NYS COMPTROLLER AUDIT REPORT DISCUSSED AT AUG ^ BOE MEETING

Following Trustee J. Tampellini’s critique of the Commack District’s “Response” to the NYS Comptroller’s Audit Report, the other four trustees also made statements on the subject. Here are some comments on those statements..
This portion of the meeting commenced with Ms DiGirolamo asking Mr Tampellini whether his activism started after his children graduated from Commack HS. This was answered in the affirmative; but an attempt by Mr Tampellini to elucidate was interrupted and ruled out of order (poor decision) by Mr Hartman. There is probably no connection between the activism and the children’s graduation. But, if there were, it is understandable. One would not want their children to be affected by the possible vindictiveness of some administrator and/or teacher. But , isn’t it sad that she would bring it up; it probably worked in the PTA. Ms DiGirolamo continued by asking the BOE’s attorney whether (words to the effect) ‘there is any place in there (the audit report) where they (the NYS auditors) cite breaking a law’. The attorney did not reply with a yes or no but stated that the “Comptrollers Report spoke for itself. He then read the following selective out-of-context sentences (page 2): “The Board and District officials need to improve oversight of the District’s budget process to adequately manage the District’s financial condition. From 2011-12 through 2013-14, the District reported (my italics) year-end unrestricted fund balance at levels that essentially complied with the 4 percent fund balance limitation.” As to ‘breaking the law’, the correct answer was: yes. The Comptroller’s Report does speak for itself in this regard as per the following excerpt from page 8 which unambiguously states: “The District’s practice of consistently planning operating deficits by appropriating unrestricted funds that were not needed to finance operations in effect caused the District to exceed the statutory limitation of unrestricted fund balance of no more than 4 percent of the ensuing year’s appropriations. As a result, the District retained significantly more than the amount of unrestricted funds allowed.” Do you need a lawyer to interpret this? The entire audit report should be required reading for the BOE and their lawyer. Other than the above, the remarks of Ms DiGirolamo, Mr Behar and Mr Hartman were generally pedestrian and predictable.
Ms Masciello generally took the high road. She noted that the BOE would take the comments of the NYS audit seriously (Is there a choice?); this was an improvement over Dr James’ comment in the audit report that the district “will review (my italics) the expenditure areas discussed in the audit report…” She asked for Board unity, stability, courtesy, and for a board that acts as a team. But, aren’t these words basically euphemisms for government by oligarchy – that is, isn’t she advocating that this group of five people make decisions behind the scenes, and then appear at public meetings not to discuss but to announce them. Where is the accountability in such a system? And isn’t the real purpose of such an attitude to quiet dissenters and to disguise disagreeements? The idea of the Board as a team is, in some ways, the antithesis of democracy, and not really applicable to an organization that is closer to a legislative body rather than to a team. After all, Board members are elected, and must ultimately answer to the community; they should be allowed to express themselves freely, especially when they disagree with other trustees.. I believe the community would want to hear what these elected representatives think about the issues, not only their “unanimous decisions ”. Ms Masciello’s also wants to give the children “the best education they can get”. Stop the presses. Does she mean “ within the bounds of what the community (not a part of the community) can afford” ? Remarks of this type blur the line between the schools and the community. The community is much more than the schools, and its fabric is determined by those residents who come to Commack to live and raise their families, not to the transients who come “for the schools” but leave when their children graduate because the taxes they voted for are too high. And as to public participation at Board meetings: it would seem desirable to pattern them on town hall meetings, not on a set of rules intended to limit discussion. Other than budgets and business, Commack might welcome information on topics like the status of Marion Carll Farm and negotiations with the Teachers union. Why the secrecy? And why can’t some of these surplus funds be used to make necessary repairs to the farm instead of paying lawyers to circumvent the district’s responsibilities or hoarding that money. The effect of decreasing enrollment including possible school closings and the costs of the IB program including its use in middle school are other items that need to be presented in a public forum. It has been said elsewhere that democracy is hard, and sometimes it’s messy. That’s the way it is. The Board needs to listen and respect opposing viewpoints, and act on them as appropriate, not just pay lip service and not just cater to special interests.
Trustee Tampellini should continue to speak out on the issues. Some words from Mahatma Gandhi are pertinent: ”Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth.”