AUBURN - It took the Auburn Enlarged City School District Board of Education a mere half-hour to decide what to do about its 2008-09 proposed school budget that was defeated by voters Tuesday.
Chet Susslin / The Citizen
At Wednesday's Auburn Enlarged City School District Board of Education meeting, Superintendent J.D. Pabis, second from left, talks to the board about possible resolutions to the budget defeat in Tuesday's election.
At Wednesday's Auburn Enlarged City School District Board of Education meeting, Superintendent J.D. Pabis, second from left, talks to the board about possible resolutions to the budget defeat in Tuesday's election.
In a 7-1 vote, the board opted for a re-vote during a special board meeting Wednesday, asking district taxpayers to authorize the original budget proposal of $66,490,371 with a 3.28 percent tax levy increase.
Board member Joe Leogrande voted against; Bill Andre was not present at the meeting.
“This budget is fiscally responsible and the tax levy is exactly where it needs to be,” board member Michael Stearns said. “This needs to stay right where it is and we have to get out and educate people.”
District Superintendent Joseph D. “J.D.” Pabis has repeatedly called the proposed budget - marked by a 4.91 increase in spending over the previous year - a maintenance budget, devised to keep educational programs and faculty at current levels. The cost of fuel, health insurance as well as contractual increases are attributed to the budget hike.
Following a state mandated timetable, the district will advertise the budget by June 3, hold a public hearing June 10 and convene a vote June 17.
Taxpayers appeared to have defeated the proposed budget Tuesday by a margin of 30 votes - 1,399-1,369 - with 63 absentee and affidavit ballots left outstanding.
After the paper ballots were counted and the voting machines recanvassed Wednesday, district officials announced the budget had been officially defeated by three votes, 1,414-1,411.
Board members and Pabis all agreed that residual confusion on what people were voting for played a roll in the budget's downfall. Based upon conversations with voters and poll workers, district officials realized that people believed the upcoming capital project, which includes various upgrades to all district schools as well as the installation of synthetic turf, was incorporated into 2008-09 operating budget.
The capital project vote is slated for June 26.
“I think as a board we need to take notice of the fact that this was the result when people thought they were voting on the capital project,” board member Fred Cornelius said. “People came out to vote no. They came out to vote no because turf is such a divisive issue and I think we need to take notice of that and start thinking about what we are doing on that issue because it is clouding some other things that are important.
“The budget got voted down and I think it's because we have a pending capital project,” he said.
Stearns asserted the board simply didn't educate the public enough on the budget. In the past, members would educate people at various venues and this wasn't done to the greatest extent this year.
“For the last couple years I think we stepped back a little bit from doing that,” he said, “whether we felt it was not necessary, whether we felt it wasn't important enough, whether we felt it was not doing anything for us. I truly believe that had we spent more time ourselves going to educate people and making sure all the people knew they were not voting on the capital project until June and they were voting on the school budget, we might have had a different outcome.”
Board members were in agreement that a vigorous marketing strategy must be used this time to ensure the budget is passed.
Pabis also acknowledged another factor in the budget's defeat could be that people did not know or could not find the budget proposition on the ballot - there were two propositions on the ballot, one for the budget and the other for board of education elections.
He said that of the 3,091 votes cast Tuesday, 266 did not vote on the budget.
The board sifted through three options Wednesday on how to move forward. They could offer a re-vote, amend the budget, or go to a contingency budget, which would cap spending at 3.36 percent and put at risk $593,000 for equipment purchases, a new custodial position, transportation and field trips, athletics and club activities, summer school and curriculum work.
Should the budget be defeated again, the district will automatically go to the contingency budget, which would carry a tax levy increase of 2.28 percent.
Leogrande, who voiced the only no vote, said the defeat was indicative of the economy. He said he spoke to people who have recently lost their jobs and are barely making ends meet, and they believe that any increase in taxes is too much.
He asked if there was anything in the proposed budget that could be deleted as a gesture to the public that the district is trying to keep costs down.
“If there was any money to be taken out of the budget,” Cornelius responded, “it would have been taken out already.”
Staff writer Alyssa Sunkin can be reached at 253-5311 ext. 239 or alyssa.sunkin@lee.net
Board member Joe Leogrande voted against; Bill Andre was not present at the meeting.
“This budget is fiscally responsible and the tax levy is exactly where it needs to be,” board member Michael Stearns said. “This needs to stay right where it is and we have to get out and educate people.”
District Superintendent Joseph D. “J.D.” Pabis has repeatedly called the proposed budget - marked by a 4.91 increase in spending over the previous year - a maintenance budget, devised to keep educational programs and faculty at current levels. The cost of fuel, health insurance as well as contractual increases are attributed to the budget hike.
Following a state mandated timetable, the district will advertise the budget by June 3, hold a public hearing June 10 and convene a vote June 17.
Taxpayers appeared to have defeated the proposed budget Tuesday by a margin of 30 votes - 1,399-1,369 - with 63 absentee and affidavit ballots left outstanding.
After the paper ballots were counted and the voting machines recanvassed Wednesday, district officials announced the budget had been officially defeated by three votes, 1,414-1,411.
Board members and Pabis all agreed that residual confusion on what people were voting for played a roll in the budget's downfall. Based upon conversations with voters and poll workers, district officials realized that people believed the upcoming capital project, which includes various upgrades to all district schools as well as the installation of synthetic turf, was incorporated into 2008-09 operating budget.
The capital project vote is slated for June 26.
“I think as a board we need to take notice of the fact that this was the result when people thought they were voting on the capital project,” board member Fred Cornelius said. “People came out to vote no. They came out to vote no because turf is such a divisive issue and I think we need to take notice of that and start thinking about what we are doing on that issue because it is clouding some other things that are important.
“The budget got voted down and I think it's because we have a pending capital project,” he said.
Stearns asserted the board simply didn't educate the public enough on the budget. In the past, members would educate people at various venues and this wasn't done to the greatest extent this year.
“For the last couple years I think we stepped back a little bit from doing that,” he said, “whether we felt it was not necessary, whether we felt it wasn't important enough, whether we felt it was not doing anything for us. I truly believe that had we spent more time ourselves going to educate people and making sure all the people knew they were not voting on the capital project until June and they were voting on the school budget, we might have had a different outcome.”
Board members were in agreement that a vigorous marketing strategy must be used this time to ensure the budget is passed.
Pabis also acknowledged another factor in the budget's defeat could be that people did not know or could not find the budget proposition on the ballot - there were two propositions on the ballot, one for the budget and the other for board of education elections.
He said that of the 3,091 votes cast Tuesday, 266 did not vote on the budget.
The board sifted through three options Wednesday on how to move forward. They could offer a re-vote, amend the budget, or go to a contingency budget, which would cap spending at 3.36 percent and put at risk $593,000 for equipment purchases, a new custodial position, transportation and field trips, athletics and club activities, summer school and curriculum work.
Should the budget be defeated again, the district will automatically go to the contingency budget, which would carry a tax levy increase of 2.28 percent.
Leogrande, who voiced the only no vote, said the defeat was indicative of the economy. He said he spoke to people who have recently lost their jobs and are barely making ends meet, and they believe that any increase in taxes is too much.
He asked if there was anything in the proposed budget that could be deleted as a gesture to the public that the district is trying to keep costs down.
“If there was any money to be taken out of the budget,” Cornelius responded, “it would have been taken out already.”
Staff writer Alyssa Sunkin can be reached at 253-5311 ext. 239 or alyssa.sunkin@lee.net
Citizen
Hot Jobs
New! Off the Menu
The Citizens' Say
Post your comment - click hereThere are 18 comment(s)
MISSEY1941 wrote on May 23, 2008 8:20 AM:
Educate yourself. I said WORKED for. You currently have a retired maintenance person and retired teacher on the board.
Also after 25 yeaes in the state retirement system they can retire. "
karl wrote on May 22, 2008 8:44 PM:
Simple. Sweet. "
vic wrote on May 22, 2008 6:28 PM:
2- MISSEY1941 you need to educate yourself. Teachers do not retire after 25 years, unless the didn't start teaching until they were in their 30's and then its only for partial benefits. School employees are not allowed on school boards. When the economy is bad, yes many people don't get the 3% increase, but by the same token when things are good and people are getting solid raises, 3% is still what they get. "
The taxpayer watchblog wrote on May 22, 2008 3:36 PM:
I have been making a substative suggestion for the past 3 months that could help every school district in Cayuga County.
Consolidate School Districts!
For those who have read this before my apologies...
I was born and raised in Auburn, NY and have lived here most of my life. My wife and I moved to Hagerstown, MD (Washington County) about 7 years ago and returned to New York in 2005. While in Maryland, we sold a home for $300,000 for which we paid less than $2000 a year in total taxes. We now live in a home in Owasco we purchased for $172,000 and pay nearly $5000 per year in taxes. One reason for this lop-sided comparison I can point to is our school district make-up.
In Maryland, school districts are comprised of an entire county of schools. One county has one school district with one superintendent, business manager, staff etc. Here in Cayuga County, if my figures are accurate there are 7 school districts; with 7 superintendents, 7 business managers, staffs etc. These positions and support staff alone account for millions of taxpayer dollars each year. Is this spending necessary?
I have analyzed 05-06 figures from the New York State Education Department's website, which provides figures for each school district in the state. I also used figures from the Washington County Maryland School District for the same school year.
In Washington County, there were 20,000 students, 44 schools and their budget was $157.7Million.
In Cayuga County, we had 11,000 students, 24 schools and budgets totaled $126.9Million.
In comparison, we have 58% the number of students as in Washington County and 55% of the schools; yet we are spending 81% of what they are spending and have 7 times the number of school districts they have.
Taxes in our state are far too high to sustain livelihood and I believe our school spending is a large contributor. I believe we should consider consolidating the 7 Cayuga County school districts into 1 district as an initial means of saving taxpayer money.
"
The taxpayer watchblog wrote on May 22, 2008 3:27 PM:
Hey, if I were so inclined, talented and educated I would like the 189 day work schedule too. But don't forget the homework, test correcting and hours of work involved in lesson plans that the really good teachers put in to their work.
I would suggest no fault to the teachers on this one, they work within the system our school board creates. "
MISSEY1941 wrote on May 22, 2008 3:21 PM:
I also didn't mention retirement after 25 years.
I have taught many students in my 50 plus years!
If you want to pay more for education, go ahead, just don't force me to pay!!!!! "
jmw53 wrote on May 22, 2008 2:58 PM:
teacher1 wrote on May 22, 2008 2:53 PM:
2. While teachers many technically work approximately 189 days a year, those days are filled with much more than others encounter who work year-round. Teachers have to attempt to educate students who are completely apathetic, have an extreme sense of entitlement, and are more concerned about the "drama" going on in their lives than with their education. Teachers have to deal with bullying, violence, drugs and alcohol, mental illness, disabilities, and uninvolved, equally apathetic parents. Teaching is the only profession where the amount of required education for the job(a Master's degree) is not in line with the pay. Therefore, if teachers get a few more days off in a year than other people, I think they deserve it. Walk a day or two in the shoes of a teacher before you criticize the amount of time that a teacher works during a calendar year. "
theking wrote on May 22, 2008 2:52 PM:
tlb4 wrote on May 22, 2008 2:13 PM:
I spend much more in gas inceases per month ( 30 cents increase in the last month)than i will with a tax increase with the school budget.
This is a great country with great opportunities, go back to school and become a teacher. "
MISSEY1941 wrote on May 22, 2008 1:50 PM:
The cost of medical insurance increased and this is one of the reasons that the school system said they need more $$$. Just in case the board didn't notice, the cost of health coverage went up for all of us.
Food price increases, gas price increases, county tax increases, water rates, natural gas, electric, flowers lawn seed and everything else has gone up.
The problem with most people in the educational system is that they never got out of school.
Grade school,middle school high school college and back to teaching or administration. They have summers off,winter and spring vacation, plus all the federal holidays off.All paid for by us. They work on an average of 189days per year. They say that they want to be on par with private industry.
They far exceed what private industry pays in this area , unless of course you are a CEO.
Taxes have gone up 63% since 2000 and enrollment has decreased 10%. We have added a whol new layer of administrators since then.
It has to stop!!!
We are not made of $$$$ and the well is dry!!!!
Also, NO,NO<NO<to turf!!!!! "
tlb4 wrote on May 22, 2008 1:37 PM:
tlb4 wrote on May 22, 2008 1:28 PM:
The taxpayer watchblog wrote on May 22, 2008 1:04 PM:
This is a mistake.
The school board has taken very little time to decide to put this budget up for a re-vote. The appearance this gives is the board is either out of touch or does not care about the message being sent to them. No concessions were made, no decreases put forth and here we go again. I believe the re-vote will be voted down by a much larger margin.
The board is underestimating voter apathy to tax increases and hiding behind inflation as a rationale for proceeding the way they have.
The message from voters is simple for anyone that cares to listen: “No more tax increases!”
The unfortunate conclusion to all this is that even when the budget is voted down a second time our taxes will still increase. The contingency budget still calls for a $2.5 million increase in spending while the budget that was just voted down called for a $3.1 million increase.
Now the mantra from the board will be, “You’re hurting the kids.” We are not the ones that put the budget together. The school board is hurting the kids by ignoring this chance to go back to the drawing board and present a budget that reflects taxpayer concerns.
What do you think?
"
vinmeister1 wrote on May 22, 2008 12:53 PM:
This tells me that they themselves feel no merit in this capital project. Why else would you use an excuse like they did? Saying that people thought they were voting for something else is an elementary move. Then to put the same budget up to vote??? So what happens when it gets voted down again? You have wasted a month with excuses. Then people will have to vote again a short time later for the capital project. Seeing they are saying this vote was actually for the capital project then why don't we strike it down now? I am in tears thinking that these people are leading our childrens schools.
"
Unknown... wrote on May 22, 2008 12:34 PM:
Unknown... wrote on May 22, 2008 12:32 PM:
chupchup wrote on May 22, 2008 12:04 PM: