|
Your opinion
counts!
Tell us what is on your
mind. Your opinion will be posted here on all types of
concerns involving our town, Plainedge.
Been to a community meeting? Didn't get
heard? We're listening and your opinion counts. Share
your thoughts with the community right here!
To protect your privacy you may request
that your name be withheld or you may use your first name or
initials only.
The opinions and facts expressed on
this page are those of interested parties. Please research all
facts for your own use.
Note: The content of
plaintalkonline.com, the "Site", including but not limited to the
data, documentation text and images and their arrangement (the
"Content") is for use on this Site only. Any cutting, pasting,
or transferring content from this Site is strictly
prohibited without the express written consent of plaintalkonline.com.
November 06,
2006
To the Plainedge
Community,
I would like to thank those that
supported me during this campaign. While I did not win this
election, I hope that the message that the State Aid Formula for
Education MUST be changed has been heard. I will continue to
work on this issue that I am passionate about by continuing the work
of the Plainedge Tax Relief Association as Co-Chairman and as a
member of the County Executives Committee of School Districts.
Further, I will attempt to use my new contacts with the new Governor
and others to fight for us on this issue.
I may have lost the battle, but I
have not lost the war!
Thanks again.
Craig
Heller
October 23,
2006
An open
letter to Joe Saldino:
Dear Mr. Saladino, I watched the debate you participated in with
Craig Heller this past week. I found it very enlightening. I
am not going to review the specific topics discussed, but I will
comment on character. If you remember back in 2005 the
Plainedge Community was desperately looking for ways to reinstate
programs for our children. We were facing a double digit school
budget increase and we wanted to reduce that but not have it affect
the children. You were invited and attended community meeting where
the letter writing and telephone campaigns were discussed.
These campaigns were started to pressure Albany into
providing additional state aid. I remember YOU standing in front of
us and telling us what a great idea that was and how, if the
community response was big enough, Albany would listen. I remember YOU
telling us that proceeding with the campaigns would help your
bill. I remember YOU saying to write as many letters as
possible, to get petitions signed, to make calls. YOU even
guided us as to whom to send them to.
Mr.
Saladino, a tremendous amount of effort went into these campaigns.
The residents of Plainedge set the stage for other school districts
to do the same. Long Island
residents need to be heard and will be heard.
In
the debate you stated that the efforts of the Plainedge Community
were a “group getting some press clippings”. Shame on you for
putting down the effort to try and further your campaign.
Phil Toscano
October 16,
2006
Dear
Plainedge Community,
My name is
Craig Heller and I am the Democratic candidate for State Assembly in
the 12th Assembly District. I am running in this race because
our number one issue is our property taxes, specifically our school
taxes. As I am sure you are aware, 65% of our tax bill
comes from our school taxes.
Last year,
I was co-Chairman of the Plainedge Tax Relief Association, a local
group organized to lobby Albany to change the state aid formula for
education that shortchanges us on the aid we receive because it
takes real property values too much into account and doesn't take
the regional cost analysis into the formula (that things cost more
here on Long Island) and to request more dollars for our Plainedge
School District. We organized the community to send letters;
sign petitions and call the powers that be in Albany to make
these changes. As most of you are aware, we succeeded in a
small way by receiving more than $955,000 more dollars than
anticipated. However, the overall formula did not change and
the future is just as bleak as before we began this
effort.
My
campaign is about the need to change this formula so that we
can receive our fair share of state aid. According to my
calculations, if the correct formula were used the Plainedge
School District
would receive $9 MILLION more per year in State Aid! This
would have a significant effect on your tax bill. I believe
this can be done by an Assemblyman that would be in the majority in
the State Assembly (Democrats out number Republicans in the State
Assembly by 2 to 1); have a passion for this issue as I do; and
would have the ability to connect with the new Governor, which most
people believe will be Eliot Spitzer, a Democrat.
On October
18, 2006 on News 12, my debate against my opponent will be on at
4:00 PM and 11:30 PM. If you miss those airings, on Saturday
October 21 and Sunday, October 22 the debate will air at 10:00
AM. Further, I am presently on a webcast that will last until
tomorrow afternoon on
www.massapequanews.com.
Take a look.
I can be
reached at my e-mail address at
hellerverdi@aol.com
if you
have any questions or problems that you wish to discuss.
CRAIG S.
HELLER Democratic
candidate for the 12th Assembly
District
September 28, 2006
Hello
Plainedge Community.
I would
like to inform you of a News 12 debate that will be aired between
Joe Saladino and Craig Heller. They are running for State
Assembly. Before you make any decisions, I urge you to watch
this debate, I'm sure you will find it
enlightening.
Debate
Air
Times:
Wed., 10/18 at 4:00 PM and 11:30 PM (you read it
right)
Sat. 10/21 at 10:00 AM
Sun 10/22 at 10:00 AM
Thank you,
Phil
Toscano
September 16, 2006
Dear
plaintalkonline.com,
For
what's it is worth, here are my views on the TAN
issue....
I've
reviewed the Board package and the latest letter from the BOE about
TANs. Lil's note, troubles me and for the following reasons: It is
premature and it is prejudicial to us.
Premature:
TAN Plan activities need not begin until the Budget process
begins. That is in February or March. Up until then we may get
clarification on this issue from the Comptrollers office which could
radically change the situation. Any "contract" made with the
District before then could put us behind the eight-ball. There is no
need to act or respond before then. Let us Table TAN
activities.
Prejudicial:
The excerpt below (a) from a prior post succinctly states the
options the BOE has for providing funds for the Library. Signing the
BOE request eliminates two of the BOE funding options and gives away
our discretionary rights to contribute to the payment of interest or
NOT! It also gives away that right for future Boards. There is no
beneficial return to the Library for doing so.
Excerpt:
(a) Doug, and I'm sure some others, show no awareness
that it's the publics' money; and that;
1)
The BOE is authorized to levy added tax for this interest in
anticipation of fulfilling their statutory responsibility to provide
operating funds to the Library for that period.
2)
In lieu of an additional tax amount, they are also authorized to use
the TAN process to obtain those funds!
3)OR,
as recommended in another Comptrollers decision, it would be more
prudent for them to pre-plan adequate fund balances in the prior
year to provide these funds without having to have the public
pay interest on a TAN
4)
(They, the public, are the only true payer's of TAN interest - not
the School, not the Library)
Further:
There are words used in the BOE requested agreement that could
be very unfair to the Library and to the public.
1)
For instance, when the "net payments" section is reviewed carefully
it also means that if the Library, while managing the funds gains
more interest than the cost of the TAN - the excess money must be
paid over to the school. Presently, any excess money would remain in
the Library fund.
2)
There is no control on our part, nor any means to negotiate, what
the interest rate the BOE decides to charge would be. They could
simply say, on one of their "hen-scratched" justifications of
interest that the Library's share is 8% or 10%! We have no recourse
on rates! We have no recourse on amounts! We are victims of their
determinations.
3)
Signing this agreement opens the door for the BOE to charge
taxpayers twice for the same service. I will not participate in any
plan which allows this to occur! Firm, fixed safeguards must be in
any agreement which entails two District entities that collect funds
from taxes, which will prevent double-dipping into taxpayers pockets
for the same cost element! All present plans or writings have no
provision for ensuring this does not happen.
4)
There is no provision for finding out if the money transferred to
the Library account came directly from a Library TAN transfer to the
Library account or if it came from the general funds account via an
overall TAN transfer into the general account. The latter method is
what was done this year. Having the money transferred to the Library
account from a general fund account makes it ineligible to have an
interest charge attached! Interest charges can't be put on funds in
the general account.
5)
The information about where this year's funds came from was given to
us indirectly at the last BOE-Board meeting which makes their entire
claim for interest this year invalid! From their lips to God's ear!
They had no legal basis to charge the $27,000! (See 7 below for a
clarification)
6)
The agreement that Lil suggests, although "giving us control"
provides no benefit to the Library other than personal satisfaction.
However, it does put an additional burden on Dorothy. I don't
believe the "gain" is worth the added load on her. The District has
finally acknowledged their responsibility to keep the separate and
segregated Library accounts and appears ready to do so. Until that
effort proves to be defective, I'll option for them doing the work
they are responsible for doing. There are two people at least for
that task and between them they are paid $300,000 by the taxpayers -
let them do this work until their efforts are proven
unsatisfactory.
7)
A very important point about the $27,000 withheld! It was not
withheld from the total Library TAX funds for the year! It is almost
a "fictitious" withholding since it was supposed TAN money
that was withheld. This means it only had an impact during the first
months of the year prior to receipt of TAX funds. Since the District
provided a --- what can best be called "screwy and irresponsible"
lump sum payment four months late and in excess of our actual needs
at the time --- it had no real impact compared to their being late
with "TAN" funding which did not come from TANs. (See 4 & 5
above!)
8)
The main negative impact is from their being late and their other
fiscal shenanigans which entailed unnecessary attorney fees, was
forcing us to use our own funds and losing what might have been the
interest gained by them! We are still out that amount of money and
the issue of their repayment is not addressed. Neither is the cost
of Attorney fees covered. Should we send the District a
bill?
Ed Dowell 9/16/06
September 06, 2006
A Report
from a Fly on the Wall.
The 800
pound Gorilla sat down with the Bookworms at a meeting of the two
District Boards last night. The 800 pound gorilla huffed
off!
The
Library Board hosted a meeting with the School Board last night to
discuss a letter that the School had sent to the Library claiming
they were "fiscally irresponsible" for not going along with the
School Districts desire to change the way taxpayer funds are passed
thought the School's hands to the Library. The School Board's letter
had negative value judgments about the Library Board resulting from
Dr. Richman's recent two mis-statements of truth and fact to his
Board about his meeting with Library representatives. The Richman
meeting concerned the school's new desire to have interest costs are
on the Library Budget - in addition to those same costs that are on
the School Budget. Additionally, the latter part of the meeting was
to discuss how to best move forward in a more cooperative way to
better serve the community.
WOW~
what an eye opener ensued! The School Board laid down the law! They
would not discuss the letter - just like e-mail gate - it was in
their "past", the past two months that is. Instead, the theme
presented by Mrs. Zinke of the school Board to the Library was:
"Here's how we are going to pass your taxpayer approved funds to you
next year - you are going to get them this way . . . " We are only
going to look forward - in the direction we tell you to
look!
Astute
members of the Library Board pointed out that this method is exactly
the method tried to be used last year, and attempted to be used this
year. The trouble was - It doesn't work! And it is not in compliance
with the Law, the Rules and Regulations and the Comptrollers
Decisions that cover these matters.
It was
only then, based on figures the Library Board knew by rote, figures
the School Board fiscal experts in attendance could not recall or
give (despite armfuls of manila folder records in their lap) that
this fly had its eyes opened as to what is really going on with this
issue!
Last
year, the School Board overestimated the actually cost of interest
on borrowed money by $62,700 dollars. In addition to this, they took
and added $25,982.57 from the Library funds as "fair" interest
costs. That total of $88.7 Thousand dollars - doesn't go to cover
children's programs as wrongly claimed it might by Mrs. Zinke, its
part of the Capital program and goes directly into the general Fund
at the end of the year.
The
Library Trustee's showed reluctance to accept this proved defective
plan because of one important fact. In essence, claims the Library's
trustee's, this excess money is collected twice by the District from
the taxpayer, and is going directly into an unaccounted for surplus
of funds at year's end. It is not spent on the children.
Where
does it go from there? One place is into one of the newly created
$2.5 Million in 5 fund balance accounts, like Dr. Richman’s
retirement fund balance! Since he's retiring at the end of the year,
money has to be fed into the account to pay for his "perk" of
$10,000 a year for ten years after he leaves the job, he and his
wife's lifetime medical and dental insurance, etc. This is addition
to his collecting the $20,000 per year tax deferred annuity the
District has been giving him since his hire!
The
meeting dissolved when the Library Trustee's stated the only way to
go forward with the same old plan from the District was to fix its
shortcomings - give a proper bill or invoice for past costs, provide
an estimate or quote for present and future costs - and, if
reasonable and not charging taxpayer's twice for the same costs, the
Library might accept the charges, What was really evident, despite
repeated requests by the Library Board, the School Board financial
persons present could not, or would not, tell the Library Board how
much these already negotiate interest costs would be! Talk about
being unprepared!
The other silent members of the School Board
and Mrs. Zinke left with Dr. Richman and staff, stating that they
would go forward next year with their plan - and only their - plan
in effect.
- Name withheld upon
request
July 30, 2006
Dear Readers of
plaintalkonline.com:
While re-reading
the statement made by Barbara Fisch at a past BOE meeting, she
respectfully requested that the BOE step in to help facilitate
negotiations for a fair and equitable contract for the
secretaries of the Plainedge School
District. Her exact statement
was "We, the Plainedge
Educational Secretaries, are asking you, the Board, to instruct your
Administration to negotiate a fair and equitable contract with us
now." She also stated towards the end of
her message "Will you, the Board, in this spirit of
cooperation restart negotiations now? We are willing to talk to
you today. How about
you!" Why hasn't anyone
from the BOE helped to move this process
along?
The statement made by
Dr. Richman in the Massapequa Post article written by Jason Kahn
adds to a confusing situation: "I've resolved every other contract ahead
of time and they seem to be the only ones who we cannot come to an
agreement with," said Richmond. "This has nothing to do
with the last contract and getting back at them. This has to do with
a failure of leadership and a failure of that leader to come to the
table and negotiate." In Mrs.
Fisch's statement, she requested that the BOE help her get
to the table to start negotiations, it seems that someone isn't
giving the community the correct information.
I find it odd that the
situation has not recently appeared on a BOE meeting agenda and
the community has never been updated on its status?
Shouldn't the community get some sort of update? I hope that
the community receives clarity on this situation in the
next BOE meeting in the same way that they
have clarified other current issues. Could someone
on the BOE simply explain who is not coming to the table?
Thank you.
Respectfully,
Felice
Cantatore
July 18, 2006
Plaintalkonline.com,
Some
true facts about Dr. Richman's statement on Library TANS. His spin on this subject,
reported at the last BOE meeting - is deplorable! In his contrived world of
"internalized truths" he grossly misleads the Plainedge public!
Here
are my comments:
Correct Facts
Both
the Plainedgechat.com site and the Plaintalkonline.com Site are
community sites that have come under criticism from the District
Administration. Their stress is on the claim that factual
information is given only at the District's Meetings and not on
these sites.
Well
folks, in many instances ~ Nothing could be further from the
truth!
Take
just the single case of what comes directly from the mouth of the
former President of the Board and was reportedly repeated by Dr.
Richman at the last Board meeting concerning Library TANS. For those
that haven't seen the report it is repeated
here:
1)
Next on the agenda was a discussion involving the Library TANS. Dr.
Richman explained that former President Richard Mallow and Vice
President now Trustee Loretta Giardina recently met with the Library
Board regarding the TAN (Tax Anticipation Notes).
True! There was a meeting!
Questionable! As of yet, there is no evidence of a
"Library TAN" existing - or ever existing in the past forty years!"
False! The meeting was not with the Library Board, but
with the Library Board President and Vice President - who stressed
that any agreement would have to be presented to the Library Board
for consideration.
2)
He explained that they left the meeting in agreement regarding the
payment of the TAN interest and they were expecting everything to be
OK . . . ."
False! What "they expected" exists only in the mind of
those quoted by Dr. Richman. No agreement was made!
Truth! The Library Board had previously sent to each
BOE member a letter containing quotes from the Law and Comptroller
decisions that the cost of funding Library operations during the
time between when the Fiscal year begins (July 1) and the first
receipt of Property Tax money (about November & December) is a
Statutory obligation of the School Distinct that they must meet by
the use of reserve funds, Tax Anticipation Notes (TANS) or other
Funds. It is the sole responsibility of the School District to determine how that is to be
done each year - and it is not an item under control of, or within
the authority of the Library Board. Thus, the Library Board would
not interfere with the District's determination of how that
obligation was to be met! This information was repeated to the BOE
members and Dr. Richman at the meeting.
3) .
. . but now the Library Board refuses to pay any cost associated
with the TAN interest.
False!
Truth! The amount of "TAN interest" has yet to be
determined and quoted to the Library Board by the BOE! The request
for the Library Board to include an unspecified amount of TAN
interest in their budget for a portion of the yet undisclosed total
TAN amounts necessary for School District operations - and an
estimate for the portion of those funds that might cover Library
operating costs was not provided by the BOE, or even mentioned,
prior to the Library's Budget preparation and approval by the
Voters.
Truth! The Library transferred this information to the
BOE in a recent letter of response to Dr. Richman's request for the
Library Board's intentions to request a "Library TAN". The statement
provided by the Library included the fact that it is only the BOE
which determines if and when a "Library TAN" is obtained - and such
info or requests for the Library to share that listing of the
taxpayer's cost for that on their Budget for this year by the BOE
was not timely in that the Library budget was already released and
approved by the voters in the
community.
FACT! TAN interest charges, whether for school
operations or School plus Library operations, are paid only by the
TAXPAYERS - not by the School or by the Library. These interest
amounts and charges are determined only by the School District and the School Board is the
one, and only one, that can lawfully LEVY the taxes the TOWN
collects for these expenses. The District is authorized by law to
include the cost of the TAN interest in the Taxes they Levy.
Fact! The Library Board plays no role in, nor has any
legal authority with determining or collecting, the means and
amounts of funding for operating costs during the July to December
period.
Truth! The Library Board, at its discretion, may
include in its Budget funds for listing TAN interest - but the money
that becomes part of their budget must be directly transferred to
the School District who pays the
Brokers this interest that the BOE contracted for TANs. It is not
spent for Library purposes.
4)
The Superintendent asked the board what course of action they would
like to take on this situation stating "the question is do you want
to be stubborn and unfair or take the high
road?"
Truth! The BOE has been stubborn and unfair - despite
this self-serving quote from Richman that is backhanded attempt to
paste this label on the Library. It is about time that Richman took
the high road and followed the law and its rulings.
The
demands made by him on the Library have been unfair - requesting
this year that an unknown amount of funds be included in an already
approved Budget - requesting last year that the Library pay interest
charges on a non-existent Library TAN; first in the amount of
$16,500 - then improperly withholding $27,000 for that amount and
never providing proper accounting for the charges.
Additionally, last year the Library Board, at its
discretion under the threat made by Richman that Library operating
funds would not be paid until they were collected as taxes; approved
the paying of interest charges - only to have the BOE fail to
approve taking out such a TAN for the Library, and the District
never having obtained such a TAN.
However, the School
District did fund a series of TANs for $9.05 Million
which cost about $221,000 in interest - and they have collected from
the people a Property Tax of $283,700 to cover these costs. The
excess money, about $62,700, sits in a General Fund along with the
Library's $27,000 that was improperly held from its voter approved
funding! If it is continued to be held - the effect is to charge the
public twice for the same pre-paid TAN interest charges!!!
5)
New BOE President Ms. Zinke again showed a great new Board attitude
by stating that the situation with the Library needs to be a public
discussion. New Trustee, Ms. Capone stated "Can we work together as
two Boards for the Children?" She went on to mention that everything
should be out in the open and that the community should be educated
on the topic.
Truth! That is precisely the openness that the two
Community Sites have been created for and the rules they continue to
exist under! Unlike the BOE and Administration which decries other
sources of information, the community sites have presented factual
information as well as opinions of the Plainedge public at large.
They have encouraged and fostered open dialogs subject to peer
review and comment - unlike the often restricted, filtered,
sanitized, censured and whitewashed information supplied by the
School District.
Ed.
July 13, 2006
I
just wanted to step back from everything and share this with
everyone. It's a great
article, one that should be shared with our children because we
sometimes seem to forget the true beauty and greatness of this
country.. I hope you enjoy it....
We
rarely get a chance to see another country's editorial about the
USA
.
Read
this excerpt from a Romanian Newspaper. The article was written by
Mr. Cornel Nistorescu and published under the title "C"ntarea
Americii, meaning "Ode To America") in the Romanian newspaper
Evenimentulzilei "The Daily <BR>Event" or "News of the
Day".
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
~An
Ode to America~
Why
are Americans so united? They would not resemble one another even if
you painted them all one color! They speak all the languages of the
world and form an astonishing mixture of civilizations and religious
beliefs. Still, the American tragedy turned three hundred million
people into a hand put on the heart.
Nobody rushed to accuse the White House, the army, and
the secret services that they are only a bunch of losers. Nobody
rushed to empty their bank accounts. Nobody rushed out onto the
streets nearby to gape about. The Americans volunteered to donate
blood and to give a helping hand.
After the first moments of panic, they raised their
flag over the smoking ruins, putting on T-shirts, caps and ties in
the colors of the national flag. They placed flags on
buildings and cars as if in every place and on every car a
government official or the president was
passing.
On
every occasion, they started singing their traditional song: "God
Bless America!" I watched the
live broadcast and rerun after rerun for hours listening to the
story of the guy who went down one hundred floors with a woman in a
wheelchair without knowing who she was, or of the
Californian
Hockey player, who gave his life fighting with the
terrorists and prevented the plane from hitting a target that could
have killed other hundreds or thousands of
people.
How
on earth were they able to respond united as one human
being?
Imperceptibly, with every word and musical note, the
memory of some turned into a modern myth of tragic heroes. And with
every phone call, millions and millions of dollars were put in a
collection aimed at rewarding not a man or a family, but a spirit,
which no money can buy.
What
on earth can unite the Americans in such a way? Their land? Their
galloping history? Their economic Power? Money? I tried for hours to
find an answer, humming songs and murmuring phrases with the risk of
sounding commonplace.
I
thought things over, but I reached only one conclusion... Only
freedom can work such miracles.
Cornel Nistorescu
Phil Toscano
July 9,
2006
Dear
Sirs:
I have
just spent about 45 minutes reading your website catching up on
everything that I have been missing. I read the statement made
by the secretaries and I caught up on the June 15th meeting minutes
about the administration raises.
Why are
the secretaries having such difficulties negotiating their raises
(or have they already received them?) when everyone else seems to be
getting their share. I thought that after voting yes last May
everything would be taken care of. My kid who will be a high
school senior this year has told me about the shirts they wear and I
was present the night the union was chanting outside of the meeting.
Can't we just
move on and fix everything in this
district?
Concerned
Parent
July 4, 2006
Did
you know that last year the School District caused about $50,000 to
be spent in attorney Fees and lost investment money interest gains
in order to try to get $26+Thousand in TAN (Tax Anticipation Note)
interest cost moved from being listed on the School District Budget
to being listed on the Library Budget?
Do
you also know that neither the Library no the School pays this TAN
interest? It does not matter which Budget list this cost is on - the
money goes into the hands of the TAN Agent that the only the School
negotiates with for the TAN interest cost!
And
it is only the taxpayer that pays for this cost! IT comes out of the
taxpayer's pocket. Not the Library, not the School, not the
State!
Last
year the total collected by the District for their TANs was
$283,700, of which the portion of the TAN interest for Library
operations was claimed to be that $26+ Thousand. This year the
District plans to collect $495,000 - the library portion will remain
at about $27,000!
Some
Financial management skill! Some questionable
spending!
Ed.
P.S. There was no financial need for getting such a
TAN last year to begin with!
June 27, 2006
Another example of the Spin Doctor's
work!
It
is no secret that Dr. Richman often misleads and misguides the
District and the School Board by twisting information and
facts. In fact, he’ll
often make up his own facts to fit the situation at hand if
needed. A famous one
was when he "created out of thin air" the amount of State Lottery
money received the prior year.
He quoted it at $40,000 - it was actually $1.6
Million!
He
has also claimed undue credit for the ROBOTICS efforts, started and
successfully done by others.
Recently he's made overtures about the successful “$550,000
fund raising" in the District.
Those that did the actual Fund Raising know it was more -
$575,000.
Now
he is attempting to get ownership of, and put in place controls on,
future Fund raising in the District. At least, that's what it
seems he's doing when one reads to recent minutes of the last BOE
meeting! He has the
audacity to claim that the outstanding community efforts of the past
year in raising the funds to restore sports were flawed! It did not properly cover
itself with insurance is his claim. HE will set things
straight! He'll get the
Board to make policies about Fund
Raising!
What
hype! It was that same Board he bamboozled last year into the
unnecessary cutting of the Sports Program funds! A fact proven by
the Fund Balance left at the end of the year and a known lie at the
beginning of the year when the cuts were forced through the Board
despite District planning documents (Cash Flow Analysis sheets) that
showed the financial industry that no cuts were
needed!
The
flaw in his logic is simply this: A community Fund Raising
effort is a COMMUNITY effort, not a School
District effort!
He
has no control and/or authority over a COMMUNITY event. It is only the BOE that may
have control over a School District
event - that they can set policy for its conduct. And it is only in a
School District supported fund
raising event would the District be able to require that insurance
be obtained by the participants.
In a
Community sponsored event the District has no authority - except if
School District property is used
for the event! In that
case, Dr, Richman will ask the event sponsors to assume some of the
District's insurance costs - a fine way to make his budget appear
better - but taking money from the event holder in order to do so!
Many
other Districts, and entities in a District, do not ask this of
groups. Especially of
groups of residents that bought and paid for all property in the
District! Instead, they
obtain a Blanket insurance policy that covers all uses of the
property by the Public.
Overall, it is less expensive to do so. This "charging of a fee" for
the Public to use a facility owned by the public is just another
devious construct of the Spin Doctor to save peanuts on the Budget
bottom line while squandering bushels of money on undue Capital
costs.
So
the Spin Doctor got the witless Board to vote on setting up the
process that would allow the District to force Community groups to
spend money to get insurance policies if they want to use School District facilities in the future! Facilities that the
Community already owns!
Want to bet this really didn't reduce School District
Insurance Policy costs one bit? But it will make one more
obstacle in the road towards a successful fund raising
effort!
Ed.
What
a legacy he leaves!
June 21,
2006
Fellow Plainedge
Residents,
First, allow me to convey my deepest sympathies to the
family and friends of Mr. Joe Chaloupka. Please know he (and all of
you) are in my prayers.
The
purpose of this posting is to finally address the numerous emails
and phone calls that I have received in regards to the email
situation that had occurred. My wife has also been approached 2
times in a nasty way by residents asking what happened. Below you
will find a timeline of STRICTLY the facts. Before I go into the
timeline - it is important that everyone knows that this situation
was not revealed to me until Mr. Raymond and I initiated numerous
investigations.
- In
November of 2005 I was appointed to the Plainedge Board of Education
and a Plainedge email address was created for me.
(fpresuto@plainedgeschools.org)
- On
Tuesday April 11th, during an executive session, Mrs. Flanagan
brought up 3 emails that were addressed only to the
fpresuto@plainedgeschools.org email address that she had come in
possession of. When asked how she got them, her reply was that they
were forwarded to her by Mr. Raymond. When I asked Mr. Raymond if he
had sent them to her - he said no.
-
That same evening (April 11th) Mr. Raymond sent a few test messages
to fpresuto@plainedgeschools.org with the tracking function enabled
to try to find out how the emails brought up in executive session
got into the possession of another Board member.
-
The results of that tracking showed that emails addressed to
fpresuto@plainedgeschools.org were also being sent to the personal
email address of Mrs. Flanagan.
-
After seeing these results, I contacted an outside IT specialist to
do some investigating. The IT specialist found that the emails sent
to fpresuto@plainedgeschools.org were also being forwarded to the
personal email address of Mrs. Flanagan through the Plainedge
server.
-
Immediately, I (along with Mr. Raymond) contacted Dr. Richman to
inform him of what had been uncovered.
-
Dr. Richman then did an internal investigation to get to the bottom
of the situation.
-
Dr. Richman then sent out a timeline with the results of his
investigation that stated that the records from the server did show
that the server was directing emails, sent to
fpresuto@plainedgeschools.org , to the personal email address of
Mrs. Flanagan, however, at this time, they were unable to determine
who set this up or for how long it was occurring. Also in the
timeline, it stated that I may have mistakenly done something to
unable this.
-
Again, I reached out to an IT professional to see if I was the
reason for the situation. After remotely accessing my computer, he
verified that I had not done anything to cause this and showed me
how it would be done. There are numerous steps that need to be taken
to do this, including typing specific email addresses in specific
fields that could not have been done
mistakenly.
- At
the April 27th BOE Business Meeting, I read a prepared statement
apologizing to members of the community, Board, and administration
for what had transpired and I also stated my dissatisfaction as to
what had occurred.
- On
April 28th , Dr. Richman requested for me to provide copies of every
email that went to the fpresuto@plainedgeschools.org email address
from March 28th through April 13th, and any other emails that I felt
may help with the investigation. I provided him with 194 total
emails. Of the 194 emails,
o 27
of them were sent FROM that email address between March 28th and
April 13th
o
113 were sent to that email address (21 of which were ONLY sent to
that email address)
o 3
test emails
o 51
emails sent only to fpresuto@plainedgeschools.org from 11/23/05 to
3/24/06
-
After taking all of those emails, Dr. Richman did a further
investigation that proved that all emails sent to
fpresuto@plainedgeschools.org from November,2005 to April 13th ,2006
were being sent to Mrs. Flanagan's personal email
address.
- I
was also told that the person responsible for these settings in the
server was named Jim and that he no longer was an employee of the
district.
I
have investigated what my possible course of action could be and was
told by Mary Ellen Clark of the NYSED that any email that goes
through the Plainedge server is foilable - therefore, I did not have
any recourse.
Hopefully this answers everyone's questions. Going
forward, I ask that if any resident has any further questions,
comments, or concerns on this or any other matter - please contact
me directly. Disrespecting my wife is uncalled for and is out of
line.
THANK YOU
Sincerely,
Frank Presuto
June 20, 2006
Can I pass along some
exciting fundraising info??
Please hurry and visit
the Plainedge library for the month of
June.....
Go see Phil Collin’s
art/doodle sold to help raise funds for Long Island Cares, the Harry
Chapin Foodbank!!
This is a fundraiser for
a well known charity that I am working with. You can purchase or
view a collection of celebrity artwork for Long Island Cares, the
Harry Chapin Foodbank. (Phil Collins, Marty Balin, Nelson DeMille,
Peter Yarrow, Phyllis Diller and many
others.)
please
visit:
http://www.licares.org/Development/Celebrity_Ceramics/Celebrity_Ceramics.htm
Thanks in advance to all
that visit,
Frank Duffy
June 19, 2006
Dear
Mr. Toscano,
Congratulations on your idea of establishing a
community action group.
It is important that as a community, we police what is going
on in our school system.
It
seems that with things such as “emailgate” and with the answers we
have received we can no longer tolerate it. I am concerned
more now since our current Superintendent has announced his
retirement starting next June 2007. I am nervous about what in
store for us this coming year.
In order to help your cause and to help our
community of Plainedge, I offer some information that I have come
across from the Farmingdale District. It is a two page layout from
the "Concerned Citizens for Action, C.C.A.”. It is laid out below:
Corruption
When will your office address the corruption in
Farmingdale Public Schools?
Concerned Citizens for Action, C.C.A.
We have been made aware of the corrupt administration
in your school district.
If you have any information about the corruption, waste, or
fraud in your school district you must
contact:
Nassau County:
Kathleen M.
Rice
The Office
of the Commissioner of
Investigations
District Attorney of Nassau
County
Nassau Commissioner Bonnie
Garone
262 Old Country
Road 1 West St. Mineola, NY
11501
Mineola, New York 11501 (516)
571-0534
OR
CALL (516)
571-3800 Hotline
at 571-STOP
Fax
516-571-0537
Additional
information:
http://www.nassauda.org
http://www.nassaucountyny.gov/agencies/investigations
New
York State:
|