTY SPACE
BOE Member: "Can we rent or sell the empty building?"
Rosario: "Unlikely"
BOE Member: "What about to a school type group like BOCES"
Rosario: "They only want to rent space in a school with kids"
The real answer- Use our "extra space" in each of the three schools to rent to BOCES allowing a revenue into the district while still allowing control over overcrowding.
BOE Member: "If we close a school KES will be nearly at maximum capacity. This would is problematic."
BOE Member: "Why not leave KES and move RES into MES?"
Rosario response: "We can look into that"
The real answer - Because MES can't absorb over 200 more kids.
BOE Member : "Can we redistrict to make the two schools even?"
Rosario response: "We can look into that"
The real answer - Already in the "North Campus" class sizes are projected to be from 24-27 kids. Moving more kids into this school will make this even worse.
The two larger schools, KES & MES are used to having about 260-290 kids per school. RES for the past four years is about 230. This means 230 kids at the minimum would need to fill into the remaining two schools. If it is done evenly then we would need to place 375-400 kids in the remaining larger schools.
This maxes out both schools when we account for classrooms needed for Special Education and Life Skills (which MES does not currently have but would need to if RES closed).
This means class sizes 25 or more when 18-20 is the recommended size for educational wellbeing.
2. USING THE EMPTY SPACE
BOE Member: "Can we rent or sell the empty building?"
Rosario: "Unlikely"
BOE Member: "What about to a school type group like BOCES"
Rosario: "They only want to rent space in a school with kids"
The real answer- Use our "extra space" in each of the three schools to rent to BOCES allowing a revenue into the district while still allowing control over overcrowding.
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Dear BOE Member
Dear BOE Member,
You, the one sitting there quietly wondering. You know who you are. You think to yourself, "Wow 24-26 kids per class and if enrollment increases, even more kids per class, that sounds wrong." You wonder what would happen to special education services, maybe even calculate the cost a single law suit would be if a parent felt that her special need child was not served. You look at the cost savings analysis and think, "Well, how do we know we would fire a library aid or food service assistant if we consolidate? Maybe we would need them in a larger school. We don't seem to really know how much we would save by closing a school." You hear Rosario tell you that an empty building will not rent or sell and think, "That's bad. We can't have a building just sit and rot." You also hear Rosario say that BOCES would only be willing to rent space in a school with kids and wonder, "Why not ask them to rent the extra space in each of our three schools?" You see the principle, teachers, parents, community members all truly distraught at what could be the greatest mistake ever made in our district, and you think, "Can I live with that?"
Go with these thoughts BOE member. Know that we the public will applaud you if you have the courage to stand up to those who see a dollar amount, believe it and ignore the real impact on our district. We need you, BOE member, who knows in your heart that this feels wrong. We need you to speak for us. And when you do, you will be able to be proud of the role you played as our hero.
I look forward to shaking your hand.
You, the one sitting there quietly wondering. You know who you are. You think to yourself, "Wow 24-26 kids per class and if enrollment increases, even more kids per class, that sounds wrong." You wonder what would happen to special education services, maybe even calculate the cost a single law suit would be if a parent felt that her special need child was not served. You look at the cost savings analysis and think, "Well, how do we know we would fire a library aid or food service assistant if we consolidate? Maybe we would need them in a larger school. We don't seem to really know how much we would save by closing a school." You hear Rosario tell you that an empty building will not rent or sell and think, "That's bad. We can't have a building just sit and rot." You also hear Rosario say that BOCES would only be willing to rent space in a school with kids and wonder, "Why not ask them to rent the extra space in each of our three schools?" You see the principle, teachers, parents, community members all truly distraught at what could be the greatest mistake ever made in our district, and you think, "Can I live with that?"
Go with these thoughts BOE member. Know that we the public will applaud you if you have the courage to stand up to those who see a dollar amount, believe it and ignore the real impact on our district. We need you, BOE member, who knows in your heart that this feels wrong. We need you to speak for us. And when you do, you will be able to be proud of the role you played as our hero.
I look forward to shaking your hand.
Tonight at the BOE
Tonight Breanna will present the BOE the "report" of the advisory committee. Breanna only gave it to the advisory committee to review today after 2:00 and it does not represent all of their views. She promised to give them time to review it and make comments but then failed to do this.
Was all of this hard work of the committee a farce? This is highly disconcerting. Please come tonight to the HS gym if you can and let them know this is WRONG WRONG WRONG.
Was all of this hard work of the committee a farce? This is highly disconcerting. Please come tonight to the HS gym if you can and let them know this is WRONG WRONG WRONG.
The History of the Rise in Administration
Below is the history of the rise in administration.
Three significant questions arise:
1. Do we need administrator at high salaries to replace the job of area/department Chairs? (This is what happened in 2002-2003.)
2. What is the explanation for those position that were once Coordinator or Director positions that got converted to administrative leading allowing nearly 2x the salary for the same job? (This is what happened to the MST Standard Chair from 2000-2003 and the Technology position in the past few years)
3. Why are some Director positions administrative and others not? (Director of Transportation is non-administrative @ just over 70k while the Athletics Director is administrative @ over 106k and the Technology Director is administrative @ over 131k).
Three significant questions arise:
1. Do we need administrator at high salaries to replace the job of area/department Chairs? (This is what happened in 2002-2003.)
2. What is the explanation for those position that were once Coordinator or Director positions that got converted to administrative leading allowing nearly 2x the salary for the same job? (This is what happened to the MST Standard Chair from 2000-2003 and the Technology position in the past few years)
3. Why are some Director positions administrative and others not? (Director of Transportation is non-administrative @ just over 70k while the Athletics Director is administrative @ over 106k and the Technology Director is administrative @ over 131k).
Prior to 2002 | 2002-2003 | 2010-2011 |
Superintendent of Schools | Superintendent of Schools | Superintendent of Schools |
Business Administrator | Assistant Superintendent Business | Business Administrator |
Assistant Superintendent Curriculum & Instruction | Assistant Superintendent Curriculum & Instruction | Assistant Superintendent Curriculum & Instruction |
Director of PPS | Director of PPS | Deputy Superintendent for PPS and Personnel |
Nurse Practitioner | Nurse Practitioner | Nurse Practitioner |
MST Standards Area Chair (non-administrative) | MST Standards Area Chair | Standards Area Chair Grades 5-12 |
Area chairs were all teachers not being paid as administrators. | Arts Standards Area Chair | Standards Area Chair for Health, PE, Home & Careers, Athletic Director |
English Language Arts/Social Studies Standards Area Chair | ||
CSE Chair/Case Manager 7-12 | CSE Chairperson Grades 7-12 | |
CSE Chair Special Education | CPSE/CSE Chairperson Grades K-6 | |
Superintendent of Buildings & Grounds | Superintendent of Buildings & Grounds | Director of Facilities and Operations |
Director of Technology – non admin civil service | Director of Technology | |
Admin positions: 6 Note: after 2000 our district starts declining in size. | It was felt for higher accountability an administrator should be hired instead. Pretty quickly the art and English administrator position were ended because of backlash that these were not needed Admin positions: 11 (then 2 shut down – 9 remained) | 2 were added – Athletic Director and Technology converted to an admin salary (nearly double) Admin positions: 11 |
Please Sign and Forward
If we want the BOE to insist that the District Administration to explore consolidation within the district we need to be loud and clear. Please take a moment now to sign and forward to ten people you know in the district.
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/rvs_district_audit/
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/rvs_district_audit/
Monday, March 14, 2011
Energy Audit Could Save Millions?
Why hasn't our district had this FREE audit done?
******************************************************************
FRAMINGHAM, MA–– Ameresco, Inc., (NYSE:AMRC), a leading energy efficiency and renewable energy company, announced that it has entered into an Energy Savings Performance Contract (ESPC) with the New Paltz Central School District. Ameresco will provide energy efficiency upgrades to four New Paltz schools: New Paltz High School, New Paltz Middle School, Lenape Elementary School and Duzine Elementary School. The project is expected to save the district $258,461 annually, according to Ameresco.
“Environmental stewardship has always been top of mind in New Paltz so we are thrilled to bring these energy efficiency upgrades to the schools in our district,” said Maria C. Rice, superintendent of New Paltz Central School District. “This long-term partnership will save our district a tremendous amount of money that can be applied to other important items, such as school activities. Additionally, this work will serve as a valuable teaching tool to show our students, parents and staff about the importance of energy efficiency.”
Once approved by the New York State Education Department (SED), the $4 million project will provide energy efficiency upgrades to the four New Paltz schools and will require no upfront capital investment from the school district or taxpayers. Funded in part by the SED, New Paltz is also expected to save $6 million over the course of the 18-year project which will pay for the improvements.
Ameresco completed a thorough energy performance audit for energy consumption in order to better understand the facilities’ baseline energy and other utility consumption. Ameresco will design and install the upgrades, which include:
Lighting System Improvements
Lighting Controls
Building Management System
Premium Efficiency Motors
Computer Load Management
Infiltration Reduction
Boiler Re-piping, Boiler Controls
De-Stratification Fans
High Efficiency Transformers
Solar Hot Water Heater
Exterior Lighting
Classroom Unit Ventilators
Kitchen Upgrades including a new Walk-in Freezer
“We are thrilled to be partnering with the New Paltz Central School District, working with them to make these critical energy efficiency improvements that will help reduce energy use, lower their utility
expenditures and reduce their carbon footprint,” said David J. Anderson, Executive Vice President, Ameresco. “An ESPC, such as this one, is a budget-neutral way to reduce energy use and associated costs while significantly upgrading facility infrastructure. We applaud New Paltz for being a leader in sustainability, and serving as a model for other school districts throughout New York State and the region.”
An ESPC is a budget-neutral way to reduce energy use and associated costs, and renew facilities and building systems without burdening shrinking capital budgets. Under this ESPC, Ameresco will pay all costs involved in identifying and installing the upgraded energy-efficiency equipment. The resulting cost savings will offset the costs of these improvements over 18 years. Ameresco will also provide savings verification.
About New Paltz
New Paltz is located 80 miles north of New York City on the western shore of the Hudson River, bordered to the west by the Catskill Mountains. New Paltz was originally settled in 1678 by a small but brave group of French-speaking Huguenot refugees from what is today southern Belgium and northern France.
About Ameresco, Inc.
Ameresco, Inc. was incorporated in Delaware in April 2000 and is a leading independent provider of comprehensive energy efficiency and renewable energy solutions for facilities throughout North America. Ameresco’s solutions include upgrades to a facility’s energy infrastructure, and the development, construction, and operation of renewable energy plants. With corporate headquarters located in Framingham, MA, Ameresco has 55 offices in 29 states and four Canadian provinces. For more information, visit www.ameresco.com.
Read more: New York House - Ameresco Contracts with New Paltz School District to Make Improvements Expected to Yield 250K in Annual Energy Savings
******************************************************************
Ameresco Contracts with New Paltz School District to Make Improvements Expected to Yield $250K in Annual Energy Savings
“Environmental stewardship has always been top of mind in New Paltz so we are thrilled to bring these energy efficiency upgrades to the schools in our district,” said Maria C. Rice, superintendent of New Paltz Central School District. “This long-term partnership will save our district a tremendous amount of money that can be applied to other important items, such as school activities. Additionally, this work will serve as a valuable teaching tool to show our students, parents and staff about the importance of energy efficiency.”
Once approved by the New York State Education Department (SED), the $4 million project will provide energy efficiency upgrades to the four New Paltz schools and will require no upfront capital investment from the school district or taxpayers. Funded in part by the SED, New Paltz is also expected to save $6 million over the course of the 18-year project which will pay for the improvements.
Ameresco completed a thorough energy performance audit for energy consumption in order to better understand the facilities’ baseline energy and other utility consumption. Ameresco will design and install the upgrades, which include:
Lighting System Improvements
Lighting Controls
Building Management System
Premium Efficiency Motors
Computer Load Management
Infiltration Reduction
Boiler Re-piping, Boiler Controls
De-Stratification Fans
High Efficiency Transformers
Solar Hot Water Heater
Exterior Lighting
Classroom Unit Ventilators
Kitchen Upgrades including a new Walk-in Freezer
“We are thrilled to be partnering with the New Paltz Central School District, working with them to make these critical energy efficiency improvements that will help reduce energy use, lower their utility
expenditures and reduce their carbon footprint,” said David J. Anderson, Executive Vice President, Ameresco. “An ESPC, such as this one, is a budget-neutral way to reduce energy use and associated costs while significantly upgrading facility infrastructure. We applaud New Paltz for being a leader in sustainability, and serving as a model for other school districts throughout New York State and the region.”
An ESPC is a budget-neutral way to reduce energy use and associated costs, and renew facilities and building systems without burdening shrinking capital budgets. Under this ESPC, Ameresco will pay all costs involved in identifying and installing the upgraded energy-efficiency equipment. The resulting cost savings will offset the costs of these improvements over 18 years. Ameresco will also provide savings verification.
About New Paltz
New Paltz is located 80 miles north of New York City on the western shore of the Hudson River, bordered to the west by the Catskill Mountains. New Paltz was originally settled in 1678 by a small but brave group of French-speaking Huguenot refugees from what is today southern Belgium and northern France.
About Ameresco, Inc.
Ameresco, Inc. was incorporated in Delaware in April 2000 and is a leading independent provider of comprehensive energy efficiency and renewable energy solutions for facilities throughout North America. Ameresco’s solutions include upgrades to a facility’s energy infrastructure, and the development, construction, and operation of renewable energy plants. With corporate headquarters located in Framingham, MA, Ameresco has 55 offices in 29 states and four Canadian provinces. For more information, visit www.ameresco.com.
Read more: New York House - Ameresco Contracts with New Paltz School District to Make Improvements Expected to Yield 250K in Annual Energy Savings
Saturday, March 12, 2011
Time is Running Out!
If you pay taxes in Rondout then please help us push the Board of Education to insist that the district's administration office figure out how it can make cuts to reduce our budget (which it currently refuses to do). More detail is provided in the link below.
We are quickly running out of time so please do not put this off.
Please sign this petition and forward it to EVERYONE you know in the Rondout community. If you are a teacher or administrator of the school district and are concerned that signing this can put you at jeopardy please still forward this to those you know who can sign it. If I sent this to you and you are not in Rondout, give me a hand and forward it to you Rondout friends and family.
Thanks. Eve
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/rvs_district_audit/
We are quickly running out of time so please do not put this off.
Please sign this petition and forward it to EVERYONE you know in the Rondout community. If you are a teacher or administrator of the school district and are concerned that signing this can put you at jeopardy please still forward this to those you know who can sign it. If I sent this to you and you are not in Rondout, give me a hand and forward it to you Rondout friends and family.
Thanks. Eve
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/rvs_district_audit/
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Do We REALLY Need ALL of these Administrators?
We asked Rosario on numerous occasions about consolidation in the district office but we were ignored. We asked him for a personnel audit but he said, "To do that would be admitting that cuts can be made" (paraphrased). He said all of our administrators were needed because of the 150 un-funded mandates. So I did the audit myself. I did not focus on the funding just on which jobs needed someone in the administrative office and how much time they would need to give it. Is this completely accurate? I don't know, I am only making educated guesses. I figure if Rosario sees a problem with this he will give me a revision. Otherwise I can only assume he agrees (trust me, he reads or has someone reading this blog).
Here is my summary of how many mandates fall under specific administrators and how much time is needed:
Pupil Services (PPS): 21 mandates: all requiring minimal time, 5 are plans that must be written once and are done.
Business: 12 mandates: 11 requiring minimal time, 1 requiring moderate time, 1 is a one time plan
Curriculum: 13 mandates: all requiring minimal time
Superintendent: 1: requiring minimal time
Facilities: 15 mandate: 9 requiring minimal time, 6 are one time or every 3-5 years
Special Ed: 17 mandates: 4 requiring one time
Technology: 3 mandates: all requiring minimal time, 1 requiring one time plan
Note: transportation is not an administrative position
Given the mandates above and other admin tasks it seems we need:
1. Superintendent (although I am not sure we do need this position at least based on mandates)
2. Deputy Superintendent - who oversees PPS, Curriculum & technology
3. Business Director
4. Special Ed k-6
5. Special Ed 7-12
6. Facilities
Hey, isn't this essentially what we HAD in 2000 before Eileen Camasso with the BOE's permission decided to massively expand the district's administration in her only 4 years as Superintendent?
Rosario, PLEASE correct me where I am wrong. I look forward to knowing the truth.
Here is my summary of how many mandates fall under specific administrators and how much time is needed:
Pupil Services (PPS): 21 mandates: all requiring minimal time, 5 are plans that must be written once and are done.
Business: 12 mandates: 11 requiring minimal time, 1 requiring moderate time, 1 is a one time plan
Curriculum: 13 mandates: all requiring minimal time
Superintendent: 1: requiring minimal time
Facilities: 15 mandate: 9 requiring minimal time, 6 are one time or every 3-5 years
Special Ed: 17 mandates: 4 requiring one time
Technology: 3 mandates: all requiring minimal time, 1 requiring one time plan
Note: transportation is not an administrative position
Given the mandates above and other admin tasks it seems we need:
1. Superintendent (although I am not sure we do need this position at least based on mandates)
2. Deputy Superintendent - who oversees PPS, Curriculum & technology
3. Business Director
4. Special Ed k-6
5. Special Ed 7-12
6. Facilities
Hey, isn't this essentially what we HAD in 2000 before Eileen Camasso with the BOE's permission decided to massively expand the district's administration in her only 4 years as Superintendent?
Rosario, PLEASE correct me where I am wrong. I look forward to knowing the truth.
March 8th BOE Budget Meeting
Rosario presented a power point that explained about the reserve, tax levy and information about a "B" budget. This can all be found on the Rondout Web site. However, do not expect to see a detailed budget so how the revised cuts will impact particular people is difficult to tell.
One glaring omission as pointed out by a few people in the public were that, once again, no further administrative cuts were put on the table beyond the one Nurse Practitioner and one M.S. Assistant Principle.
Once again, the BOE and Rosario are creepily silent about this.
In addition the BOE was questioned about a number of line items where it seemed apparent that they are not spending OUR money wisely.
The take home message? Gail announced to us all at an advisory meeting that we should trust the BOE.
Trust is not a given.Trust is earned and lost. So far you all are losing the trust battle more and more each day.
One glaring omission as pointed out by a few people in the public were that, once again, no further administrative cuts were put on the table beyond the one Nurse Practitioner and one M.S. Assistant Principle.
Once again, the BOE and Rosario are creepily silent about this.
In addition the BOE was questioned about a number of line items where it seemed apparent that they are not spending OUR money wisely.
The take home message? Gail announced to us all at an advisory meeting that we should trust the BOE.
Trust is not a given.Trust is earned and lost. So far you all are losing the trust battle more and more each day.
- Demand an personnel audit of the district administration.
- Demand transparency in spending
- Demand that accurate data is used for decision making (the advisory committee still works off of inaccurate transportation data and an incomplete itemization of real expenditures and savings associated with closing a school)
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
BOE Budget Meeting Tonight @ 7:30 at H.S.
If you can make it tonight to the BOE budget meeting you should. If you want to talk about something you should.
As a background:
School Closing: The BOE will get the advisory committee's report on 3/15. However, Gail and a few others have been at many meetings. Gail said last night, "She was optimistic about the data showing that we can close a school." This comment which comes a week before she has even been given the report is a cause for concern. BOE members need to understand that the 5 meetings yielded data about savings which are fragile and incomplete. We do not have the information to identify the real savings (if any). The 2 million rhetoric must end but it must not be replaced with the 1.7 million dollar claim either since there are many unknowns.
Consolidation of District Administration:
Before Eileen became the Superintendent we had five administrators now we have ten. Rosario says this is all due to unfunded mandates. While it is true that there are a lot of these mandates I am having trouble, as I go through this list understanding how these support the idea that no administrator can go. Most relate to the school being required to have policies in place which either probably existed or were created for the mandate and now the policy exists. Many other mandates, such a needing four contractors for construction, seat belts and fire inspections are costly but not in the form of administrators. I am sure some mandates need an administrator to comply but which ones? How many? Can one administrator tackle multiple mandates? Rosario should present the mandates that he NEEDS administrators for and show us that every administrator is needed. By the way, there are no technology reporting mandates but there are a bunch of health mandates. Perhaps the BOE should consider this.
As a background:
School Closing: The BOE will get the advisory committee's report on 3/15. However, Gail and a few others have been at many meetings. Gail said last night, "She was optimistic about the data showing that we can close a school." This comment which comes a week before she has even been given the report is a cause for concern. BOE members need to understand that the 5 meetings yielded data about savings which are fragile and incomplete. We do not have the information to identify the real savings (if any). The 2 million rhetoric must end but it must not be replaced with the 1.7 million dollar claim either since there are many unknowns.
Consolidation of District Administration:
Before Eileen became the Superintendent we had five administrators now we have ten. Rosario says this is all due to unfunded mandates. While it is true that there are a lot of these mandates I am having trouble, as I go through this list understanding how these support the idea that no administrator can go. Most relate to the school being required to have policies in place which either probably existed or were created for the mandate and now the policy exists. Many other mandates, such a needing four contractors for construction, seat belts and fire inspections are costly but not in the form of administrators. I am sure some mandates need an administrator to comply but which ones? How many? Can one administrator tackle multiple mandates? Rosario should present the mandates that he NEEDS administrators for and show us that every administrator is needed. By the way, there are no technology reporting mandates but there are a bunch of health mandates. Perhaps the BOE should consider this.
What Rosario Said About Closing an Elementary in December!
KYSERIKE - Rondout Valley Superintendent Rosario Agostaro recommended Tuesday that the school board form a subcommittee to examine whether there is a more efficient way to organize the district’s schools.
Agostaro made the suggestion at the board's meeting in response to Trustee James Ayers, who asked Agostaro if he thinks the district’s elementary school program could be delivered in two schools instead of the current three.
The superintendent said he didn’t mean to “skirt around” the question, but the answer is complex. “Multiple models and ideas” are possible, he said.
Following the meeting, Agostaro said he envisioned a subcommittee of the board talking about the configuration of the entire district rather than just elementary schools.
(Was this done??)
School board President Gail Hutchins added the state’s dire financial condition compels the board to consider new ways to save money. She said school officials have had some informal discussions about starting up such a committee.
Agostaro said in addition to cost-saving measures, the committee should also consider other factors like opportunities to improve educational delivery and what the community wants.
Agostaro made the suggestion at the board's meeting in response to Trustee James Ayers, who asked Agostaro if he thinks the district’s elementary school program could be delivered in two schools instead of the current three.
The superintendent said he didn’t mean to “skirt around” the question, but the answer is complex. “Multiple models and ideas” are possible, he said.
Following the meeting, Agostaro said he envisioned a subcommittee of the board talking about the configuration of the entire district rather than just elementary schools.
(Was this done??)
School board President Gail Hutchins added the state’s dire financial condition compels the board to consider new ways to save money. She said school officials have had some informal discussions about starting up such a committee.
Agostaro said in addition to cost-saving measures, the committee should also consider other factors like opportunities to improve educational delivery and what the community wants.
Community: Tell Rosario what you want.
Monday, March 7, 2011
Last Advisory Meeting 3/7
There was a transportation update where the computer generated estimates somehow resulted in 6 extra buses (than we now use) in our 3 school current model. It did other weird things. Gloria admitted that she did not use the computer to do this sort of thing. Discussion ensued as to whether transportation information should be added into savings or not. It looks like it will be taken out with a note from Gloria (explaining what? I am not sure.
There was an estimate or the cost of moving. They added $67,376 as a cost but never answered what happens to all of the items that do not get moved to a school. Apparently it will sit in the empty building and rot along with the building.
There was a presentation of cost savings. If you hear that it is a 1.7 million dollar savings to close a school don't take that at face value. PLEASE KNOW this is based on projections that do not necessarily consider the real staffing needs of school that will have over 100 kids more in each. They also exclude unexpected costs in renovations related the move. We do not know the real savings.
The group discussed class sizes next. Based on the lowest enrollment projection we would see classes of 22-27 including inclusion if they closed a school. Most seemed to agree that this was too high - it would hurt teaching, learning, special needs. This is the strongest argument on the table. Two schools simply can't handle current or projected enrollments without having class sizes well over 25.
Yet when asked, Gail, president of the BOE said, "I am feeling encouraged about the consolidation." Huh? Have you been listening Gail or did you decide this before this group met and you plan to stay encouraged no matter what the advisory group reports?
Tomorrow is a BOE Budget meeting. The BOE will NOT have the advisory report yet. Still feel free to tell them that you will not stand for these excessively large classrooms. Feel free to plug the consolidation of the district administration while you are there as well.. Just over 8 years ago we had 5 people in the district now there are 10? I used to count transportation but I just learned it is not an administration position.
On March 15th at 7:30 the advisory committee's thoughts will be presented to and discussed by the BOE. Definitely come to that if you can.
There was an estimate or the cost of moving. They added $67,376 as a cost but never answered what happens to all of the items that do not get moved to a school. Apparently it will sit in the empty building and rot along with the building.
There was a presentation of cost savings. If you hear that it is a 1.7 million dollar savings to close a school don't take that at face value. PLEASE KNOW this is based on projections that do not necessarily consider the real staffing needs of school that will have over 100 kids more in each. They also exclude unexpected costs in renovations related the move. We do not know the real savings.
The group discussed class sizes next. Based on the lowest enrollment projection we would see classes of 22-27 including inclusion if they closed a school. Most seemed to agree that this was too high - it would hurt teaching, learning, special needs. This is the strongest argument on the table. Two schools simply can't handle current or projected enrollments without having class sizes well over 25.
Yet when asked, Gail, president of the BOE said, "I am feeling encouraged about the consolidation." Huh? Have you been listening Gail or did you decide this before this group met and you plan to stay encouraged no matter what the advisory group reports?
Tomorrow is a BOE Budget meeting. The BOE will NOT have the advisory report yet. Still feel free to tell them that you will not stand for these excessively large classrooms. Feel free to plug the consolidation of the district administration while you are there as well.. Just over 8 years ago we had 5 people in the district now there are 10? I used to count transportation but I just learned it is not an administration position.
On March 15th at 7:30 the advisory committee's thoughts will be presented to and discussed by the BOE. Definitely come to that if you can.
Gag Order for Today's Meeting?
Rumor has it there will be no public comment allowed tonight. This decision seems to not have come from a democratic consensus of the committee but rather as an authoritarian order. Why would it be decided to shut out the many community people, principles, teachers and parents who have also given their time to this process?
Are we going to keep letting this process be manipulated leaving us feeling powerless to accept whatever fate the BOE decides?
If you are unhappy with this let Breanna know: breannacostello@hotmail.com
If you are unhappy with this let Breanna know: breannacostello@hotmail.com
Sunday, March 6, 2011
Do They Have Reason to Close?
Would they be closing to save us during this budget crisis?
NO, since it appears that with moving costs the money saved by a school closure is ONLY just over $100,000.
Would they be closing because of declining enrollment in the elementary schools?
NO, since for the past four years, and based on current enrollment trends for next year's kindergarten, it looks like we are staying even if not slightly increasing enrollment in the elementary schools.
WHAT'S LEFT?
Why would they subject so many people (children & teacher's primarily) to emotional anguish in order to close a school leaving it to sit and rot when it saves little money and would result in making the two existing school over 60% larger, more crowded, less safe, making it harder for teachers to do their great work, and cutting down what is currently our district's greatest asset?
WHO KNOWS.
MAYBE THIS HAS SOMETHING TO DO WITH WHY ROSARIO REFUSES TO SUBJECT HIS TOP HEAVY ADMINISTRATION TO AN AUDIT.
Scary.
A Look at Class Size
Rosario provided an analysis of class size. There were three problems I noted. My focus is on Kerhonsen since if any school closes, it seems unlikely to be KES so the easiest picture is there.
Below I first present his numbers (Table 1). Then I present Table 2 which adjusts Rosario's by estimating 6 kids in kindergarten special ed (based on other years). Then I present Table 3 which simply moves each kid in the 2011 projection to the next grade in 2012 and estimates no growth in the kindergarten.
If we use Rosario's estimates, and we add 7 special education kids to KES and 8 to the RES/MES model (simply using the average from the other grades) then that suggests that we could have 791 kids in our elementary school next year. In 2008 we had 776, in 2009 we had 772, in 2010 we have 782. A prediction for 791 for 2011 means for the past 4 years WE DO NOT HAVE DECLINING ENROLLMENT IN THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS. We may be seeing quite the opposite in the next few years if this stupid idea does not mean that we lose too many kids to High Meadow. If you do not like the class sizes projected here imagine, it could get worse.
Table 1: What Rosario Presented:
total classes need = 20
Table 2: Adding 6 Kids to Special Education in Kindergarten and Taking one Class Out for 19 Non-Special Needs Classrooms.
Table 3: Projections for 2012 Moving All Students Up with No Increase in K Enrollment
- For a special education estimate for kindergarten he wrote "to be determined". Why not use the rate of the other grades and put in a guess so that we can have a clearer idea?
- For the number of available classrooms, Rosario listed 20. On his list provided last week, he reported that there were 21 classes. However, it was pointed out that he was counting a behavioral management classroom and an OT/PT room in the list. This would mean that if we do not cut services to special needs the classroom count is really 19.
- The projection provided is again, shortsighted. What happens in 2012?
Below I first present his numbers (Table 1). Then I present Table 2 which adjusts Rosario's by estimating 6 kids in kindergarten special ed (based on other years). Then I present Table 3 which simply moves each kid in the 2011 projection to the next grade in 2012 and estimates no growth in the kindergarten.
If we use Rosario's estimates, and we add 7 special education kids to KES and 8 to the RES/MES model (simply using the average from the other grades) then that suggests that we could have 791 kids in our elementary school next year. In 2008 we had 776, in 2009 we had 772, in 2010 we have 782. A prediction for 791 for 2011 means for the past 4 years WE DO NOT HAVE DECLINING ENROLLMENT IN THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS. We may be seeing quite the opposite in the next few years if this stupid idea does not mean that we lose too many kids to High Meadow. If you do not like the class sizes projected here imagine, it could get worse.
Table 1: What Rosario Presented:
| Kindergarten - 4th Grade Elementary School(s) - two schools | ||||
| School #1 (KES) | ||||
| Grade Level | Number of Classes | Student Enrollment | Class Size Average | |
| General Education | Special Education | |||
| Kindergarten | 4 | 74 | tbd | 18.5 |
| 1st Grade | 3 | 63 | 6 | 23.0 |
| 2nd Grade | 4 | 71 | 8 | 19.8 |
| 3rd Grade | 5 | 93 | 5 | 19.6 |
| 4th Grade | 4 | 72 | 6 | 19.5 |
| Special Education | 2 | |||
| Total =398 |
Table 2: Adding 6 Kids to Special Education in Kindergarten and Taking one Class Out for 19 Non-Special Needs Classrooms.
| Kindergarten - 4th Grade Elementary School(s) - two schools | ||||
| School #1 (KES) | ||||
| Grade Level | Number of Classes | Student Enrollment | Class Size Average | |
| General Education | Special Education | |||
| Kindergarten | 4 | 74 | 6 | 20.0 |
| 1st Grade | 3 | 63 | 6 | 23.0 |
| 2nd Grade | 4 | 71 | 8 | 19.8 |
| 3rd Grade | 5 | 93 | 5 | 19.6 |
| 4th Grade | 3 | 72 | 6 | 26.0 |
| Special Education | 2 | |||
| Total = 403 | ||||
Table 3: Projections for 2012 Moving All Students Up with No Increase in K Enrollment
| Kindergarten - 4th Grade Elementary School(s) - two schools | ||||
| School #1 - South (KES) - 2012 | ||||
| Grade Level | Number of Classes | Student Enrollment | Class Size Average | |
| General Education | Special Education | |||
| Kindergarten | 4 | 74 | 7 | 20.3 |
| 1st Grade | 4 | 74 | 7 | 20.3 |
| 2nd Grade | 3 | 63 | 6 | 23.0 |
| 3rd Grade | 4 | 71 | 8 | 19.8 |
| 4th Grade | 4 | 93 | 5 | 24.5 |
| Special Education | 2 | |||
| Total school enrollment = 408 - if no growth | ||||
| Keep in mind these are average class size. Will inclusion be a bit smaller making the non-inclusion even larger? are these number o.k.? Every piece of research I read says student perform better academically in the short and long term with smaller class size. How will these sizes impact our KES kids? Also keep in mind that this means over 100 more kids in KES (if we have no more growth). What are the implications of that? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Saturday, March 5, 2011
The Final Advisory Meeting Approaches
Monday is the last advisory meeting - 5:30 at the high school auditorium. Please come if you can. I was thinking perhaps we should all bring our children. This is just a thought but this decision impacts them and while I know the advisory board is empathetic to how this will impact our kids, I would expect we will see administration and a few BOE members (other than Brianna) there as well. They should have to look at our kids faces before making their decision.
E-mail me privately if you would consider bringing your child so that I can communicate with those of you who think you might do this.
E-mail me privately if you would consider bringing your child so that I can communicate with those of you who think you might do this.
Friday, March 4, 2011
From the Alliance for Quality Education
All around the state, we've been working day in and day out to make sure our kids get the college and career options they deserve, not more budget cuts. Thousands of faxes and emails have been sent to Governor Cuomo and events and public actions have been held all over the state to let the Governor know that he needs to protect school children, not millionaires!
Here are three ways for you to get involved:
On February 19th, Campaign for Fiscal Equity plaintiff, New York City Councilman Robert Jackson lead a march of 250 parents and students to the Governor's Mansion in Albany to rally against the $1.5 billion proposed education budget cut. The marchers delivered thousands of handwritten letters demanding the Governor to to restore education funding!
There are just EIGHT days left to submit your video entry to tell the Governor that budget cuts hurt. Win an iPad or $1,000 for your classroom or youth group by following these three easy steps:
- Make a short video addressed to Governor Cuomo that tells him why your school can't afford any more cuts
- Upload the video to YouTube
- Send a link to the YouTube Video to AQEvideocontest@aqeny.org
Education Lobby Day 2011 is just one week from tomorrow. Free buses from all over New York will travel to Albany on March 9th to stand up for our children. Click HERE to reserve your seat to be part of hundreds in attendance saying “Yes” to College and Careers and “No” to devastating cuts to education!
Thank you so much,
Harrison
A New Look at Wednesday's Presentation?
From my take on the flaws pointed out at Wednesday's meeting. It seems that this is what we have to work with (put on your reading glasses the type is small in places)
Thursday, March 3, 2011
CRREO and School of Education cosponsors “Financing Education through Income Taxes” forum
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE March 2, 2011
Contact: Suzanne Grady
845-257-3245
CRREO and School of Education cosponsors
NEW PALTZ- The Center for Research, Regional Education and Outreach (CRREO), in collaboration with the SUNY New Paltz School of Education and the New Paltz Central School District Board Legislative Action Committee, is sponsoring a forum on “Financing Education through Income Taxes?” with Assemblyman Kevin Cahill 101st A.D. (Kingston), on Thursday, March 24th in the New Paltz Central School District high school auditorium from 7– 9 p.m.
The Equity in Education Act ( A.447) proposes the elimination of real property taxes for the purposes of funding education. “By doing away with the school real property tax and changing to a more progressive statewide income tax, we will be able to fund our schools equitably, fairly and more affordably for all New Yorkers,” said Assemblyman Cahill.
Gerald Benjamin notes, “There are pros and cons to shifting the tax burden of funding education from the local real property tax to a statewide income tax. This forum will include the perspectives of experts who have studied the issue of school funding and have come to varying conclusions about the efficacy of the Equity in Education Act’s model.”
The panel includes: Frank Mauro - Executive Director, Fiscal Policy Institute; Martin Reid - Deputy Director of Government Relations, NYS School Boards Association; and Gerald Benjamin - CRREO Director and Associate Vice President for Regional Engagement at SUNY New Paltz.
The New Paltz high school is located at 130 South Putt Corners Road. Babysitting will be provided on site in Room 174 by the Duzine-Lenape PTA. For more information, please email tobinflk@newpaltz.edu or call (845) 257-2901.
CRREO was established in 2007 to further engage the university and its people with communities, governments, not-for-profits and businesses across our region. CRREO conducts and publicizes research on regional topics; creates and directs select institutes focusing on specific topics of regional interest; connects and partners with local governments, not-for-profits and businesses to initiate reforms and advocate for best practices; contracts to assess the performance of public and not-for-profit agencies and programs; and works to foster intergovernmental collaboration and community engagement.
The School of Education at SUNY New Paltz offers Bachelor's and Master's degree programs that lead to teacher certification, a Certificate of Advanced Study in education administration and a collaborative doctorate in school leadership and policy development with SUNY Albany. The School of Education is the home of several major grants and has established clinical partnerships with many school districts and BOCES in our region. It also maintains a collaborative program in Teaching English as a Second Language with Middle East Technical University in Ankara, Turkey.
The New Paltz Central School District Board Legislative Action Committee is designed to: inform, educate and advise the Board of Education and community concerning legislative issues and matters affecting public education; provide the community with a practical way to get involved in legislative issues relating to the school district; advocate for the school district on the federal, state, and local levels; review and monitor legislation to determine its impact on the school district; build positive relationships with legislators for the school district; make known the school district’s needs to our elected officials; enlist community support for legislative issues that affect our schools; and inform and make recommendations to the Board of Education accordingly.
Contact: Suzanne Grady
845-257-3245
CRREO and School of Education cosponsors
“Financing Education through Income Taxes” forum
The Equity in Education Act ( A.447) proposes the elimination of real property taxes for the purposes of funding education. “By doing away with the school real property tax and changing to a more progressive statewide income tax, we will be able to fund our schools equitably, fairly and more affordably for all New Yorkers,” said Assemblyman Cahill.
Gerald Benjamin notes, “There are pros and cons to shifting the tax burden of funding education from the local real property tax to a statewide income tax. This forum will include the perspectives of experts who have studied the issue of school funding and have come to varying conclusions about the efficacy of the Equity in Education Act’s model.”
The panel includes: Frank Mauro - Executive Director, Fiscal Policy Institute; Martin Reid - Deputy Director of Government Relations, NYS School Boards Association; and Gerald Benjamin - CRREO Director and Associate Vice President for Regional Engagement at SUNY New Paltz.
The New Paltz high school is located at 130 South Putt Corners Road. Babysitting will be provided on site in Room 174 by the Duzine-Lenape PTA. For more information, please email tobinflk@newpaltz.edu or call (845) 257-2901.
CRREO was established in 2007 to further engage the university and its people with communities, governments, not-for-profits and businesses across our region. CRREO conducts and publicizes research on regional topics; creates and directs select institutes focusing on specific topics of regional interest; connects and partners with local governments, not-for-profits and businesses to initiate reforms and advocate for best practices; contracts to assess the performance of public and not-for-profit agencies and programs; and works to foster intergovernmental collaboration and community engagement.
The School of Education at SUNY New Paltz offers Bachelor's and Master's degree programs that lead to teacher certification, a Certificate of Advanced Study in education administration and a collaborative doctorate in school leadership and policy development with SUNY Albany. The School of Education is the home of several major grants and has established clinical partnerships with many school districts and BOCES in our region. It also maintains a collaborative program in Teaching English as a Second Language with Middle East Technical University in Ankara, Turkey.
The New Paltz Central School District Board Legislative Action Committee is designed to: inform, educate and advise the Board of Education and community concerning legislative issues and matters affecting public education; provide the community with a practical way to get involved in legislative issues relating to the school district; advocate for the school district on the federal, state, and local levels; review and monitor legislation to determine its impact on the school district; build positive relationships with legislators for the school district; make known the school district’s needs to our elected officials; enlist community support for legislative issues that affect our schools; and inform and make recommendations to the Board of Education accordingly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)