UPDATE: Who knew vote counts were so complicated?
Monday, May 24, 2010
by Susie Pender
Who knew that some voters came to the polls last Tuesday and only voted for the library budget, and not the school budget? Or only voted for the school board candidates and not the school budget? Well, Theresa Markey, the district clerk for the Chappaqua Central School District, knew. Because it happens every year, she explained.
“Voters are not the same as number of votes,” Markey was kind enough to explain to NewCastleNOW.org. Calculating the number of voters “is not as simple as adding yes and no votes because we don’t know what people do inside the voting booth. We do know that several people came out and asked to do it again because they forgot to vote for the budget, or for the library, or for candidates, etc., so we know the vote totals are not accurate counts of voters. Of course, they can’t vote again.”
So the number of voters who voted on Tuesday, May 2010, was 1874, according to Markley’s tally, not the 1797 NewCastleNOW.org reported in last Friday’s edition using the total of votes cast yea and nay for the school budget. “We use machine totals and laptops to verify totals, plus the affidavit ballots, which, once verified, represent bodies as well,” Markley explained.
Of those 1874 voters, 1807 voted for the $109,391,348 school budget. That represents a 57.6% approval rate, down from last year’s approval rate of 81.4%.
The total number of voters last year was 1063, Markley reported, although only 1038 voted on the school budget. But congratulations are still in order. The increase in voter participation from last year to this year was 76%.
Friday’s article about the increase in voter participation ended with a question and an invitation: “What do you think contributed to the increase in voter participation this year? Please use our comment function to share your thoughts on this.”
There has been some interesting commentary in response, which still remains below so that readers can keep up the conversation.
I went out and voted because I got an email from Frank Francese telling me about Jeff, Randy, and Eleanor and then another email from him reminding me that voting was Tuesday. I know he and his wife Beth are very involved in the community particularly the schools. That’s why I voted this year when I normally don’t.
Several factors made voting an imperative including (1) spirited conversations with other citizens about the school superintendent search (2) a slowly dawning realization that there is not enough transparency on the part of the school board (for example, it is nearly impossible to find the school board by-laws on the web site) a sign that change is needed (3) the fact that the economy and long-term demographic trends require real strategic - 5 to 10 year - thinking from the school board and (4) MOST IMPORTANTLY - the excellent reporting by New Castle Now. What a great reminder that a free press is essential to our democratic way of life.
I’m getting the distinct impression in speaking with people since Tuesday that blocks of sports-interested parents were encouraged by sports groups to vote for the two male school board candidates as the “field friendly” candidates. Emails with this purpose were flying in the days before the vote. Hey, I love sports, but I’m not comfortable with having the composition of the school board decided by whether the candidates are supportive of sports. Does anyone else have this feeling?
Yes, great coverage of the candidates - thank you. Also, love the picture of Keith!
The historical yes/no profile of the school budget votes confirms the obvious - If you have children (or plan to have children in the future) attending school in Chappaqua you are likely to vote to approve the budget despite concerns that it is excessive. If you are an empty-nester, of simply without children, you tend to vote against these excessive budgets that fly against logic in the face of economic reality.
The “haves” outweigh the “have-nots” so the budgets are approved. This is not a case of being pleased with the budget, it’s a matter of fear. The “haves” have not the ability to say no to anything that could possibly effect their children and the value of the investment they have made when moving to Chappaqua. Chappaqua is a living and breathing long term ponzi arragenemnt that relies on an influx of new “haves” to bail out the poor decisions of the exiting population.
I think having a polling place at the train station would greatly increase voter turnout. It would be interesting to see what this would do to election results, too. I doubt you would see every budget get passed.
It’s great that turnout was higher than usual—but only 1700 people deciding the fate of nearly 110 million dollars is sort of absurd. Over $2MM per week is necessary to run our schools? (and that’s considering a school year as being 52 weeks long, which it isn’t—it’s at least 13 weeks shorter.)
I just wonder if this pattern is sustainable. House values have decreased, but taxes continue to rise, not fall.
Union and school board take heed! The tide is rising rapidly against excessive school budgets and a poorer quality of education. Students attending Greeley are now doing homework in classes instead of being taught. That is a study hall not a class. Parents pay attention and find out what is going on in the schools. Incomplete courses because of inadequate class time resulting from block scheduling, put in place despite resistance from parents and students, mean that students are ill prepared for continuity in the sequence. Our kids are telling us that it is not working and impacting their education. It is time to listen. This vote is just the beginning. One wonders if the board reads the newspapers or attends to other media reporting what is happening across the country. There is a drop in the approval rate for the budget and the board to 58.1% from 81.4% last year. Aren’t these numbers a historical first in Chappaqua?
The increase this year is 5.9% not 1.9%, almost 12% in just two years. You are using our money from the reserve fund to make up the difference and conceal the true increases. Transparency, transparency, transparency, where art thou! Such deceit is insulting to our intelligence.
Thank you NewCastleNOW for keeping us so well informed and creating a forum for this community. We are very fortunate to have this most professional newspaper. You do a splendid job.
One substantial reason for higher voter turnout was the realization that the majority of town residents do not have children in the schools.
Until that fact was publicized by New Castle Citizens for Responsible Education and this publication, many residents believed—as many still do—that bothering to vote was futile. That any budget, no matter how bloated and unsustainable, was destined to pass.
Also, this year saw school budget increases voted down in township after township. Chappaqua is one of the few that clung to the illusion that there was no end to other people’s money. Or to their own.
When will the board require that the schedule change be systematically assessed? There are problems with the schedule that no one is paying attention to. Now that David Fleishman is leaving, let’s get serious about it: What have been the benefits, what the liabilities of the schedule as it is now? Administrators pressured teachers from the beginning to put up AND shut up. Who’s watching? Do parents care?
This is an interesting set of comments.
In reference to “05/21/2010 at 8:56 am”, I found it curious that the two members elected to the school board were male, and I wondered to myself if there was some sub rosa sex discrimination at work. I hadn’t heard anything from anyone about sports being an issue - and frankly, that might have swung my vote(s) to the two women because the schools are about academics, not about sports. Sure, sports are a nice ancillary thing, but our school system is supposed to be teaching our kids to read and think and analyze, not to kick a soccer ball.
Also, I love the idea of the polling place being moved to the train station. The station isn’t used for much of anything now that there’s no ticket seller - why not use it for school/library voting? It’s much more conveniently located than the high school gym.
I’m very sorry the two women—who offered sophisticated skill sets that would have been extremely useful in these difficult times—lost because the two guy-candidates like fields (did either female candidate declare she was AGAINST fields?). So the sports contingent decided the election? And now we have five business-oriented people on the board who will know nothing about the inside operations of the administration of the schools—at a time when their top CEO (David Fleishman) is decamping.
Mester has done little in his years on the board but chide people about their lack of attendance at meetings. Why does he think people aren’t coming to meetings? Because the board has not proved responsive to those who do come. Not only not-responsive, but downright rude to speakers, men and women both. Who will be president next year?
We do not need a school czar in Chappaqua! I agree with “I voted for the women too.” Mester is downright rude to those who dare to question his divine wisdom. Time for some fresh air and democracy and a change of attitude. If the board really wanted participation, they would be more open to questions rather than so defensive. Innovative ideas, knowledge of education and financial issues raised by speakers should be appreciated not immediately rejected. An arbitrary two-minute restriction placed on speakers by Mr. Mester, at one meeting, when there were only 5 or 6 people wishing to speak says it all. It was interesting to observe how that time restriction was immediately waived by Mr. Mester for the one speaker who flattered the board.
I write in response to the common misconception that athletics are ancillary to academics. How ironic that academics started in the gymnasium with Aristotle and Plato!
Stanford, Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Cornell, Duke, Michigan, Indiana, UCLA, Notre Dame and the US service academies - What do these top academic institutions have in common? Based on surveys that rank top academic and athletic colleges and my personal knowledge they have great athletic programs.
My definition of a great athletic program is one in which the school provides a full panoply of sports for men and women where the achievement of excellence against other institutions is sometimes gained. I also favor those schools that have rigorous intramural programs.
People who say sports are just an ancillary part of education miss the educational value and benefits derived from sports participation. Sports are not just about learning to kick a ball, which is something I did with great proficiency on my way to Yale, Columbia Law School and a brief stint with the San Francisco 49ers.
Sports teach critical thinking under pressure and how to handle pressure, as well as adversity. Another benefit of sports is the practical application of math and science. While the academics and/or athletics debate is on, let us not overlook the arts and art. Although one could argue the arts and art are unnecessary to academic pursuits, I wouldn’t want to make that argument.
So let’s drop idea the schools are only about academics. There is no separation of great academic, athletic and art programs; together they form the whole of great education.
