47°
OSSINING, N.Y. – The Ossining Board of Education will host informal dialogue sessions at 10 a.m. Saturday at the Ossining Community Center and at 7:15 p.m. Feb. 15 at the Ossining Public Library’s Café.
While the school board’s consideration of a $42 million bond proposal could be a major topic of discussion, Deputy Superintendent Raymond Sanchez said the dialogue will be an open format and parents, students and residents are invited to share any concerns they might have.
“There’s no formal agenda, it’s just the idea of let’s come in and let’s chat,” Sanchez said. “It’s a real focus of the board to look at our communications with our community and that’s what these dialogue sessions are about.”
While residents are allowed to attend both meetings, Sanchez said the idea was to set aside two separate times for people to speak to the board of education about topics concerning the Ossining Union Free School District.
“I’m sure (the proposed bond) will come up but the meeting is not specific to any set topic,” Sanchez said. “It can be a dialogue on student achievement or any issues parents or people in the community want to share.”
A proposal for a $41.6 million bond to repair and renovate facilities within the Ossining School District was presented at a board of education meeting in December. The previous $69 million bond proposal was defeated in April 2011 by roughly 500 votes.
“We’re well aware that the bond is coming up on March 6 and people might have a need for clarity on that too,” Sanchez said. “That’s why we’re asking people to come to the meeting. If they have questions or thoughts, this is the opportunity to share them.”
Comments (6)
Having been to numerous meetings and pored through the information I strongly agree that Mr. Little omits facts at every turn to tailor his argument. I would also greatly argue his logic that none of these expenditures will help the students eventually FIND A GOOD JOB. Here's why:
When I started a new job three years ago in a position that has me spending A LOT of time in schools I was BLOWN away at how drastically eduction had changed since I had graduated, most notably the teaching environment and the fields of study. Considering that Science and Technology are at the forefront of one of the strongest and most burgeoning sectors of the economy (I wonder what Mr. Little thinks of Google or Facebook and the myriad ENGINEERS that work there?) it's kind of foolish to suggest that upgrading science rooms and labs won't put our kids down the right path to compete for those jobs. I also can't tell you how many schools I have seen that have instituted Forensics, which requires modern labs, into their curriculum as well (CSI is not just the name of a show, Bob, it's a tremendously growing industry!).
I am also blown away by the number of schools that I have seen emphasizing the performing arts because with the advent of media distribution through entities like Youtube (Hey, I wonder if Mr. Little know's that Youtube just launched over 100 channels with millions of dollars of funding?) there is even more opportunity to earn a living both in front of and behind the camera.
Did I mention the schools that have upgraded PE facilities so that kids can actually study and get hands on work experience with the school's athletic trainers in another area of the economy that continues to show tremendous growth.
I could go on further, but I think you get the point by now. And that's before I even mention that we are primarily talking about paying for boilers and roofs and to keep the walls from collapsing on our kids for the sum of a 0% TAX INCREASE.
Having been to numerous meetings and pored through the information I strongly agree that Mr. Little omits facts at every turn to tailor his argument. I would also greatly argue his logic that none of these expenditures will help the students eventually FIND A GOOD JOB. Here's why:
When I started a new job three years ago in a position that has me spending A LOT of time in schools I was BLOWN away at how drastically eduction had changed since I had graduated, most notably the teaching environment and the fields of study. Considering that Science and Technology are at the forefront of one of the strongest and most burgeoning sectors of the economy (I wonder what Mr. Little thinks of Google or Facebook and the myriad ENGINEERS that work there?) it's kind of foolish to suggest that upgrading science rooms and labs won't put our kids down the right path to compete for those jobs. I also can't tell you how many schools I have seen that have instituted Forensics, which requires modern labs, into their curriculum as well (CSI is not just the name of a show, Bob, it's a tremendously growing industry!).
I am also blown away by the number of schools that I have seen emphasizing the performing arts because with the advent of media distribution through entities like Youtube (Hey, I wonder if Mr. Little know's that Youtube just launched over 100 channels with millions of dollars of funding?) there is even more opportunity to earn a living both in front of and behind the camera.
Did I mention the schools that have upgraded PE facilities so that kids can actually study and get hands on work experience with the school's athletic trainers in another area of the economy that continues to show tremendous growth.
I could go on further, but I think you get the point by now. And that's before I even mention that we are primarily talking about paying for boilers and roofs and to keep the walls from collapsing on our kids for the sum of a 0% TAX INCREASE.
Robert Little continues to selectively represent partial facts for the purpose of dramatization.
For example, he cites, "AMD Principals Office, Reception and Nurse's Office ($1,125,996)" while neglecting to mention that the price tag more accurately reflects the consolidation and reduction of administrative space to accommodate new classrooms, and a reception area that provides for better security and makes it harder for strangers to easily enter the building.
Robert characterizes, "AMD Music Rooms ($1,431,022)" but conveniently omits the part that the price tag covers work that is tied to the cafeteria expansion, efficiently relocating the current band and music room to the 2nd floor where the space would be reallocated to provide for two music rooms and two additional classrooms.
If you look behind just about any of the points Robert and the makes, you'll likely find additional information that meaningfully changes the context and the way a person would objectively evaluate this very important decision.
He suggests there is subterfuge and critical information hidden that needed to be uncovered, though one will find substantial information made available in a dedicated section of the District's website and at many of the community meetings that have been taking place on this subject since September. Yet what he's done is not to reveal the full scope of information "uncovered," - just selective facts that support a decision he's already made.
Additionally, Robert offers no suggestion as to how this work, prompted largely by a growing student population, the need to maintain buildings according to evolving legislatively-mandated building codes, and the need to eventually replace things like building roofs and heating systems at or past their expected life, would be funded aside from the annual operating budget, meaning these items would be EXEMPT from the 2% tax cap and would almost certainly amount to sharp and immediate short-term tax increases when, not if, they need to be done. It would mean walking away from $22 million in State Aid that isn't guaranteed to be around next year, waiting for critical failures before acting to fix them, and setting the bar for investment in education in this community at the bare minimum to meet standardized testing goals.
Robert also needs to make a decision as to what is more important - to use 100% Made in America products and unionized labor, regardless of cost, or to place a priority on contractors willing to do the work with expected quality and materials at the most aggressive price, with origin and union affiliation preferably as stated but absolutely secondary to that.
I encourage voting residents to listen with open ears to both sides of the debate, to attend the BOE Sessions and ask questions, to visit OssiningCFS.com for additional information, and to vote YES for a bond that provides for responsible use of taxpayer dollars, without having the effect of increasing taxes.
Correction on story: The April 2011 bond proposal was defeated by a vote of ~2500 votes to ~1500 votes which is to say that the bond was defeated by ~1000 votes, not "500 votes".
The citizens representing www.FreeOssiningTaxpayers.com strongly recommends that the people of Ossining vote "NO" on the $41,548,900 bond proposal which will tax you for twenty years (until the summer of 2036) and provide for "soft" cultural arts projects whose importance is highly questionable in view of the recession our Ossining area is experiencing....'cultural fluff' such as:
•OHS auditorium- seats, sound, air ($2,554,000)
•OHS physical education locker rooms ($1,993,348)
•New AMD locker rooms and a classroom ($1,904,000)
•New OHS "Main Office" ($546,040)
•OHS "Basement Stairway to Nowhere" ...to the auditorium basement ($1,015,939)
•Air conditioning for the AMD cafeteria ($375,000)
•AMD Principals Office, Reception and Nurse's Office ($1,125,996)
•AMD Music Rooms ($1,431,022)
•OHS Second Floor hallway ($500,025)
•AMD Cafeteria ($2,391,999)
•AMD Library ($1,836,903)
•OHS Main Office, other offices and Nursing/Wellness room ($1,028,959)
•AMD Servery ($554,001) (the sinks, stoves and back area of the kids' cafeteria kitchen)
.... along with a host of other proposals which will not contribute to a student's ability to get into college and ultimately find a good job. None of these proposed expenditures will raise the SAT scores of any student. We insist that the school board learn to live within its means and fund repairs and infrastructure improvements out of the continuing taxpayer revenue budget, slated to exceed $105,000,000 for the school year 2012-2013.
Bear in mind that our $320,000 per year Superintendant of our Ossining School District Phyllis Glassman has stated repeatedly that the above-referenced updates are "....urgent, urgent, urgent, urgent!" She repeated it once again on January 11th. So have the 20 school administrators of the Ossining school district who earn a collective $4,300,000 in salaries and benefits.
You be the judge.
Please review her entire budget proposal on the www.FreeOssiningTaxpayers.com website that can only be found on that website due to the school board and administration refusing to voluntarily offer this detailed financial data to the voting public.
We obtained the data by utilizing the New York State Freedom of Information Act and through other lawful sources. Not a single page of these materials were transparently offered to the public.
Without the efforts and the expenditure of time and money to 'mine' these materials by our members, no one would realize the entire scope of this proposed bond initiative.
Ask 10 of your friends and neighbors to take a look at this website...we guarantee they will be amazed and dismayed at the wrong-headed direction our school adminstration has chosen to take in this recession against a Ossining resident body 40%+ of whom reside below the poverty level....with the middle class completely willing and eager to see their heavy tax burden actually recede starting in 2016. Not more taxes through to the year 2036.
Members of our FreeOssiningTaxpayers.com committee asked whether the proposed bond could or would include the stipulation to require 100% of the working men and women be 100% unionized labor and that 100% of the materials used be "Made in America".
The school district refused both requests.
"No. It is not possible."
This in spite of the fact that the Federal Government, the State of New York and thousands of corporations make that contract stipulation each year in their construction projects.
There is no case law in New York State to preclude requiring the use of 100% unionized workers and 100% "Made in America" materials. Guide your votes accordingly as Proud Americans.
If you vote "Yes" on this bond initiative of Tuesday March 6th you are consigning yourself and your neighbors, your senior citizens and your young people to the same crushing taxation levels as you are experiencing today.... through the year 2036.
These costs are shocking.
And remember: It Is Your Money.
The school district should learn to live within OUR means... not THEIR ability to raise sky-high expenditure levels secure in the knowledge that an uninformed electorate marching blindly to the school budget drumbeat will perpetually approve their expansive annual budgets and bond proposals year after year "....because it is for the children....".
This is the time of the 'new normal' and the expansiveness of the past will no longer be tolerated...
.....not last April...and certainly not this March 6th.
Vote "NO" on Tuesday March 6th from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Let me correct this poster Mr. Little. The vote for last year's bond was 1533 Yes votes to 2055 No votes for a defeat of 522 votes. I was at the HS gym last year when the official vote was announced. Furthermore your line items are also incorrect as those items are the LOCATION in which the work will be done so I recommend Ossining residents to get the facts at www.ossiningcfs.com
Also Mr. Little publically announced in the Ossining Board of Education meeting on January 11th that he agreed with $33 million of the proposed $41.6 million bond. As he called the remaining $8.6 million fluff. Well the "fluff" as he calls it are core, state-mandated classes.
The Ossining taxpayers all understand that there is a need to maintain and repair aging buildings and to get the most efficiency out of our facilities. This Bond represents extremely critical needs, WILL NOT RAISE TAXES, essentially an interest-free loan as the NY State Aid that is incentive for schools to do capital projects to maintain aging facilites will more offset the interest expense and best of all, Ossiniing Schools will start seeing significant cost savings if this bond is passed. If we do these critical projects from the operating budget, it will increase our taxes....please do the math.
I am voting YES on Tuesday, March 6th because it will keep my taxes from increasing. Please go to www.Ossiningcfs.com for more information.
What ever your personal feelings are about Physical education and the arts are Mr. Little, it does not change the fact that they are state mandated and core curriculum that needs to be funded. Also your notion that we should stipulate Union only, is contrary to your demand of spending less. If a union contract comes in with a bid more then a non union one and the district took it you would be sitting here whining about how the district isn't doing it for the cheapest possible bid.
Since this Bond WILL NOT INCREASE OUR TAXES I will Vote yes. Your arguments are very irresponsible for someone who claims to be thinking of the tax payers. If one of those boilers brakes it will cost Millions to fix that wont be kept under the tax cap which would mean a huge spike in taxes, when we could avoid it now with no tax increase at all. The responsible thing is to Vote Yes for this bond, but Mr. Little would rather gamble and risk huge tax spikes than be responsible.