2009/10 Budget Discussion

[john]

Chris,

O.K. sounds fair. I just have a difficult time wrapping my arms around this. Everyone has their own special wants and desires and I feel,it will cause more havoc.

Just wondering,If when you were on the BOE,Chris,was this how it should have been done...It seems like it could be a huge undertaking and battle session,that would raise everyone's blood pressure,necessary or not,I am not sure. But I could also be open minded.

Thanks for your response.

[jdelisa]

sorry for a delayed comment on this thread but after 12 weeks of BAC meetings, BoE meetings (didn't go tonight) and yes, I still go to Wantagh Sports Booster Club meetings, I'm a little budget'ed-out.

to put the intramurals confusion in context, because it did confuse alot of us lately, JCuiffo's March 4th presentation to the BAC clearly listed inclusions and exclusions of programs in next year's budget. since that presentation, there were no announced follow-ups or updates to his or many of the other budget presentations for the balance of the many BAC meetings. my PE budget score card, on April 22th, read "ALL 08/09 SPORTS CUTS RETURNED EXCEPT SPORTS TRAINER AND INTRAMURALS."

the next night, slide 10 of Lydia's powerpoint presentation at the BoE meeting (available on the District website) , included a line that said "Reinstatement of intramurals." my April 23rd scorecard now had intramurals as needing to be reviewed by the officials since it was (thought to be) probably a typo.

to end this annoying sports metaphor, it wasn't until the above described annual visit of Board members and Administrative staff to the pre-vote Booster Club that the final call that intramurals had been returned to the budget by the Board was clearly stated. smart money would seem to have intramurals back next year.

but even after all this, after four years of BAC meetings and countless BoE and other budget discussions, I'm still confused:

• the only budget line that changed at all during the entire BAC budget process was for "Interscholastic Coaches" which started at $424K on the Feb 2 draft budget, went down to $424K in the March 4 & 31 version and then up to $426K on the final April 7th version we got and still remains on the District's website. every other bucket in the PE budget group "2855" didn't change a penny.
  
  
• as part of JCuiffo's March 4th presentation to the BAC, he indicated that intramurals would add $27,000 to the budget.
  
  
• if intramurals are back, where in the budget is the money for it? or if the program is back in part, what part? if not in the PE budget budget group, where is or should it be included?
  

not that intramurals or cultural arts or any other student-oriented enrichment program should be excluded from our school budget, but in this year's coming back from austerity budget, it should have been especially clear that making everything step of this year's process inclusive, coming off back-to-back double bond then double budget votes into a local economy of double digit increases in the cost of everything (including unemployment), was probably as important as coming up with a finished budget.

additionally, it's not that the Board owes those of us masochist enough to participate in school groups any special favors or access to information, but if a group like the BAC, that become the closest "civilians" to the nuts of bolts of the annual $67 million budget monster, imagine how hard it is to clearly explain to non-masochistic what's inside it.

while dustups like this make for good conversation in Mulcahy's, let's not let it get in the way of accurately explaining what this recovery school budget is all about and then having everyone interested showing up to vote. once.

:DI hope everyone has a great Mothers' Day.

[lilly]

jdelisa, you rock. You advocate for sports as admirably as "the other" kids like everyone should. Will respond more/better the next rainy day (tomorrow?).

(And what the heck were you doing up at such un-Godly hours?)

d

[ourkids]

This post will hopefully clear up some of the confusion about intramurals. I contacted Mr. Christie directly and he e-mailed me the following very detailed information regarding the intramural programs in our district. Intramurals were added into the budget roughly in the beginning of April. Why were they added back in? At a cabinet meeting prior to April, the elementary principals suggested using club money that was already budgeted for them and apply it to the intramural program instead. The principals reasoning for this is that intramurals benefits more students. Following this meeting, Mr. Christie said he moved money from the already budgeted clubs to the athletic code for intramurals. The clubs alone were not enough money to cover the cost of intramurals which is $27,140. But, due to the 16 retirements in the district, Mr. Chrisitie stated there has been flexibility in paying for things in the budget while still reducing costs to a final tax levy number of 4.35%.

Everyone may not agree with the above explaination, but the information is available if asked from responsible people in our district. We can agree to disagree if intramurals should have been put back into the budget, because that is every person's right. But as we move closer to voting for a budget, I feel it is important to state the facts or to find the facts so everyone will be informed correctly about the budget. Have a great day.

[lilly]

May 7, 2009 11:53:19 GMT -5 john said:

I will look in the notes and get back to you...Believe it or not I too have many people who want to pick my brain as well.It at times can become overwhelming,as I am sure you know.

I am in the habit of always trying to be respectful and nice,sorry some have issue with this.Personally,I just have issue that the constant confusion this Blog has on people.

If you're unsure of something you're posting here, I wouldn't post it unless you can back it up. I'm not seeing the "confusion" this blog is supposedly creating.

Who here has issues with being nice?

May 7, 2009 11:53:19 GMT -5 john said:

It also sounds like people actually post issues and pander back as someone else,so they can get their position heard.Do you think that MIGHT be happening.Many who lurk seem to think so.There are many in this community who try to do the best for it and OUR kids,not just you,me and some of our other regulars.....I have respect for those who at the least give it their true effort,I am sure you do too.

I don't think that's the exact definition of pandering.

Who besides yourself is posting on this board as someone else? The people I can remember posting last week were myself (and you know who I am, anyone who wants to know if you haven't guessed already can PM me), chriswendt, Michael S, ourkids, taxpayer and jdelisa. taxpayer seemed pretty consistent in his her/concerns and was searching the district website for info but still had questions. I suspect that ourkids is involved with the booster club, if not head of it since he/she reminds people of meetings and has a consistency in posts - sharing info. You were "sally" last year and this year, "john". So who else besides you is changing identities?

And while I respect your right to internet safety since I share that concern, , hence the screen-name of lilly, I wouldn't reveal your name. I think you should at least please be straigthforward about how you get your info. We sit in the same meetings and travel in the same circles but you know seem to know so much more than anyone else so I can only surmise that you are here on behalf of the BOE since you are related to a BOE trustee.

[lilly]

May 9, 2009 6:50:01 GMT -5 ourkids said:

This post will hopefully clear up some of the confusion about intramurals. I contacted Mr. Christie directly and he e-mailed me the following very detailed information regarding the intramural programs in our district. Intramurals were added into the budget roughly in the beginning of April. Why were they added back in? At a cabinet meeting prior to April, the elementary principals suggested using club money that was already budgeted for them and apply it to the intramural program instead. The principals reasoning for this is that intramurals benefits more students. Following this meeting, Mr. Christie said he moved money from the already budgeted clubs to the athletic code for intramurals. The clubs alone were not enough money to cover the cost of intramurals which is $27,140. But, due to the 16 retirements in the district, Mr. Chrisitie stated there has been flexibility in paying for things in the budget while still reducing costs to a final tax levy number of 4.35%.

Everyone may not agree with the above explaination, but the information is available if asked from responsible people in our district. We can agree to disagree if intramurals should have been put back into the budget, because that is every person's right. But as we move closer to voting for a budget, I feel it is important to state the facts or to find the facts so everyone will be informed correctly about the budget. Have a great day.

Thanks for trying to clear it up ourkids. So, does anyone know where elementary & 6th intramurals are in the budget line items? Like was it in a sports code last year and now it's in clubs?

This is my issue with the budget that I was vocal about at the budget hearing. We're not just "reinstating" sports, it's at an all-time high, higher than what was proposed in the failed 08/09. So restore or reinstate isn't exactly an accurate description when it is more. If they're talking restore/reinstate vs. 07/08 well there were other things, like arts seniors that weren't reinstated so that description doesn't do the situation service anyway.

This is the thing. We really need to have a passed budget for the good of the district and the town. However, I don't think that what the BOE put on the table is a great budget. They started out "trying" but that's not what is in the final budget. At the end of the day, they've prioritized sports for elementary and middle schoolers over senior arts kids. In general, they've prioritized sports over academics by no late buses for after school extra help. However they got there, it sends the wrong message about priorities.

The result of this BOE is dysfunctional decisions which might not sit well with the community, which jeopardizes ALL kids.

[tommy]

Lilly.
I do not know who you are exactly but it sounds to me that you are extremely angry. It sounds like you just don't want kids in Wantagh to have sports. Do you know how many kids play sports in wantagh?Are you talking about cultural Arts? when that was cut we are talking less then 10 kids right? Will you feel better if it were an eye for an eye? Most often in life the majority rules.These are the biggest groups of children ever, in Wantagh I don't believe sports is at an all time high what sports were added? Sorry but intramurals for elementary kids Big deal!!! Why so angry ?
What I am trying to say is there are bigger problems in the world then this. Yes, let us fix the mistakes that were made year after year with the budget, but lets not have temper tantrums when all doesn't go our way. As far as the late buses They have been empty for years No body takes them not to mention why we wouldn't let our young one on that bus.Wantagh is a small town <Friends can drive our children home if need be. Chris Wendt did have a good point about catholic schools though. These all seem to be small irrevelant promblems, Wantagh seems to be heading in the right direction c :)hanges are being made and hopefully the budget will pass and in time the economy will pick up .Lets not dwell on the Little things.Just felt like I had to get that off my chest...

[Wantagh Parent]

Please refer to updated message board guidelines as of this morning:

wantaghsd.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=62

We are in the process of investigating several usernames and unfortunately have had to take action on a few.

REMINDER TO ALL: Please abide by the message board guidelines at all times. Newcomers are always welcome. However, we encourage you to read the guidelines before participating. We are very serious about trolling and personal attacks.

[lilly]

For the record, I am definitely NOT anti-sports.

Sports becomes an issue for me when increased spending is at the expense of other programs and that action subjects the sports program to the chopping block.

The purpose and construct of arts and sports offerings are different. Please see pages 4-7 in this link www.wantagh.li/bac/minutes/bac_minutes_2009_04_01.pdf that shows costs for sports, vocational and arts programs are comparable despite their different constructs. (The costs in this analysis were as of 4/1. Since then occupational ed decreased, sports increased by ~$10k and arts remains cut. And of course, in *any district* there are less arts kids than sports kids.)

Here is historical and proposed spending from May budget vote documents for these programs:

Interscholastic Sports
2005/06 $765.2k
2006/07 $836.3k
2007/08 $854.1k

2008/09 $773.0k (proposed)
2008/09 $307.4k (contingency)
2008/09 $771.9k (after SOS and other donations)

2009/10 $866.5k

Diff. 2009/10 vs. 2007/08 +$12.4k
Diff. 2009/10 vs. 2008/09 (proposed) +$93.5k
Diff. 2009/10 vs. 2008/09 (contingency) +$559.1k
Diff. 2009/10 vs. 2008/09 (after SOS and other donations) +$94.6k

BOCES CA/LIHSA
2005/06 $57.8k
2006/07 $24.3k
2007/08 $25.8k

2008/09 $0k (proposed)
2008/09 $0k (contingency)
2008/09 $0k (after SOS and other donations)

2009/10 $0k

Diff. 2009/10 vs. 2007/08 -$25.8k
Diff. 2009/10 vs. 2008/09 (proposed) $0k
Diff. 2009/10 vs. 2008/09 (contingency) $0k
Diff. 2009/10 vs. 2008/09 (after SOS and other donations) $0k

Source: Wantagh School District documents (anyone can view them at the library or district office)

It is therefore misleading for the BOE & district to sell in this budget as “reinstating & restoring” without accurately qualifying that statement.

And yes, although there were steps taken to make 09/10 sports spending more efficient, it is accurate to say the $867k in sports is an all time Wantagh high. That plus another $630k (pro-rated portion of the bond repayment for gym/field/bleachers) while we have other needs, is [findtherightwordhere]. (It appears to me that the BOE is relying on quid pro quo and pandering to shoe-in a yes vote but that is JMO.)

I would expect any parent group to represent the interest they are advocating for to effectively do so to the best of their ability. That is understandable and expected. If they didn’t, well, I wouldn’t have much respect for those parents and the disservice to those kids.

However, when statements are made at the expense of other kids or the parents that advocate for them, that is unacceptable. The fact that we have a BOE in place that seems to perpetuate these situations is a topic for another thread.

Again, if you want to “go there”, the "easy pickings" is elementary & 6th intramurals were added when we are lucky enough to have strong organizations such as PAL, Little League, CYO and travel leagues for those grades? That in and of itself could have funded arts without touching the middle school situation.

And while we’re at it, the BOE/district made the decision to prohibit Wantagh kids from attending the 2009 Summer Arts Academy in Syosset leaving parents scrambling to make other arrangements and find comparable programs (few, if any). This program is funded by our tax dollars, at zero cost to the district and “no skin off their [BOE/district’s] noses” in “allowing” kids to attend. In fact, this brand new edict seems not only arbitrary but like punitive retribution to me. Go Wantagh pride… There are more than a few po’d parents from this extending beyond the affected families.

Bring on the tomatoes…

It's time to stop playing "The Emperor's New Clothes" in Wantagh and call it like it is.