I was happy to learn that the North Hempstead and the Nassau Republican Committees did not sanction or approve the activities of the Manhasset Republican Club as was reported by your paper last week, “Manhasset GOP Club Sent Anti-Budget ‘Robo-Calls.”
Let’s be clear: club president Martin Dekom has hijacked the Manhasset Republican Club for his own personal agenda. Dekom skews the truth at best, and at worst chooses to tell only parts of the whole story so that he can twist the story to suit his own anti-budget purposes.
Neither Dekom, the MRC, nor the MPSA have any respect for the truth or the facts, and they distort reality and disparage those that are working to serve the interests of students and the community.
Dekom and the MRC do the community a real disservice because they resort to a negative campaign of fear, lies and innuendo to fan the flames of frustration and to sow negative seeds of anger. Look at the following examples:
1. Quoted in the article, “the district had the opportunity to control those figures when it last negotiated teacher and employee contracts, and must operate moving forward in a manner that will not allow the teacher’s union to gain so much power over the state of the district’s budget.“
In fact the district did control things in the last negotiation, resulting in the union agreeing to take less than the law dictated.
By nature, education is a people business; any school district will have a large percentage of its budget in salaries.
When Dekom implies that the district ceded power to the teachers, he chooses to ignore fact as he sows the seeds of distrust.
Consider this fact: Manhasset’s five-year average budget increase of 1.41 percent is a full percent lower than the average Nassau County increase of 2.48 percent. That is not handing power to the union.
2. Also stated, “The fact is the school board originally supported an almost 9 percent tax hike and then brought it down to a little under 6 percent.“
Again, facts ignored about the budget process. The board did not originally support a 9 percent tax hike. The budget process is as follows: the administration proposes a budget to the board, as was done on March 2.
That begins the process of budget discussions between the community, led by the board, and the administration which then culminates in the board adopting a budget for community vote. The lack of respect for the precision of the details of the process creates a damning and intentionally misleading misperception.
3. Dekom’s closing quote in the article states, “The budget ultimately lies with needing a superintendent and school board that needs to grapple with the unions, not go out of their way to please them.“
The district’s record over the last few years has proven that a collaborative effort to address issues facing the district results in a far healthier environment for students, a more highly functioning environment for professionals and a more widely respected school environment for the community. The recent two year teacher contract saved the district $650,000 and with the givebacks in the June 18 budget, those savings total nearly $1 million. The District’s average tax levy increase over the last five years is 1.75 percent while the Nassau County average has been 2.93 percent.
I prefer results like that for our community any day over a divisive environment of black armbands and picketing. Thank you to our superintendent and school board for rolling up their sleeves, grappling with issues and delivering results for our students and for Manhasset taxpayers.
4. More part truths, “One hundred and twenty other Long Island school districts that also live with the state’s mandates managed to come in under the tax cap, but this one could not.“
The average tax levy cap on Long Island is 3.55 percent. Manhasset’s is only 0.15 percent. That is a materially important difference.
Dekom states in the article that the calls informed residents their school taxes would have increased by $1,000. The number released by the district was $731 for the average Manhasset home assessed at $1.035 million (that number for the June 18th revote is now $265).
Not only is it irresponsible, but it is false to state that school taxes would have increased $1,000. That’s clear evidence that Dekom does not hold himself to the highest standard of the truth.
As for the e-mail recently circulating from the MPSA titled “JUST FOR THE RECORD,” it is important to note that the second to last sentence is intentionally incorrect. It reads, “In other words, if the 2013-2014 proposed budget fails on June 18, the budget reverts to last year’s level.“
While the citing just above (beginning with 8..) is correct, this last sentence should read, “In other words, if the 2013-2014 proposed budget fails on June 18, the Tax Levy reverts to last year’s level.”
When the MPSA e-mail asks the question, “Was last year’s budget austere?” the question conveniently avoids the fundamental question: Would an austerity budget be austere?
A failed budget on June 18 leading to the adoption of an austerity is not a choice to be taken lightly, as the e-mail seems to imply.
Here’s why, if the June 18 vote fails, the tax levy cannot increase, forcing an additional $1.5 million of cuts to the June 18 budget. So take what we are trying to make peace with for June 18, and think about taking out an additional $1.5 million. That is austere!
Benefit costs are increasing by $1.5 million and must be paid, leaving the rest of the expense lines in the austerity budget to be reduced total of $4 million if it fails. That is austere!
The real question is what happens to excellence in education and the future for education in Manhasset if the budget fails on June 18?
Dino Moshova
Manhasset
