A look ahead at Board of Ed issues for the new year
The next Board of Ed meeting is “Budget Preview” on Tuesday, January 10, 2012, when the board will discuss “How are we responding to the BoE fiscal question?”
December 30, 2011
by Christine Yeres
• The CEFF committee has chosen three action items. What next?
• How many applicants so far for the two principal positions?
• Does the $3.1 million rollover budget figure include last year’s $4+ million of reserves?
• When will the input from the budget Knowledge Cafe be released?
• In a Jan. 31 meeting, board members will discuss the book Getting to Yes. Good reading for the community?
• In a Jan. 31 meeting, the board of ed will consider a third “Strategic Question” on student wellness, both physical and spiritual
In its December 15 meeting, the Chappaqua Education for the Future committee settled on three areas for improvement for the school district. According to Superintendent Lyn McKay, they are:
(1) moving forward 21st century skills in our schools,
(2) supporting the social and emotional needs of our students, and
(3) exploring ways to ensure students learn in an environment in which they are motivated to take risks.
“Three parents and a teacher are summarizing our work to date,” wrote McKay in an email, “which we will put on the website. We will ask for community input.”
This week, the district’s public information officer, David Hayes, gathered information from several administrators in response to a series of questions from NCNOW:
NCNOW: What will happen next with the CEFF committee and its action items?
Hayes: A small group of four committee members will be working with Eric Byrne in January to pull together information from the three working groups of the CEFF. The work will be shared in January through the CCSD electronic newsletter and will highlight the three areas of focus that we will move forward.
NCNOW: How many applicants for the two principal spots have you received so far?
Hayes: Applications for our principal positions as of 9am on Wednesday, December 21st:
HGHS – 70
RBS - 95
NCNOW: In the board’s scheduled January 10 “Budget Preview,” its agenda question for that evening is “How are we responding to BOE fiscal question?” Will administrators present an ball-park budget or just discuss process? Although it looks as though the tax cap allows $1.9 million additional dollars in the 2012-2013 budget, I’m still confused about the $3.1 rollover budget figure John supplied to NCNOW, and about how the administration arrived at the $1.8 million figure for cuts, since a provisional dollar amount for reserves use hasn’t yet been supplied.
For example, does the $3.1 million figure for rollover assume/include the $4+ million we drew on from reserves last year? If it does not, does that mean that the rollover figure is more like $7.1 million?
Hayes: The January 10 meeting will be to discuss the process and to take a look at where things currently stand since there are still many ‘unknowns’ such as Teachers Retirement System (TRS), Transportation Costs, Special Education Placements, State Aid, Assessed Tax Value, Tax Certiorari Settlements and the Tax Cap Number. The Board meeting on February 28th will be the “Superintendent’s Budget Proposal and Budget Discussion (School Programs and Staffing)” and at that time we should have a better sense as to what the 2012-13 budget will look like.
NCNOW: At the Knowledge Cafe on budget, participants were asked to consider:
1) What specific cuts they would make to arrive at $1.8 million in cuts,
2) What other sources of revenue could they think of, and
3) What is a long-term financial issue that the school district must begin to address now? And, how?
When will the information gathered from participants at the Knowledge Cafe on budget be released?
Hayes: The information gathered at the budget process Knowledge Café was turned over to the Finance Advisory Committee. They are currently in the process of analyzing the information for recurring themes. Since there was a large amount of information collected, the committee expects to have this process completed sometime in January. Once the process is complete, the themes as well as the raw data will be posted on the CCSD web site, etc.
NCNOW: On the board of ed’s January 31 meeting agenda is an item called “Book Study.” The book’s title is Getting to Yes, Negotiating Agreement without Giving In [first published in 1981]. Is this a book board members will read over the holiday and discuss at the January 31 meeting? Do you recommend that community members read the book also?
Hayes: Getting to Yes is an excellent resource for people in all walks of life to learn how to better communicate, collaborate, and negotiate. It is a highly regarded text that our administrative team and Board of Education will be reading and discussing in January. Any community member who is interested in the fine art of communication might find the book to be an interesting read.
NCNOW: That same January 31 meeting lists “Board Discussion: Third Strategic Question.” Is this third question related to (or even the same as) the second CEFF action item, having to do with “social and emotional health” of students? If so, when and how did this issue come to the fore of administrators’ attention?
Hayes: This is just an opportunity for the Board to, should they even chose to do so, initiate a brief discussion regarding whether or not to pursue the possibility of beginning to draft a 3rd strategic question. Various groups have suggested over the past years that creating a third question might be relevant. A third strategic question would not address just social/emotional learning, but the broader realm of wellness and ensuring that students strike a healthy balance in their lives and nourish their bodies and spirits as well as their minds.
To catch up on school board matters, visit NCNOW’s “Schools” page.
Can this be? Am I reading this correctly? I cant even finish this article because I am so angry. The introduction to the interview / Q and A with “McKay’s publicist, David Hayes” has my blood boiling. Does our newly appointed Superintendant really have a “publicist”? Many comments have been posted on this blog and discussed elsewhere that are critical of our outsized and bloated administration. Budget cuts have caused reduction in our children’s curriculum, after school activities, capital improvements etc yet we have multiple Superintendants and assistant Supt, 4 high school principals and assistants and much more. Please tell me our superintendant doesn’t have a publicist!!!! I hope our CCSD Board of Education is paying attention. This is incredible and unacceptable!
Editor’s Note: Correction—We’ve changed “publicist” to Hayes’ actual civil service title as the district’s “public information officer.”
Seriously? Really? Our tax dollars are being spent to employ a “Public information officer” ? My children have had their athletic and performing arts programs cut back, curriculums are under pressure, teachers have been let go but we have multiple superintendents and assistance, multiple principals , and generally a large administrative staff. Now I learn we have a full time public information officer???. I certainly expect this and other staff positions to be under review before one more dollar is taken away from our kids.
Editor’s Note: The public information officer position is a half-time position. See
“School District hires half-time public information officer,” NCNOW.org, 11/18/11
The following statement is the original one published referred to by Editor’s above link.
“Over the summer, the board of education approved the hiring of David Hayes, a publicist, to work half time for the district. Superintendent Lyn McKay describes Hayes’ main focus as helping her “to push out relevant information through our monthly electronic newsletter, our website, and eventually a CCSD Facebook page.” Hayes will also ‘support individual schools,’ that is, McKay explained, he will follow and write up special events and projects that take place in the schools.”
“The publicist spot was a civil service position, so the district posted the job both internally and in the civil service listings. According to Superintendent of Business John Chow, who worked with Hayes for the Hastings-on-Hudson school district, no internal candidates applied for the job. Hayes’ annual salary of $28,750 carries no benefits. After one year he will qualify for tenure.”
N.B. He is a “publicist.” He is responsible for the information on the website? There is never any information on the CCSD website, THE PAGES ARE BLANK. We get all our info. from NCNOW. He is serving at the behest of Supt. McKay. HE WILL HAVE TENURE AFTER ONE YEAR!! Does that include a pension?!
Why does she need a publicist? Why doesn’t she carry out these duties herself? Like Will Rogers, only the difference is—our Supt. never saw a hire she didn’t like.
Question: Exactly what info. has he supplied to the district?
To Greeley Mom,
You children have had their athletic and performing arts programs cut back because of RAISES in compensation to the union groups, primarily the teachers. Yes, teachers have had to be let go to pay the 15% + annual increases to the benefits programs, which have increased nearly by over 200% in the last 10 years…Don’t blame the public information officer’s stipend for this. The quicker you accept the truth, the quicker this community can find solutions. Stay focused and be honest with yourself…
YES - it is true that the culprit behind our budget cuts is the continuing and escalating raises and entitlements to teachers. Our children’s curriculums are under pressure, performing arts and athletic programs have been cut back, field trips eliminated, and capital improvements and upgrades postponed all in order to pay raises, steps, and unsustainable entitlements to teachers. Whenever someone points out this REALITY they are accused of “teacher bashing” or anti education. This could not be farther from the truth with me. I have 3 children in CCSD and I recognize the importance of talented and dedicated teachers. However I also recognize the REALITY that current teacher union contracts and mandates are unsustainable and taxes can not continue to escalate at current pace. Salaries must be frozen and teachers must begin to contribute more fairly to THEIR OWN healthcare and pensions. This would save teachers’ jobs and free up funds for our children’s programs. Make no mistake; we must also address the bloated administration in our district. Our Superintendant has multiple assistant superintendants and we have 4 high school principals. Do we really need a part time “public information officer” when we have all these administrators already on the payroll? AND this part time position qualifies for tenure after one year!!! Everyone knows that tenure equates to a job for life- shouldn’t we be saving money and not expanding the administration. Lastly, since when does a part time CCSD employee qualifies for tenure? With all due respect this job (public information officer) is all about updated the CCSD website and electronic newsletter. My son and many of our students are tech savvy enough to accomplish this. Perhaps McKay should consider getting some Greeley students involved and let them update these websites and save the taxpayer the money.
I BLAME THE CCSD SCHOOL BOARD FOR ALLOWING THIS WASTE OF MONEY!!!!!
It is amazing to me that our Board of Education can and would allow such a waste of money. Do we really need to hire a part time person ($29,000 salary) to update the district website and newsletters? On top of that this person will be eligible for tenure after only one year which will ensure he has a job in our district forever. We can assume he will get healthcare and pension benefits also at taxpayer expense. Wouldn’t it make more sense to delegate this responsibility to one of the many administrators we are already paying? How about Selesnick - he will be making over $200k next year, why not let him update the newsletter. Or better yet, why not “employ” a few of our high school students to update the website or launch a CCSD Facebook page. We can pay them minimum wage and give them some real world experience that may help them in future years.
This hire is an unconscionable waste of money given the strain on our budget and escalating taxes.
@ To Greeley Mom:
You don’t add insult to injury. Just because we have the union mandates problem, doesn’t mean we should have these superfluous hires, like a publicist for the Superintendent.
Hmmm, interesting! Why do I think “To Greeley Mom” is connected to the publicist since she/he prefers to call him, “the Public Information Officer”?
Who else would defend this highly questionable hire? Maybe a Superintendent ally?!
To the Superintendent, stop spending our money on your minions and spend it on our kids!
I don’t care that this is a part time position. It’s money we do not need to spend and a job that can be done by others already employed by CCSD. How insane that we are paying someone to upload articles,updates, and district news and developments to various websites and media. Even more insane is that this public information officer gets tenure after only one year. So we the taxpayer will pay raises,steps, and benefits for years to come. Let’s remind the school board of this when we are asked to pass budgets while we also cut back on classes, programs, and layoff additional teachers.
Why does Supt. McKay need a publicist? What is she, a rock star?
Cronyism is alive and well in Chappaqua!
Lyn McKay promotes her loyal minions assuring their future personal loyalty to her not to the district.
In addition, she hires John Chow’s friend to be her publicist. why do we need a publicist?
Why is the school board allowing administrators to create jobs for their friends, especially in these stringent economic times?
I wonder if they would be so profligate with their own funds. Meanwhile, as Greeley Mom says, our kids suffer.
Where is the school board?
Perhaps the question is….where was this line item in the budget?
If it was not in the 2011-2012 budget, what summer board meeting was it approved in? I cannot find it in the minutes of any meetings, only the announcement as referenced in the above NCNOW link. (Funny, I read NCNOW all the time, and I did not see the original 11/18 posting….it had zero comments to the original article, so I guess I was not the only one to have missed it.)
But, if it was in the budget, perhaps the budget needs to be more fully disclosed so there are no more “surprises”.
I have found it is difficult to drill-down the budget as currently presented to understand what is REALLY in the numbers. There needs to be further explanation to each line item. It should be easy to do, since it had to be “known” to build-up into the budget.
What I always thought would be helpful if dollars were aligned with the number of children impacted, thereby creating a per-student cost.
An easy example is Bus Transportation, which I believe is created by combining the numbers and dollars for:
- transporting in-district children to in-district schools
- transporting in-district children to non-district schools
- transporting non-district children to in-district schools.
This per-unit format could also be used for salaries (regular vs special ed), technology, guidance counselors, etc. Kind of an easier way to go after dollars IMO.
The bottom line should always be what is the impact to our children. I follow that mantra as a mom, and would hope that the adults in charge of our children would follow the same.
The Athletic Director has an assistant AD each sports season.They are are salaried employees of CCSD. Who are these people.(I have heard 1 of them is a district custodian)What are their duties? How much are they paid? That whole department needs to be scrutinized. Does John Chow and Lyn Mckay know about this?
