Sheldon Silver yesterday seemed to be sticking a poison pill in the fine print.
by E.J. McMahon 5/25/11 New York Post
If Silver insists on a hard expiration date for the cap, the governor will need to start again.
Silver and his allies in the state's teachers union were always seen as the chief obstacle to passage of the most popular initiative of the highly popular new governor. But hope resided in the coming expiration of New York City's seemingly perpetual but legally temporary rent regulations, last renewed in 2004.
The two issues -- a cap on property taxes outside New York City, and price controls applying mainly to apartments within the city -- obviously are unrelated. But since the renewal of rent control is a top Silver priority, it seemed likely all year that their fates would be linked in the end.
Sure enough, with the clock ticking on an as-yet unfinished rent-regulation deal, the speaker on Tuesday introduced his own tax-cap bill -- matching Cuomo's priorities in almost every significant respect.
Cuomo has been insisting all along on a broad, tight and permanent cap -- like the one passed by the GOP-controlled Senate in January. And the speaker's changes to the governor's basic tax-cap structure are relatively minor.
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/poison_pill_for_the_tax_cap_lOdioQZXBPSedtxkzveoTL#ixzz1NTrcZRYE
Thursday, May 26, 2011
A Tax Cap & Mandate Relief
A legislative column by Assemblyman Michael Fitzpatrick (R,C,I-Smithtown)
Throughout this legislative year, there has been a push by the Assembly Minority Conference and the state Senate’s Majority to pass a property-tax cap. The proposed tax cap would keep property taxes at a 2% increase or 120% of the Consumer Price Index (CPI), whichever is lower. While a cap is important to limit the growth of Long Island’s sky-high property taxes, only the tax cap will drive all interested parties to the negotiating table to produce comprehensive mandate relief in order to keep these rates low.
School districts are overburdened with paperwork and government red tape, which the state forces upon them without funding. Schools then pass these additional costs on to taxpayers through property-tax increases. In Governor Cuomo’s current property-tax-cap legislation, there is no direct answer to the problem of unfunded mandates and schools are worried that, with cuts to state education aid, they will, inevitably, have to continue to make cuts in classroom instruction in the effort to afford those unfunded mandates.
However, I see any cap on property taxes as a necessary first step to bring all the stakeholders to the table for true mandate relief. This tax-cap legislation will begin to force the hand of Albany to address the burdens faced by school districts with unfunded mandates. Some of my fellow lawmakers do not want to pass the tax cap without direct mandate relief – but there will be no mandate relief without a tax cap.
It is time for the state to take action to save struggling taxpayers and provide relief for school districts and local governments. The governor’s property-tax cap will lead to unfunded mandate relief and force a hard look at the cost-drivers that have created some of the highest property taxes in the nation. I look forward to working with my legislative colleagues to pass both a genuine property-tax cap and long-needed mandate relief as soon as possible.
As always, I urge constituents to contact me about this or any other state matter. You may reach me at my Smithtown office at 631-724-2929.
Throughout this legislative year, there has been a push by the Assembly Minority Conference and the state Senate’s Majority to pass a property-tax cap. The proposed tax cap would keep property taxes at a 2% increase or 120% of the Consumer Price Index (CPI), whichever is lower. While a cap is important to limit the growth of Long Island’s sky-high property taxes, only the tax cap will drive all interested parties to the negotiating table to produce comprehensive mandate relief in order to keep these rates low.
School districts are overburdened with paperwork and government red tape, which the state forces upon them without funding. Schools then pass these additional costs on to taxpayers through property-tax increases. In Governor Cuomo’s current property-tax-cap legislation, there is no direct answer to the problem of unfunded mandates and schools are worried that, with cuts to state education aid, they will, inevitably, have to continue to make cuts in classroom instruction in the effort to afford those unfunded mandates.
However, I see any cap on property taxes as a necessary first step to bring all the stakeholders to the table for true mandate relief. This tax-cap legislation will begin to force the hand of Albany to address the burdens faced by school districts with unfunded mandates. Some of my fellow lawmakers do not want to pass the tax cap without direct mandate relief – but there will be no mandate relief without a tax cap.
It is time for the state to take action to save struggling taxpayers and provide relief for school districts and local governments. The governor’s property-tax cap will lead to unfunded mandate relief and force a hard look at the cost-drivers that have created some of the highest property taxes in the nation. I look forward to working with my legislative colleagues to pass both a genuine property-tax cap and long-needed mandate relief as soon as possible.
As always, I urge constituents to contact me about this or any other state matter. You may reach me at my Smithtown office at 631-724-2929.
Unions Win Big
The voters decided to elect three candidates sponsored by unions over two proven Trustees on Tuesday, May 17th. The ramifications of the vote will be enormous to the people and students of Smithtown.
Four contracts will be decided by the new, union-backed Trustees in the coming months, and several top administrators will be hired by the Board. Superintendent Edward Ehmann will retire next spring. Mary Cahill, Assistant Superintendent for Instruction & Administration; Dr. Meryl Ain, Assistant to the Superintendent for General Administration and Planning; and District Clerk Mary Wilson are retiring this June.
The Board's actions on both the contracts and hiring will impact the SCSD for years to come. When those overseeing the running of SCSD's business are so comfortably tied to the unions working for the district, it appears that the taxpayers of Smithtown are slightly under-represented.
Four contracts will be decided by the new, union-backed Trustees in the coming months, and several top administrators will be hired by the Board. Superintendent Edward Ehmann will retire next spring. Mary Cahill, Assistant Superintendent for Instruction & Administration; Dr. Meryl Ain, Assistant to the Superintendent for General Administration and Planning; and District Clerk Mary Wilson are retiring this June.
The Board's actions on both the contracts and hiring will impact the SCSD for years to come. When those overseeing the running of SCSD's business are so comfortably tied to the unions working for the district, it appears that the taxpayers of Smithtown are slightly under-represented.
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Rossi & Carlin for School Board!
Smithtown Taxpayers Education News wholeheartedly endorses Board President Bob Rossi and fellow Trustee, Neil Carlin, for election on Tuesday, May 17th, for the SCSD Board.
Also on the ballot is the uncontested seat held by Gladys Waldron for 33 years. We endorse no one for this position.
There are two referendum questions with a 'yes' or 'no' for both--they cannot be split. They are: to extend the walker area slightly--an elementary student now is eligible for busing if living next door to the school, this would extend the distance to 1/2 mile, with similar changes for older students; and to go back to the state required 15 mile distance for mandatory busing to private and parochial schools, rather than the 20 miles Smithtown previously agreed to in a referendum.
The budget and contingent budget are the same, so voting it down will only force the taxpayers to pay for a re-vote. Support the budget.
Get to your polling place on Tuesday--Accompsett El, Smithtown El, St James El, or Nesconset El.
Also on the ballot is the uncontested seat held by Gladys Waldron for 33 years. We endorse no one for this position.
There are two referendum questions with a 'yes' or 'no' for both--they cannot be split. They are: to extend the walker area slightly--an elementary student now is eligible for busing if living next door to the school, this would extend the distance to 1/2 mile, with similar changes for older students; and to go back to the state required 15 mile distance for mandatory busing to private and parochial schools, rather than the 20 miles Smithtown previously agreed to in a referendum.
The budget and contingent budget are the same, so voting it down will only force the taxpayers to pay for a re-vote. Support the budget.
Get to your polling place on Tuesday--Accompsett El, Smithtown El, St James El, or Nesconset El.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
A Quiet School District Investigation
Sgt. Schultz: “I Know Nothing!”
Spurred by a friend’s request to the Administration to investigate charges of ethics and policy violations, Rick Schlomann and another Smithtown citizen, Stan Meyer, spoke before the general meeting of the Board of Education on Tuesday, May 10th.
Mr Schlomann read Policy 1511 which prohibits politicking in schools on school time by staff. The policy exists to protect the students. He asked Superintendent Ehmann if he had followed through on this investigation.
Mr Ehmann acknowledged that the Administration had looked into the charge and took ‘appropriate action,’ indicating that the details were ‘not for public disclosure.’ At this point the District’s attorney, Eugene Barnosky and Assistant Superintendent for Personnel, Karen Ricigliano, added that, “in one or two instances corrective action was taken, counseling letters, (and) documentation was provided so that will not occur again.”
In other words, the policy was violated.
Mr Schlomann tried to dig deeper and discover what names were on the petitions, to no avail; they hadn’t asked.
Upset by this revelation, Mr Meyer said, “I think you gave a political definition, not a legal definition, because if anyone benefited, we should know.” He didn’t know why a blanket of secrecy was covering the candidates’ identities, and was dissatisfied to hear that is was not a question the district asked. We are not to know who was petitioned for by district employees, in schools, on district time; only the petitioners were reprimanded.
It stinks. And the stench carries far in this election year when contracts are up, the board could be flipped, and the union has everything at stake.
Spurred by a friend’s request to the Administration to investigate charges of ethics and policy violations, Rick Schlomann and another Smithtown citizen, Stan Meyer, spoke before the general meeting of the Board of Education on Tuesday, May 10th.
Mr Schlomann read Policy 1511 which prohibits politicking in schools on school time by staff. The policy exists to protect the students. He asked Superintendent Ehmann if he had followed through on this investigation.
Mr Ehmann acknowledged that the Administration had looked into the charge and took ‘appropriate action,’ indicating that the details were ‘not for public disclosure.’ At this point the District’s attorney, Eugene Barnosky and Assistant Superintendent for Personnel, Karen Ricigliano, added that, “in one or two instances corrective action was taken, counseling letters, (and) documentation was provided so that will not occur again.”
In other words, the policy was violated.
Mr Schlomann tried to dig deeper and discover what names were on the petitions, to no avail; they hadn’t asked.
Upset by this revelation, Mr Meyer said, “I think you gave a political definition, not a legal definition, because if anyone benefited, we should know.” He didn’t know why a blanket of secrecy was covering the candidates’ identities, and was dissatisfied to hear that is was not a question the district asked. We are not to know who was petitioned for by district employees, in schools, on district time; only the petitioners were reprimanded.
It stinks. And the stench carries far in this election year when contracts are up, the board could be flipped, and the union has everything at stake.
Let the Sunshine In
At last night’s Smithtown Board of Education meeting, board members Neil Carlin and Scott Martella had a short, intense interaction regarding giving information to the public. Since it followed a heartfelt explanation by Martella of the new Citizens’ Advisory Committee (CAC), which was formed to involve the community more directly in school district issues, it created an odd moment.
Carlin raised the idea, endorsed by Suffolk County’s District Attorney, Tom Spota, of informing Smithtown residents of contract agreements with our unions once a Memo of Agreement (MOA) has been signed by all parties. An MOA is like a binder on a house—before the actual sale--it indicates that there is a basic agreement between parties, in this case between the SCSD and the particular union.
Martella insisted that the democratic process was in place, and took exception to the idea. Carlin said he felt as though he was being given a civics lecture. When Martella asked what possible purpose exposing details of the pre-agreement would serve, members of the audience called out, “Openness,” “transparency,” and sunlight!”
Carlin asked that if union members had the information, why couldn’t the public?
Eugene Barnosky, attorney for the district, agreed that it was legal for citizens to be made aware of the district’s negotiation with a union at the point of an MOA.
During the audience portion of the meeting, Rick Schlomann said that since the union’s rank and file get to know the particulars about a proposed contract, “it is only fair, balanced, and open,” to have the Memo of Agreement made available to the public, who can then comment to their elected board.
Stan Meyer, a retired teacher, asked if board members were afraid to hear what the taxpayer had to say about union agreements and the implications to Smithtown for years into the future, saying, “I resent not having the right to know!”
Indeed, following the discourse on the CAC, this disinclination to provide data to the public seems mystifying.
Carlin raised the idea, endorsed by Suffolk County’s District Attorney, Tom Spota, of informing Smithtown residents of contract agreements with our unions once a Memo of Agreement (MOA) has been signed by all parties. An MOA is like a binder on a house—before the actual sale--it indicates that there is a basic agreement between parties, in this case between the SCSD and the particular union.
Martella insisted that the democratic process was in place, and took exception to the idea. Carlin said he felt as though he was being given a civics lecture. When Martella asked what possible purpose exposing details of the pre-agreement would serve, members of the audience called out, “Openness,” “transparency,” and sunlight!”
Carlin asked that if union members had the information, why couldn’t the public?
Eugene Barnosky, attorney for the district, agreed that it was legal for citizens to be made aware of the district’s negotiation with a union at the point of an MOA.
During the audience portion of the meeting, Rick Schlomann said that since the union’s rank and file get to know the particulars about a proposed contract, “it is only fair, balanced, and open,” to have the Memo of Agreement made available to the public, who can then comment to their elected board.
Stan Meyer, a retired teacher, asked if board members were afraid to hear what the taxpayer had to say about union agreements and the implications to Smithtown for years into the future, saying, “I resent not having the right to know!”
Indeed, following the discourse on the CAC, this disinclination to provide data to the public seems mystifying.
Saturday, May 7, 2011
Tax Cap Press Conference 5/5/11
To view the You Tube of the Conservative Society for Action meeting in Hauppauge with State and County officials in support of a property tax cap click here
Friday, May 6, 2011
Support the Tax Cap NOW!
The State Senate and Assembly are looking at versions of a bill to provide aid to taxpayers by limiting the growth of school district spending through the use of a tax cap. A 2% cap is expected.
A tax cap will accomplish several things, one of which will be, of course, the limit to increased spending and importantly, pressure on Albany to make swift and effective changes to regulations and policies which cost districts millions, yearly.
Senate version of Property Tax Cap
S2706-2011: Establishes limitations upon school district and local government tax levies; repealer read the proposed bill here
Assembly version of Property Tax Cap
A3982-2011: Establishes limitations upon school district and local government tax levies; repealer read the proposed bill here
A tax cap will accomplish several things, one of which will be, of course, the limit to increased spending and importantly, pressure on Albany to make swift and effective changes to regulations and policies which cost districts millions, yearly.
Senate version of Property Tax Cap
S2706-2011: Establishes limitations upon school district and local government tax levies; repealer read the proposed bill here
Assembly version of Property Tax Cap
A3982-2011: Establishes limitations upon school district and local government tax levies; repealer read the proposed bill here
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Ethics, Anyone?
We have a situation in Smithtown that stinks--a candidate is running for a seat on the SCSD Board--and some believe she is ineligible.
She submitted petitions on April 18th, but, on that date she was ineligible to serve. Policy states the candidate must be eligible at the time of filing. Serving as a district employee bars service on the BOE.
The candidate had her first retirement from teaching in the SCSD accepted by the BOE in November 2009 effective on July 1, 2010, then, on January 11, 2011, she was again hired as a permanent, certified, per diem substitute teacher in Special Education. The second retirement was accepted at the April 28th BOE meeting, after the petition filing date.
This candidate also served on the Smithtown Teachers Association (STA) Executive Committee as Secretary. There is no problem with her holding this position on the STA, but when putting the pieces together, the picture doesn't look good.
The district is in negotiations (actually mediation) with the STA union and two other unions, now. Is this the time to put a former union exec on our School Board?
Maybe what you want to see is an extended contract? If the board flips members, no doubt there will shortly be a new contract with sweet deals for the STA.
As it is, the SCSD will have a hard time getting thru each of the next several years without deep concessions from the union and a change in the pension system. Another season of 8% increases will seriously damage Smithtown's ability to continue to give our children an excellent education.
Is this what we need?
She submitted petitions on April 18th, but, on that date she was ineligible to serve. Policy states the candidate must be eligible at the time of filing. Serving as a district employee bars service on the BOE.
The candidate had her first retirement from teaching in the SCSD accepted by the BOE in November 2009 effective on July 1, 2010, then, on January 11, 2011, she was again hired as a permanent, certified, per diem substitute teacher in Special Education. The second retirement was accepted at the April 28th BOE meeting, after the petition filing date.
This candidate also served on the Smithtown Teachers Association (STA) Executive Committee as Secretary. There is no problem with her holding this position on the STA, but when putting the pieces together, the picture doesn't look good.
The district is in negotiations (actually mediation) with the STA union and two other unions, now. Is this the time to put a former union exec on our School Board?
Maybe what you want to see is an extended contract? If the board flips members, no doubt there will shortly be a new contract with sweet deals for the STA.
As it is, the SCSD will have a hard time getting thru each of the next several years without deep concessions from the union and a change in the pension system. Another season of 8% increases will seriously damage Smithtown's ability to continue to give our children an excellent education.
Is this what we need?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)