Local District Tax Increases (Not Decreases, of Course)

Shoreham-Wading River +2%, programs and teaching positions maintained

Rocky Point +5%, programs and teaching positions maintained

Longwood +4%, cuts in staff and programs

Miller Place +7%, cuts in teachers and programs


Which budgets do you think will pass?

W.W.B.S? (What Would Belushi Say?)

Well, this was the final "budget hearing" meeting. What was accomplished over these past four meetings? Nothing. The board, administration and the unions (er, units) missed a great opportunity to take control of this crisis, hammer out a deal and present it to the crowd and show how all of the interested parties could work together for the common good -- themselves and the residents. Lumps would have to be taken, but if all shared in the pain the taxpayers would have, in all likelihood, rallied behind them and passed a budget.

But, noooooo.

We went to four excruciating meetings, each one building on the pointlessness of the one before. The bad news was presented as a done deal, the crowd complained, cried, begged, and exhorted, all probably for nothing. We were presented with no valuable information. We are still in the dark as to what negotiations are taking place with the unions -- we don't even know if there are any negotiations. All we know is that 30+ teachers are likely to get the axe, and all of the good stuff that the kids participate in is getting cut. And, we are gonna get a big tax increase. So, what was accomplished?

Other districts in the area have worked together and taken proactive steps to save jobs, programs and present a unified, coherent plan to their residents. Middle Country comes to mind. Their unions all agreed to concessions and they worked out a deal with the district. Then, they let the residents know what they were doing. There is a high probability that their budget will be passed because the residents there have been kept informed, and the unions got a PR coup by proactively making concessions. They acknowledged to the people that pay them that they understand we are in tough times, and they wanted to do their part. Good for them.

Mr. Mangani, you told the audience that the board is kept well informed via the state's clip service, so you all must have known about the Middle Country deal. Why didn't you at least try to get out in front of this matter, rather than have these pointless hand-wringing meetings?

What do we have in Miller Place? A board that answers very few questions and hides behind legalisms. They should have been having round-the-clock talks with the unions right after the first budget meeting (debacle) and then presented something to the public at the next meeting, and by the third meeting that information would have been digested and we, the taxpayers, would at least have a reasonable picture of what to expect for next year -- program-wise and tax-wise. Instead, we heard more of the same. Nothing.

Now we learn that Jim Moran has quit as president and trustee. But, did he really? The email read by Angela Guido was confusing, and even the board seemed befuddled. And then(!) we learn that two or possibly three trustees (did that include Moran?) will not stand for reelection. My guess is that the two who should go will not be the ones leaving. What is going on here?

Some valuable questions were asked again last night -- again because they were not answered by last night as they should have been. A parent asked what AP classes were being cut. That should be an easy one to answer especially since the schedules are already be made up (or may be completed by now) for next year. Why won't they answer the question?

The agitated guy spoke again last night, but this time he was more like Columbo than My Cousin Vinny. I think the new persona works well -- run for a seat! I would vote for you!

Another rumor floating around is that the PTA president is going to run for a board seat. That would be a bad move as this person is widely thought to be way too friendly with the administration and the teachers. The district needs someone who will represent the residents and not be a rubber stamp for the unions and administration.

The Backbencher vs Pelosi 2.0

There is a special election scheduled for Tuesday, March 29 for the Suffolk County Legislature's 6th District, which includes Miller Place.  Can you feel the electricity in the air?

The contenders are Martin Haley, a career pol from the Miller Place/Rocky Point area.  He has already been in the legislature and he is currently building commissioner for the Town of Brookhaven.  He had a stint as a realtor, but he seems to have stuck to government work.  He is running on the Republican ticket.

The Democrat is Sarah Anker, a "longtime community leader, public servant and working mom with a track record of standing up for the community and getting results", to quote her website.  While she has yet to hold a political office, she has mingled with the Dems for quite a while on such pressing issues as helicopter over flights of the North Shore (against) and duck hunting in Mt. Sinai Harbor (also against but, curiously, she is endorsed by Planned Parenthood).  She was able to grab a small slice of the limelight with her helicopter issue, when she got Chuck Schumer to come out for a press conference about it (but, now that I think about it, how difficult is it to get Schumer to appear someplace where cameras are also present?).

Who to pick?  

Pick the quintessential political benchwarmer?  A nice guy, probably with his heart in the right place, but one of those guys who's specialty is staying under the radar while keeping on the public payroll, doing enough to hold a job but not enough to tick anyone off or bring much attention to himself.  Or, the energetic community activist who has plenty of ideas on how to make your life better and, by golly, she is gonna make sure your life is better!  As per her website, she is a mom (mom's know best)  and she gets results.  She was "Woman of the Year for the Environment", so I am sure she knows what is our best interest.

Even better, Anker is endorsed by a whole bunch of unions.  The Long Island Federation of Labor endorses her, and the unions are so great for our economy, aren't they?  But wait, Haley has the endorsement of the Sheriff's union.  That makes him a "law and order" guy, right?

So, who to pick?

Anker is a woman, and her election would mean that there would be FOUR, not a measly three, women in the legislature.  And, as a woman, she would bring us all up to speed on womanly-type stuff, right?  Haley is a guy, and he does not represent anyone special.  

So, after much thought and deliberation (well, some, at least), I have come to a conclusion.  I am going to vote for Martin Haley.  He is old enough and been at the public trough long enough to have his income and retirement covered, so he is not going to do anything really radical to upset the apple cart and really make government "responsive" (which means, "even more expensive and ridiculous") .  He will be a reliable Republican vote and that will be good enough for me. 

Sarah Anker, on the other (left) hand, represents the Nancy Pelosi-ing of local politics.  She fits the mold of the well-off stay at home mom who is no longer challenged by her kid's homework, shoe shopping and nail-saloning, and her husband probably wants her to do something other than spend money.  She exudes the self righteousness that most liberals have -- that they know what is best for us, and they want the government to force us to conform to their ideal image.

With both candidates, you know what you are going to get.  With Haley, you get a career go-along-to-get-along, slightly back-roomish, pol.  With Anker, you get Gladys Kravitz (although Sarah is much easier on the eyes).

If it can happen in London, it can happen here....

"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money. "
— Margaret Thatcher

This is what happens when the public gravy train jumps the tracks.

Chuck Norris' Japanese twin brother

A good read to start the day....

On a day when the news about radiation levels has turned more ominous, we need something to boost morale. So here you go: Meet Hideaki Akaiwa, formerly an unknown resident of northern Japan, recently a hero responsible for saving two lives, soon to be global Internet shorthand for alpha-male bravado in the same way Chuck Norris is.

Read the whole thing at HotAir.

How long before it comes to Miller Place?

“We Are at War” – NEA’s Plan of Attack

Via HotAir.

More on the public pension timebomb...

Via InstaPundit:

Actuaries got another rebuff this week when the labor-friendly CalPERS board voted to leave its earnings forecast unchanged, much like a CalSTRS board action in December that did not lower its forecast as far as actuaries recommended.
A lower earnings forecast raises pension costs for state and local governments struggling with budget cuts during a deep recession. But another rate increase also might fuel the drive for pension reforms that increase worker costs and cut their benefits.
“I was afraid we were going to throw gasoline on the fire in the public pension debate,” Neal Johnson of the Service Employees International Union told a CalPERS committee after a key vote.

Herein lies the main problem with public employee pensions:  they are administered by politicians (who are influenced by union campaign contributions) and investment advisors (chosen, in part, by the parties that will collect the pensions) BUT the vast bulk of the funds contributed come from public coffers (ie, us, the taxpayer).  If the calculations are all wrong, the pension beneficiaries don't care -- they have us to make up the shortfall. 

The unions have very little skin in the game.  And few people know this.

Public Employees Rush to Retire

Interesting article in the Wall Street Journal.  It mostly references public workers in CA and WI putting in their papers quicker to avoid any potential future downside to their benefits.  Can this be far behind in NY?  Is it already happening in Miller Place?  And, are we prepared for it?  My guess would be no.  Retiring employees represent a big short-term hit to the budget.  The deadline in MP (maybe the whole state) to submit retirement papers was this past February 28.  We, the residents, will not know until later in the year who is retiring, so we have no idea what budgetary impact this will have.

Just another financial thing to be concerned about.

Are the unions for us, or against us?

Since I am not a member of a union, I am going with the latter.

CAUGHT ON TAPE: Former SEIU Official Reveals Secret Plan To Destroy JP Morgan, Crash The Stock Market, And Redistribute Wealth In America

Oh look -- this story has got legs.  It's now up on Memeorandum.

And now for something completely different...

George Monbiot is a columnist for the (very) liberal UK paper The Guardian.  Over the years, he has been reliably against everything the US does in the world (especially when the president was named Bush) and he has been a standard bearer for every environmental cause out there (and I mean out there). 

So, it was not a shock to see that he has weighed in on the Fukishima reactor troubles in Japan.  What is a shock is that he defends nuclear power and he goes on to explain what a miracle of science and engineering the plant is to have survived and earthquake and tsunami that were quite larger than anticipated. 


Read it here.

So, I went to the next MP budget meeting....

It was Groundhog Day Live.  Presentation by the business superintendent on faculty and staff costs.  Of course, and a mite bit conveniently, the talk was all round-about like, as the "units" (I guess that is a new euphemism for "unions") are in negotiations with the district, so nothing could really be discussed.  Making this meeting another exercise in time wasting.  The only thing that matters is how much the unions (er, units) are going to give up.  Are they going to take a pay cut? Defer or eliminate raises? Pay more into their healthcare and pensions?  Until we learn this we have not learned anything valuable at these meetings.

If the board and the parents at the meeting think that the people assembled in the cafeteria on Wednesday night are a representative sample of the greater Miller Place community, and that by pleading for the theater program, and robotics, and clubs, etc is going to convince people to vote for a huge budget increase they are sadly mistaken. Unless the units (!) give back -- and give back substantially enough for the residents to feel that they are sharing in the budgetary pain -- the budget will go down to defeat. 

Please, unions (units) and administration -- get serious!  Get to the table and work out a deal that will show the taxpayers that you are serious about preserving jobs and the educational programs here in Miller Place.  And then let us know about it before we go to the polls.

A few more random thoughts:

To the slight guy who passionately urged the administration to cut itself, and to great applause.  You spoke at both meetings and said basically the same thing, but you bring the red meat and you had plenty of people on your side.  But, you then attempted to interrupt and shout down another parent who was having her say (admittedly, she was not making much sense).  You totally blew the goodwill you built up, and now you are going to be known as a crank.  Way to go!

Why are Seth Lipshie and John Magnani at these meetings?  Neither of them speak a word.

Ann O'Brien often brings up the bogeyman named "Unfunded Mandates".  Sounds like an episode of Will and Grace.  How about naming some, and their associated costs?  Until you do that most people aren't going to know what you are talking about.

And, Mr. Kramer.  You are way too smart to drop that silly line about Wall Street being bailed out while education is not.  The main similarities between the Wall Street banks and the education establishment is that they are both intertwined with politicians who do their bidding -- Wall St gives campaign donations and then pliable pols write laws favorable to them just as the unions extract dues from guys like you and them give them to pols who write laws favorable to them.  Same thing.  The unions are asking for -- and getting -- the same treatment.  Hence, we have Government Motors and Chrysler bailed out by us, but benefiting the UAW.  The teachers unions got -- albeit somewhat indirectly -- a bailout when Obama gave $billion$ to state governments in the "stimulus" package.  The problem now is that there really is NO MORE MONEY.

Poking fun at the Unions

This goes after the unions, not the teachers.  There is a big difference.

Thoughts on the March 2 Miller Place Board of Ed meeting

Went to the board meeting on Wednesday and it was pure theater.  Parents and kids lined up to tell the board how terrible it is that they want to cut clubs, sports, etc.  Some crying.  But, if the entire assembly was a choir, then we were all singing from the same hymnal -- nobody wants to cut drama, or AP, or varsity club, et al -- students, faculty, parents and administration.  And, for what?  A savings of a few hundred thousand dollars -- about 1/2% of the entire $60+million budget.  Peanuts!  This is practically rounding error.

What took place on Wednesday was the ritual that has taken place at almost every school board meeting at budget time, and not just in Miller Place.  It is the time-worn, yet effective, strategy of getting the students and their parents very worked up at the prospect of losing all of the extra-curricular activities and enrichment classes and soften them up to accept a large tax increase -- "for the children".  Even a casual observer of the school budgeting process knows that what the residents actually vote on is maybe 20% of the budget.  We vote on busing, and clubs and sports and stuff, but the real meat and potatoes -- the personnel costs that comprise about 75% of the budget -- are off the table.

We have arrived at a crossroads.  The United States is broke.  We are a debtor nation.  New York State is broke, and solvency is not even on the horizon.  Local governments are broke, even if they are still (successfully) using bookkeeping tricks that would have made an Enron finance guy blush to keep up the illusion of fiscal fitness.  That brings us to the school districts, which used to be largely funded by their residents, but are now dependent on a alms from the feds and the state pols (which -- surprise -- are not coming).  Panic time!  The kids are gonna suffer!  They won't get into college! They will get into trouble!  Our houses are gonna be worthless!

Allow me to step back and look at who is responsible (or to blame, however you like your linguistic semantics).  

First, who is not responsible?  The parents and residents of the district.  Parents here support the district in myriad ways.  The PTO fundraisers are packed.  The wrapping paper is bought.  The concerts, awards nights, fashion shows, sporting events, etc are all well attended and financially supported.  No one can say that the people of Miller Place are cheap.

Who is not totally responsible, but shares some of it?  That would be the rank-and-file teachers.  I cannot blame someone who, when presented with an opportunity (be it a contract, a deal, whatever) that is financially advantageous, takes it. Whether it is a good salary, generous medical and retirement benefits, good working conditions and/or high job security, who among us would turn that down? And yet.  These are all smart people.  Didn't any of them have a nagging feeling in the back of their brains that said "Maybe this is too good to be true?  Maybe this can't work out indefinitely?" 

Going up the blame chain we have the school boards, past and present, and the administrations that ostensibly serve at their pleasure.  Maybe we have reached a point where the structure and economics of modern school district operations are beyond the capacities of volunteer school boards.  That is a debate for another time -- we gotta dance with the one we brought to the party. However, we have to believe that they are advised, or at least informed, by the professional managers whom they hire -- the superintendents, the business managers, etc.  Somewhere in all of those PhDs, MAs and EdDs there must be someone who can look at a balance sheet, read the papers and do a little forward thinking  and arrive at the conclusion that there are (certainly were) storm clouds ahead. 

The financial crisis of the past few years has been unfolding with painful obviousness, but here we seem to be left with the same old plans -- beg the state for more money, whine about "unfunded mandates", and keep on keepin' on with labor contracts that seem to have been negotiated in a vacuum (that is a nicer way of saying "smoke filled room").

Who bears the most responsibility?  Well, it is a tie.  The union leadership, along with their "honest" politician allies in the legislature.  And by honest, I define it the same way that Abraham Lincoln cabinet member  Simon Cameron did:  "An honest politician is one who, when he is bought, will stay bought".  Again, the union folks are doing what they are supposed to do -- get the best deal for their membership.  Can't fault them for that.  But, they have gone about it in a way that flouts democracy and perverts the collective bargaining process.  They have bought and paid for the "other side of the table".  Where a Teamster rep sits across from the table of the trucking company CEO and hammers out a contract , both want the best deal for the ones they represent.  The union rep wants the most money for the least amount of work, while the CEO wants the opposite.  But, both of them realize that they are not involved in a zero-sum game.  If the CEO gives away the store to the union, then another business will see that and compete for his business by offering a better price.  The company can go out of business and then the great contract that the union rep won would be worthless.  This is a pretty effective check and balance in a free economy.  

However, the teacher's union, as well as all of the other public employee unions, do not negotiate the same way -- they don't have to.  There is no CEO sitting across the table from the union rep.  Oh, school board members, city managers, etc. will all argue that they are fulfilling the CEO role -- they say that they are looking out for the "little guy" (that would be us).  But, this is baloney.  The CEO has his job, and maybe his company, on the line.  Negotiate a good contract (in his view) and he has made himself more valuable to the company, and possibly made the company more valuable and efficient (which is his job).  If he fails, he can pay with his job, or even the failure of the company (GM and Chrysler execs -- you know you can disregard this last section).  

The public employee union rep sits across the table from a person who has no real skin in the game.  Someone else is ultimately paying the bill, so there is no real urgency to fight for a contract that really benefits the organization he works for.  If he negotiates a lousy deal it might be years before it becomes apparent, and even if it is known early on there is no shareholders or board of directors to hold him responsible and possibly kick him out of the job.  To make it even worse -- incestuous, even -- the person sitting across the table from the union rep might even owe his job to the union.  After all, the largest political contributors in the US are not the evil oil companies, or the evil Wall Street tycoons, or the evil (fill in whatever robber baron stand-in you wish) but the unions, and the public employee unions are on the top of that heap.  Money being the mother's milk and all that of politics, what politician -- from the school board member all the way up to the President) is going to resist  the sweet, sweet sound of all those dead presidents chatting in his or her campaign bank account?  Not many.  

But it goes much higher than that.  I am not suggesting that local school board members are "bought" by the unions.  But, the state and federal politicians?  What do you think?   Millions of dollars flow from the coffers of the unions (extracted from the union members, like it or not) into the campaign war chests of politicians, and they expect results from those payments.  Laws are passed that are union-friendly, and the costs of complying with those laws are borne by the taxpayer.  The individual tax payer has no clout -- what is my one crummy vote worth?  But, the unions deliver oodles of votes to their chosen pols, and those votes have plenty of clout.  

It all boils down to this:  who represents me?  I am not in the teacher's union, nor am I a politician.  I am supposed to be represented by the school board, but how does that really work out?  The boards are often made up of teachers, or people married to teachers, or people represented by other unions.  All of them have skin in the game, but the skin they have is mine!

So, back to the packed board meeting.  It is a show, and it is dishonest, and we, the people, are being played for dupes (sadly, again).  We plead and cry about the things that are important to us, but, financially, are practically meaningless in a budgetary sense.  We cannot do anything about anything, folks, in the short run.  This is a union/government created problem -- all of it, every bit of it (am I clear on that).  The unions and their political accomplices have to fix it.  The game of hot potato is over and the current "leaders" are stuck with it.  There is NO MORE MONEY.  Raising the taxes higher and higher will not make more money come in.  It will force people out of their houses and chase the business that are left away.  The solution is painfully simple.  The union members are going to have to make major concessions -- pay their fair share of their medical, pony up for their pensions and forgo raises -- and probably take a pay cut -- if they all still want to have jobs.  That is the reality -- it HAS been the reality, but they have be refusing to accept it.   Accept it.  Taxes across the board are already way too high, and the stone is bled dry.  We, the residents, have given all we can.  It is time for the union to fix this mess.