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.

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,

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?

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!

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,

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.

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

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?

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.

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!

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,

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,

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: