We’ve previously written about the entire debacle that the Greenburgh School Board has created under the guise of consolidation. Consolidation, as bandied about by public officials and others these days usually is done under the mask of savings. It could be saving money, saving resources, personnel or time. Rarely do most people question the benefits that could be had should a consolidation take place. As taxpayers, who wouldn't want to save money? An example is the Villages within the Town of Greenburgh created a purchasing consortium that the Town refused to participate in, saving on many common items, one being asphalt (blacktop). By consolidating their purchasing, they gave up nothing and gained a lot in the way of savings for each Village.
Now the Greenburgh School Board has decided to use the consolidation mantle to push a spending extravaganza plan for the Greenburgh School District – at a cost far beyond the reach of many in the Greenburgh Central School District‘s finances. The cavalier attitude presented by those pushing this, including School Superintendent Chase has the hallmarks of ignoring the plight of many of our residents! The project was kept secret by those in favor of it and only started gaining publicity once the referendum date had been publicized. Thankfully, many involved throughout our Town and astute residents became aware of this. We wrote about it and attended most of the “information sessions” that were said to provide answers.They did not.
Dr Chase equated the cost of this proposal to a specialty cup of coffee per day. Perhaps in her world she can do that, but she’s obviously out of touch with many working parents, residents, and taxpayers either with kids in the school system or not. Additionally, seniors on a fixed income are scared to death of this bond proposal and fear for their homes! One resident we'll call Rose, said she is 94 years old and is barely able to stay in her home where she has lived all of her married and widowed life. She stated to us that if this bond passes, the best that she can hope for is to die before it’s implemented. Does that sound like someone having a specialty cup of coffee each day?
Under state law, it is illegal for school officials to use public money to hire political consultants to pass bond measures. A board of education may use public resources to present objective, factual information to the voters concerning a vote or election (Education Law §1716; Phillips v. Maurer, et al., 67 NY2d 672; Appeal of Caswell, 48 Ed Dept Rep 472, Decision No. 15,920; Appeal of Wallace, 46 id. 347, Decision No. 15,529). However, while a board of education may disseminate information “reasonably necessary” to educate and inform voters, its use of district resources to distribute materials designed to “exhort the electorate to cast their ballots in support of a particular position advocated by the board” violates the constitutional prohibition against using public funds to promote a partisan position (Phillips v. Maurer, et al., 67 NY2d 672; Stern, et al. v. Kramarsky, et al., 84 Misc 2d 447; Appeal of Caswell, 48 Ed Dept Rep 472, Decision No. 15,920; Appeal of Wallace, 46 id. 347, Decision No. 15,529). Dr Chase is now making the rounds to various churches and other groups to sell her legacy plan.
Additionally, it is improper for a board of education, as a corporate body, to be involved in partisan activity in the conduct of a school district election (Appeal of Wallace, 46 Ed Dept Rep 347, Decision No. 15,529; Appeal of Hager and Scheuerman, 43 id. 363, Decision No. 15,019). Even indirect support, such as a school board giving a PTA access to its established channels of communication to parents to espouse a partisan position that the board itself was prohibited from doing directly, has been deemed improper (Stern, et al. v. Kramarsky, et al., 84 Misc 2d 447; Appeal of Wallace, 46 Ed Dept Rep 347, Decision No. 15,529; Appeal of Hager and Scheuerman, 43 id. 363, Decision No. 15,019).
An issue or conflict we see here is that the Greenburgh School Board had gone directly to their student's parents with this proposal to garner support from them. Only after scheduling a referendum vote and not advertising their $166 million dollar proposal to the public was the plan exposed. But once it was learned of, the plan received quick resistance as too costly and would be blocked by Greenburgh’s already beleaguered taxpayers. The School Board quickly reacted by lowering the cost to $114.6 million dollars, jettisoning the work slated for Woodlands High School. They've once again kicked the maintenance can down the road. Those that don’t study history are destined to repeat it.
Repeating history is exactly what we continue to see happening. Utilizing the explanation that the repairs needed to the Greenburgh schools was a conscious decision that was purposely made by the Board, the audience was astounded. They were told in the (non-information) information sessions that it was the taxpayer’s fault that maintenance was not performed because the taxpayers had not approved previous bonds. Wow.
Next, the audiences were admonished because they let the schools get this way and now we must look forward and not live in the past. By the way, the brochures that were handed out contained little information regarding real and detailed costs for all of this construction. But they did have nce watercolor renditions of what the buildings would look like. When resident taxpayers posed questions about future maintenance and those costs and plans, they were told these would be new buildings and not require much maintenance! So much so that maintenance is not even in the upcoming budgets for those buildings.Remarkably, the audience then received an ad hoc lecture on integrity from Dr Chase.
Another interesting facet is that the architectural firm the School Board has hired is the same firm featured in a Journal News article about the Mt Kisco Fire Department's building renovations screw-up that they estimated the project buildings to cost. A bond was floated and passed to renovate the firehouse. Now it’s been learned that their figures were incorrect and way off what was put out to bid. Don’t take our word for, read about it at: https://www.lohud.com/story/
GCSD has hired the following firms to handle bond planning:
Repeating history is exactly what we continue to see happening. Utilizing the explanation that the repairs needed to the Greenburgh schools was a conscious decision that was purposely made by the Board, the audience was astounded. They were told in the (non-information) information sessions that it was the taxpayer’s fault that maintenance was not performed because the taxpayers had not approved previous bonds. Wow.
Next, the audiences were admonished because they let the schools get this way and now we must look forward and not live in the past. By the way, the brochures that were handed out contained little information regarding real and detailed costs for all of this construction. But they did have nce watercolor renditions of what the buildings would look like. When resident taxpayers posed questions about future maintenance and those costs and plans, they were told these would be new buildings and not require much maintenance! So much so that maintenance is not even in the upcoming budgets for those buildings.Remarkably, the audience then received an ad hoc lecture on integrity from Dr Chase.
Another interesting facet is that the architectural firm the School Board has hired is the same firm featured in a Journal News article about the Mt Kisco Fire Department's building renovations screw-up that they estimated the project buildings to cost. A bond was floated and passed to renovate the firehouse. Now it’s been learned that their figures were incorrect and way off what was put out to bid. Don’t take our word for, read about it at: https://www.lohud.com/story/
GCSD has hired the following firms to handle bond planning:
CS Arch (architectural firm): They are represented by Darryl Mastracci and Tina Mesiti. Their website provides strategies for passing school bonds.
Focus Media, out of Goshen, is a public relations firm. They helped Mt. Vernon pass their school bond.
Savin Construction Management P.C.was also used by Mt. Vernon. Their name has been mentioned at meetings, but it is not clear how their role differs from/complements that of CS Arch.
* In case the bond passes, there is reason and precedent for establishing a Bond Oversight Committee.
http://www.smcoe.org/assets/files/about-smcoe/superintendents-office/citizens-bond-oversight/BestPractices_5.09.pdf
We recommend voting NO in the referendum and let the school board work with the community instead of around it to come up with changes for our school district. Furnish facts and figures, provide real information and let the public - the only real stakeholders in all of this - have a seat at the table. It’s the only way to get A Better Greenburgh School District.
We recommend voting NO in the referendum and let the school board work with the community instead of around it to come up with changes for our school district. Furnish facts and figures, provide real information and let the public - the only real stakeholders in all of this - have a seat at the table. It’s the only way to get A Better Greenburgh School District.
Someone needs to file a complaint with the Westchester County DA (doubt they will do anything) and the FBI public integrity unit in White Plains. this money MUST be returned to the district
ReplyDeleteAnd while the school board is bragging about its great bond rating, but Moody's specifically says that the bond rating is based on low debt. Has the board factored into its projections that the bond rating will likely tank, and the cost of borrowing increase?
ReplyDelete