Letters To the Editor
ee
After reading the New Paltz Times of January 14, 2010 regarding the
crumbling roof of the New Paltz middle school, I am reassured that we
need to vote no on the $50-million bond on February 9. It displeases
me that we wait for it to be an emergency fix to make repairs or
maintenance.
It has been stated by the school board at least five years ago that
there were maintenance issues at the middle school that had not been
addressed. This is something that obviously should have been taken
care of before now. The longer a repair is ignored the greater the fix
and the more costly.
In fact, there is a list of maintenance fixes to be done in all of our
school buildings. This is what we should be looking at and taking care
of all the buildings at this time. We need our board to focus on the
real problems, where and how taxpayers' money needs to be spent for
our children's education.
I strongly urge the community to get out and vote no on February 9.
Margaret LaMark
Gardiner
We should fix the roof
A portion of the roof collapsed. An ice dam let some water soak a
ceiling, which fell. Some would think this portends justification to
undertake an extravagant $76-million debt and rebuild: Absolutely not!
The school board knew about this on February 11, 2009 (and presumably
before) when they presented their publication containing "Facility
Evaluation, Summary of Renovation Needs [and] Existing Building System
Needs."
The failure of the school board to take immediate action to remedy
this condition is unjustifiable and may well have placed our own
children in physical danger. Imagine if your child had been injured
and you found out that the school board knew about this condition and
did nothing.
You wouldn't continue to drive a car with faulty brakes just because
you were thinking about buying a new one.
Now, those same voices would have us believe that their failure to
make a repair is proof positive that we need to undertake a Taj-like
renovation. No, we just should have fixed the roof.
Robert Gabrielli
New Paltz
Where the wild things are
As the February 9 vote on it gets closer, the frenzy surrounding the
middle-school bond issue seems to be becoming even more frenetic.
Although the Kingston Daily Freeman reported in a news story that
"school officials" were "losing support" for the expensive project, I
think the reporter underestimated the number of people who are for it.
People like Rachel Lagodka, who usually could be counted on to help
stop a project like this, are some its biggest supporters. Aren't the
project's cost impacts on seniors, retired on fixed incomes (I'll be
65 in April and retired on a fixed income), more important than if the
project threatened wildlife? The cost of the project will be added
onto our ever-increasing annual school tax.
I've noticed that even on Facebook the pro-project crowd has put up
middle-school renovation support sites where people can join in
support the bond. I was surprised to see they have gotten a large
number of SUNY New Paltz students to sign up as supporters. I would
have thought that since most of the students don't pay school taxes
here and don't have children in the school district they wouldn't care
about this issue. Although the students have the right to vote
February 9, I think they should avoid an issue they know little about
and affects them even less.
The Internet is not the only front that the renovation project is
being fought on. I've noticed that "our" public access TV channel (23)
has also become another front to win the hearts, the minds, and most
importantly the votes of Newpalzians. Knowing a little about the
people who control our Time Warner public-access TV channel, I wasn't
surprised to see that the middle-school public hearings got very
little or no airings. You would think that on an issue as important as
this to New Paltz, the recordings (paid for by New Paltz taxpayers in
the school budget) would be run every day until the February 9 vote.
I hope school-board member Don Kerr (a leading project proponent), who
coincidentally is the chairperson of the Public Access TV Committee,
is not letting his support for the project influence public access TV
programming fairness and evenhandedness. I have a sneaking suspicion
that if there wasn't massive community opposition displayed at the
public hearings, we would be seeing round-the-clock reruns of them on
channel 23. This is the kind of thing I was afraid would happen when
the politicians control "public" access TV.
Speaking about who runs the public access TV channel, I've heard Bob
Fagan, the program coordinator, talk about using SUNY students as
interns to run our channel. I think it's a great idea, but I think the
same opportunity should be given to New Paltz residents. In other
communities local resident volunteers actually run their public-access
TV stations, but I guess they're not as progressive as New Paltz.
Bill Mulcahy
New Paltz
A nickel-and-dime repair
When I heard that a piece of the middle-school ceiling fell down, my
first thought was for the safety of the children. Then I got really
ticked off.
This did not happen suddenly. The leak was there for quite a long time
before the ceiling became so heavy with water saturation and
deterioration so that it lost its integrity. This problem could have
been cheaply and easily avoided by annual gutter cleaning and visual
inspection of the roof, including evaluation of the ice dam guards. It
seems that they bent and thus, stopped functioning.
This is a nickel-and-dime repair. This school board let this happen.
It was blatant neglect. My question is, was this just plain poor
maintenance that wouldn't make safety a top priorty? Or perhaps it was
intentional benign neglect trying to prove a point to the community
about the poor building structure requiring an almost $80-million
major remodeling in order to fix a roof leak. Sort of like an argument
looking for an excuse to happen.
My unhappy supposition is that this is an unacceptable protocol
designed to manipulate the community by fear. Hmm, Hitler used fear
and lies to control the public. Bush and Company used fear and lies to
get us into an illegal war in Iraq which never attacked us, and to
force the Patriot Act on us to destroy our civil liberties.
Lies and fearmongering: very old tactics for mass social manipulation.
And now do we have the New Paltz school district using fear and lies
to force an unaffordable, unnecessary, poorly designed and bloated
renovation on us?
I cannot support this school board's choices: the elephant is in the
room, and its droppings stink. It is okay to vote no on February 9.
Tanya Marquette
Gardiner
Foxy lady
After reading Lagusta Yearwood's letter last week, I'm willing to give
her my $54 a year if she can guarantee that's all the middle-school
renovation is going to cost me.
By the way, why don't we all do that so that we can put this to rest?
In fact, I'll write a check for $216 for the first four years of
additional school taxes now. That would simplify things for all of us,
and allow more time for her to peruse the "typo-ridden hate-mongering
websites warning of the socialist dangers of paying taxes" (those
pesky typos!).
I'm also sure that Fox News can, at last, stop all its coverage given
to the New Paltz middle-school renovation and tips on how to avoid
paying taxes. It is comforting to know that Fox News will ultimately
be responsible for either the pass or fail of this vote, so I won't
have to avoid looking into the eyes of my neighbors for clarification
of the decision.
This issue is not about education, it is about accountability and
common sense. The thought that an amphitheater was even on the school
board's goodie list is beyond me.
How our school taxes are used is the problem. The maintenance of the
middle school obviously didn't get the attention it deserved, as shown
most recently with the roof leak. I'm sure this fact alone will give
credence to the need of a renovation. We're not disputing that fact.
It is about using our taxpayer money in a careful and responsible way.
As stated in [Yearwood's] letter, the fact is that she doesn't "even
like children all that much" but is willing to pay the $54 per year.
Well, that's so nice of her. Unlike her, I do like children, [and]
even have some of my own. So I'm not against providing for them.
I have paid plenty of school taxes through these 33 years, and have
even found the funds necessary for providing private high-school
educations for my children followed by college tuitions, all the while
paying into the (as she put it) the "common fund to be used for the
common good" that she thinks "tired old right-wingers" object to. That
additional expense of private education was our choice, one that we
took on gladly, and one that my children benefited from greatly.
[The] statement that "we need do nothing more than ignore them,"
meaning people with opposing views, is testament to the clear thinking
she so obviously enjoyed "while closely following the debate." Well, I
guarantee that this debate will continue for awhile. If the vote
fails, the school board will put it up for another vote; that is what
they do, keep putting it up until it passes. If it passes on the first
go-round, well, I'm home free; I've paid my $54 a year. I'll alert Fox
News.
Paula McGee
New Paltz
----------------
A professional hunch
The New Paltz school board held four informational meetings designed
to promote its efforts to influence taxpayers to cough up $50 million
for a school renovation. They called every instance of prior
renovations, "band-aids." But what would they have their successors
call their renovation?
I have heard that some parents are concerned that there is mold
present in the middle school. I asked the board at a public meeting if
concerns about mold were noted in their comprehensive building study.
"No." Do they have knowledge of any mold? "No."
I asked whether there were any instances that affected or could
possibly affect the health or safety of our children, in any way.
Again, they answered in the negative.
So where is the evidence? The smoking gun of pressing need is not to
be found.
The school board paid a very low sum of $5000 to an architectural firm
for a study. There was no plan stating what type of windows, what
manufacturer, etc. how many feet of wire, or any such specifics
presented. In return for such a low-cost study, this firm will be the
architect for the future project, with fees estimated in excess of two
million dollars. How could the architectural firm estimate without
benefit of the subcontractor's bids or estimates? The specifics just
were not provided. The $50-million figure is, at best, a professional
hunch.
Like with the county jail, we could, and probably will, have overruns,
especially since we don't know the parameters of the scope of the
work. This plan calls for 25% in "incidentals." That's a mere $12.5
million for unexpected costs. Would you build your own house like
this?
The school board has failed to explain the need for the renovation and
the plan to fix it. We have only been told that we just cannot provide
a twenty-first-century education for our children without the
expenditure of $50 million.
One of the problems is that the gym lockers are on a different floor
than the gym. I climbed those stairs to the gym. Just imagine asking
our twenty-first-century children to walk up a flight of stairs to go
exercise? Would we rather do that than try to provide for newly
unemployed, underemployed or fixed-income neighbors?
What a twenty-first-century education the taxpayers are going to get
if this referendum passes!
Robert Gabrielli
New Paltz
Buildings and people
The Highland school district is making a plan with input from the
community. MidHudson News.com reports that "Superintendent Haab said
the district has adopted a budget in the past under state contingency
caps, but with state aid unknown and limited federal assistance, it
will have to make ﾳhard choicesﾲ about programs and the direction of
the district."
In the New Paltz school district our school board is planning a 50-
million-dollar renovation of the middle school. I guess buildings are
more important to some folks than children, teachers, programs. Very
sad!
Additionally Midhudson.com just reported, "Ulster County can expect to
lay out $22 million to local school districts for unpaid school taxes
in the 2009-2010 academic year. The money
will make the districts whole and cover the amount that goes unpaid by
district residents. The county shelled out $20.8 million in unpaid
school taxes for the 2008-2009 school year."
County comptroller Elliot Auerbach, in his second "By the Numbers"
report, said unpaid school taxes are expected to climb by over 50
percent since 2006-2007. "In better financial times this was less of a
burden on the county," he said. "As a matter of fact the county was
rewarded a seven percent penalty for its efforts once the obligation
was met. But, these unconventional times
and a multi-million-dollar strain will wreak havoc on the already
reduced fund balance or force the county to borrow in anticipation of
the future revenues. It is a state requirement for the county to make
up the difference."
Nora Strano
New Paltz
Show me the math!
Much has been said about the financial impact of the proposed middle-
school renovation project. The claims of the school board are that
starting in 2012 the impact per month on a median-valued home will be
around five dollars per month. After four years, the total impact will
be no more than $20 per month for the same home.
I find that number to be strangely low. The school board says that
after state aid the cost of the project is $29 million. That number is
wrong. It does not factor in interest on the money that is borrowed.
The actual amount that the district will be borrowing is $77 million.
Of that amount, if nearly $30 million is covered by state aid, that
still leaves the taxpayers with a total bill of roughly $48 million.
That is the true amount, at a minimum, that we as taxpayers will be
liable for. If state aid goes down on this project, then the liability
to the taxpayer will only go up. This is very possible in these
financial times. Do we really want to put ourselves on the line for an
additional $48 to $77 million dollars at this time?
What really bugs me about this is why not just come out with the
actual numbers? Why is the board playing silly games with the numbers?
In this era of hope and change, we should expect this process to be
open and transparent. Why are they hiding the effect of the interest
on taxes? The banks will surely be collecting the interest. Are they
counting on an interest "fairy" to cover that portion?
If you give me something to doubt you on, then I start to wonder, what
else is it that you are hiding? Is it the fact that it is already
known that major cuts will be needed in the operational budget next
year due to the loss of stimulus funds? Is it that athletics have
already been cut and more cuts are coming? Is it the fact that the New
Paltz YBA will need to find a new place to play its games? Is it that
the other buildings in the district also need almost $5 million in
repairs as well? Will teachers' positions be cut? By being less than
forthright about the actual financial cost, it is a smoking gun that
makes one wonder about all the rest. It makes me wonder whether this
entire project is well conceived or if it is just a political rant by
an ideological school board. If you cannot get the numbers right, what
else is wrong? If you cannot be honest about the numbers, what else
are you being dishonest about?
In the end, it is the very children that we are aiming to help that
will be adversely affected. Parents will have to take second jobs (if
they can find them with over 11% unemployment) just to keep up with
the taxes. More time at work is less time at home thus, less time with
our children. Not exactly the best plan for educating our kids and
growing our community.
We need a comprehensive plan that will unite our school district and
community. This plan does not do it. Voting this proposal down is a
vote for the future of our community and for our children.
Andrew Cymbal
New Paltz