MEET THE BAUMANN SCHOOL BUS DRIVERS
SCHOOLS
050605 Candidates running for Katonah School Board
Katonah-Lewisboro School District
Five candidates - Eve Hundt, Felycia Sugarman, Selby Kiffer, Debra LaPerch, and Bob Dixon - met at the offices of The RecordReview on Monday, May 2, for a round-table discussion about their candidacies for the KatonahLewisboro School Board. Mr. Dixon is the only incumbent, and one candidate, Stephanie Tobin, dropped out of the race.
Q: Why are you interested in being on the board?
Eve Hundt: I've been attending school board meetings and have been involved in the budget process and educational issues in the district for four or five years. I think I have a good working knowledge of the issues and board practices and some of the problems with our current board.
Ms. LaPerch: I also have been very active in attending board meetings. I'm running because I believe I can make a difference. My history of educational service to the district as well as my past educational experiences makes me a good person to step up to the board of education.
Mr. Dixon: My main goal if I am reelected is to hire a consulting firm that specializes in education. Their mandate would be to try to reduce costs without compromising the education of the children.
Mr. Kiffer: I think we're too focused on the education complex and meeting the needs of special groups and special interests and taking away the focus on children. I'm sure things are going to change for the next 10, 20 years, but kids still need to be taught how to think critically, how to write critically, and I want the emphasis on that.
Felycia Sugarman: My children have been in the school district for only three years - I have twins in second grade. I have been attending board meetings. I'm on the foreign language subcommittee, which started a couple of years ago with an endeavor to start teaching foreign language earlier than we currently do, which is the seventh grade.
The reason I threw my hat in the. ring was that I find myself walking away from every board meeting thinking that they aren't working as a team. But there has been some good work done, there's no question about that, and I don't think we should take that' away' from-anyone - not the administration, not the board, not the teachers, not the students. There have been tremendous accomplishments.
But so much of what is happening is so divisive. I have the ability and the experience to create teams. I don't think it's a matter of whether the administration is leading the board or the board is leading the administration. It's a matter of the board and the administration and the community working together as a team. That's the way we can really encompass teaching our kids and having a community that can coexist with everybody - parents and senior citizens - and there isn't this structure where we are pitting seniors against parents and rich people against poor people.
Q: Will
you support the district's budget proposal, on May 17?All the candidates said they would support the budget except for Mr. Kiffer, who explained his position.
Mr. Kiffer: I would like to have a budget I can support. I don't know where all the $93 million is going. I do know that the district is asking us to pay $42,000 a day more to run' the schools this coming year over last ear. The district is also camouflagng facilities improvements, which hould be part of the budget proper, s a separate bond initiative note. ,hat will come back and the taxpay:rs will have to pay that over five rears as part of debt and that then vill presented to us as part of the fixed costs that we can't do anything about.
Q: Are there services or educational )opportunities that are not being addressed by the district that you would push for if you were a board member?
Felycia Sugarman: I was on a committee that dealt with class size. I believe in many cases, but not all, small class sizes are imperative to a good education. The district has been moving in the right direction. But we have to be very careful not to commit ourselves to something we aren't willing to pay for down the line. If we start mandating small class sizes and you get increased enrollment, do you build, do you hire dozens of teachers? These would become some of the issues.
Deborah LaPerch: I agree we need to start foreign language sooner. The inherent difficulty in that is teacher availability. It's so difficult to find foreign teachers. There are years where one foreign language class had three different teachers.
It's important to have low class size, but you are going to get 15 in a class, which is never going to happen in a public school system.
Ms. Hundt: There has been such focus on detail and minutiae like cost-cutting or building maintenance, we can't see the forest through the trees. I would like to study our educational objectives to determine as a community, not just as a board of education; what kind of school system do we want? What is our mission? What is our vision? And from that develop policies, goals, and objectives. I feel that we are throwing things out there - class size
is a good example - but it may not necessarily match our own policies, rules, and objectives. This is a little bit backwards.Mr. Kiffer: I think it would be very good to add an Asian Language to our foreign languages or our World Languages. Get the focus back on teaching and learning. I also think the libraries need to be improved, particularly the high school library. -the middle-sclhool library is much better at meeting the needs of the students, and don't think of technology as the only resource that people have.
Mr. Dixon: What you've heard here today is a bunch of intelligent people that are really interested in helping our school district. They seem to have a lot of good ideas, not necessarily all agreeing with each other. I think that particularly you, Eve, if you get elected, you will be delighted to participate in the longrange strategic plan because basically we are going to have a consultant to help us because it's difficult to determine to lay this out. Many school districts have started this, and the first thing they do is get a consultant, and they help the administration and the board determine how they are going to go.
Q: How do you perceive the current board's divisiveness, and what would you do to make things whole again?
Ms. Hundt: A few of us went to some board training offered by the Westchester-Putnam School Board Association on Saturday. There's a lot of guidance and training out there, there's best practices. And we've had presentations on how to function as a board.
There is a best way to function as a board, and it's well documented, and the question is whether you are going to follow these practices and adhere to them or not.
We are seeing the fallout now from not following proper protocol and best practices. No board member has any power to act independently, and they function as a board. Where we've crossed the line is that you need to be respectful to fellow board members and the administration because you need to work together with these people.
It's common sense. We've had board members that have completely circumvented their fellow board members and the administration. Now we have a board that didn't work all that well as a team to begin with, that has been incredibly fractured and handicapped by these kinds of actions.
Felycia Sugarman: My understanding is that starting last summer, Mr. Dixon and [board member Bruce] Pavalow received anonymous letters informing them of some improprieties.
If you're a board member and you get an anonymous letter that has a ring of truth to it, you have choices on how to react. The letters started coming in last summer. In the fall, [school superintendent Dr. Robert] Lichtenfeld asked the board to raise the level of the annual audit to be more detailed. He did that to avoid a sense of a Roslyn [the school district on Long Island in which budget improprieties took place] thing happening here. The board didn't take any action on that request.
Why they didn't ask for a full audit, a detailed audit, or a targeted audit is just beyond me. Then they go to this Hevesi videoconference and are told they could bring it to the board, the president of the board, or report them to the state. What they decided was to go to the state.
To me, it's like you find out that your little brother has done something really bad, and instead of going to him or going to your mom and dad, you call the police. I don't quite get it. We shouldn't lose sight of the question, which is, "Is anyone stealing?" If you're going to be on the board, you need to be held to a higher standard, behave in a professional manner, and follow some protocol that helps your community get through stuff like this.
Ms. LaPerch: My take on all of this is that I've heard everything, but there's a whole lot we don't know. I personally will not cast aspersions on anyone - pro, con, or indifferent - until all the facts come out, and I don't think all the facts have come out. People ask me, "What would you have done?" and I would hope that I would have been able to go to my fellow board members, but not knowing what the true climate is among them and not knowing what happens in executive sessions - because we can't know that - and not knowing what other things were discussed and the feeling that was among the whole group, I don't know if I would've done something differently I wasn't in that situation, so I think it's very interesting that people put themselves in a situation where they don't have all the facts. It's very dangerous to put yourself in a situation and hypothesize about what you would do about being in that exact situation.
I hope that [State Comptroller] Alan Hevesi's office comes back and says that there was no wrongdoing. I hope that we can get on with things after that. I think this is a bump in , the road. I think that it was sort of predictable given the climate of our community and how they were not happy and satisfied with some of the things that they have been hearing over the course of the last couple of years.
These are elected officials. They all won votes that got them into office, so I do agree that there are best practices and there are policies to adhere to, but I don't think anyone can say, unless they were in that situation, what they would have done.
Mr. Kiffer: I agree with Debra. An audit is under way now. We can't know exactly what put it into place. We should just see where it goes. The fact is our district was going to be audited anyway because every school in the state is going to be audited because of Roslyn, and maybe this will be a blessing and we can get it out of the way.
Clearly, the administration has exacerbated the situation. They've tried to embarrass the board members, they've postponed and rearranged agendas so they can bring this issue up at a particularly sensitive time to try to incite the public and turn some anger onto Mr. Pavalow in particular. The fact is that they've been cooperative with the minority. Only the majority of the board can put something on the agenda.
The superintendent was hectoring Mr. Pavalow, [board member Bob] Meyer, and Mr. Dixon as to why they didn't take up his suggestion of having an auditor earlier. Well, three people couldn't have done it. They have to have the majority of the board. I've been at board meetings where the majority have repeatedly told the minority to FOIL for information rather than having it shared. At the meeting on April 5, there was a resolution about appointing the law firm to represent the district. The .resolutionwas that. Shaw .& Perelson be appointed as the law firm for all school business except labor.
The majority was willing to go along with that if that motion carried by either a seven-to-nothing or a six-to-one vote. When there were two votes against it, they immediately withdrew the clause about excluding labor to give Shaw & Perelson all the business. That's the worst sort of strong-arm tactic the majority can use.
There's bickering that shouldn't be going on - board members shouldn't be calling each other liars. It's embarrassing to be in the audience when that's going on. But there's two sides to every argument, and this is not the fault exclusively of only one side.
Mr. Dixon: You have to have in place the structure so that it works.
When I was sworn in three years ago, the meeting after that, at 11 o'clock at night, [board president] Don Scott called for an executive session at the end of the meeting. I wanted to visit the schools when I was a candidate.
I have a 37-year-old son, and I felt that I needed to catch up. We went into executive session, and I didn't know about anything. Don Scott started this executive session by saying "no board member can visit a school unless accompanied by the full board and the administration." If there's anybody here that says that's wrong, then ask Brent Hailpern, because he defended me, and it ended up that he got into a screamfest with Don Scott. What Don Scott was doing was illegal, and that's how it ended. We told him that he cannot make a motion like that in executive session - it's illegal. That was the first thing.
Then I got an e-mail from Lichtenfeld to the board saying that he wouldn't give any information out to any board member unless the majority of the board approves it. That still exists. We soon learned that we could not get something on the agenda unless the majority of the board approved it.
That meant that you had to wait until there was a board meeting, and at the end of the meeting you had new business and then you could ask for it to be put on. By the time you get to it, the tulips are coming up, or the fall leaves are. That's the atmosphere that we started to operate in, and it was in place when the new members got elected.
It's a two-way street when the board operates, and we were told that we can't get information unless the board approves it, and we can't get anything on the agenda unless the board approves it, so basically we FOIL [use the Freedom of Information Law]. We cannot get enough information to participate, and that sets the tone of this back and forth.
I asked how many special ed students there were and that took three months. This got us off on the wrong foot, this dysfunctional board, but we still passed all the major initiatives and supported this year's budget.
Bob Meyer got a phone call right after he was elected from someone telling about alleged improprieties in the construction project. He called me up and asked what he should do, and I told him he had to go to the superintendent. He did that, and he gave the superintendent the person's telephone number, and several times after that he tried to follow up. He was told by the superintendent that he had taken care of it.
There were anonymous letters that came in, and we heard that they were thrown out by those members, including the president of the board, who told [board member Peter] Breslin that he throws them out. In November I got my first letter. At a conference in Albany, Hevesi said about 80 percent of fraud is uncovered by anonymous letters.
I really didn't know what to do. So I called the state comptroller's office, and he told me I had three options - which you've already heard. I decided to fax the letter to Hevesi. That's how the investigation got triggered.
I was reluctant to talk about it because the letter mentioned a longtime district employee whose reputation might have been besmirched, and if there were going to be an investigation, it might have been compromised by what was in the letter. The person who wrote the letter, I think, works in the district office. If the letter was given to the superintendent, there could have been retribution.
I agonized over what I did. I really did. It was not easy. I just thought I was doing the right thing. If I had to do it again, I would be tempted to throw it in the wastebasket. The whole issue in this election will be the whole Hevesi thing and a dysfunctional board, and that's unfortunate, with all other work that the board members have done.
Even though the letter became an issue, the board really does work well together. We are polite to each other. If you watched the tape of the last meeting, it's a nice tape, up until the end.
We are elected to this board, and in-trying to be a proactive nieiitber; we should be able to get answers and have a flow of information. We'll operate better. Other things to make it better are having the agenda earlier, and the minutes aren't published until three or four months.
Ms. Hundt: At the training that we went to, we heard that it was very common. Information, items on the agenda, that it did take the majority of the board to do that, and the reason for that is that you are a board. If all seven board members were asking the superintendent and the business office for all kinds of information all the time, how are they supposed to meet those requests? I understand that board members need information to do their job, but there has to be a balance between that and what the requests are and who is making the requests and why and how does that fit in with the board's goals, objectives, and policies.
Mr. Kiffer: At the meeting of April 12, during the public forum, there was a complaint about the lack of open practices with the board. The superintendent pointed out that "a single board member has no more standing than a private citizen as far as getting information." As it hap-., pened, the board counsel was there that night, and he said, "Individual board members have unrestricted access to school records." The superintendent asked what "unrestricted access" was. If board members can request information and get it, they wouldn't have these deadlocks. It's all well and good to talk about how everyone should work together, but somebody has to be in charge. According to the New York State School Board Association, the school board is charged with hiring and evaluating the superintendent and overseeing the general operation for the district and setting directions for academic programs, public relations facilities, and contracts. The board should be in charge.
Mr. Dixon: People who are reluctant to give you information, you have to wonder why.
Felycia Sugarman: There needs to be a very clear policy about how board members obtain information. There is a policy book, and it probably needs to be updated. We need guidelines and to have board members follow the guidelines so no members are acting like a cowboy or a maverick. On the other hand, nobody can hide anything. When you have $100 million and 4,000 kids and a large staff and an administration and a board, there have to be policies and they have to be followed or changed, but they can't be usurped.
Ms. LaPerch: I don't think the community needs to get involved in telling the board how to have visits at the school sites.
Mr. Dixon: I don't think it's fair for a board member to show up unannounced at a school.
Ms. LaPerch: It's unreasonable to think that a person has to be with six other board members and the administration to go to a school. What about the key issue whether majority rules or whether the individual has any rights?
Mr. Dixon: The superintendent could be a big help in helping us get together. We are going to get more access to information, and that will take a huge cloud away. As soon as we got the information about buying $700,000 worth of computers, the board voted unanimously to buy the technology.
Q: If the board doesn't move on resolving issues before the superintendent either renews his contract or retires, how do you think that will impact attracting teachers or administrators to the district?
Mr. Dixon: I see this thing getting better. We had to hire a principal about a year ago, and we got 150 applicants. We are a very desirable district. I don't think the board is going to be as contentious.
Ms. LaPerch: In the midst of all this I was part of an interview committee for a new global teacher. There were 100 applicants for the job. Narrowed down to 20, two gave a class, and that's after this all happened. Stuff happens, people get to an impasse collectively, and they start to iron out the things that go wrong in a school district. Differences of opinion being aired out is sometimes a good thing. It's not anything unusual.
Felycia Sugarman: I was on one of those committees for the increase Miller principal, and we took somebody already on staff. There were a lot of applicants, but the pickings were slim, and one thing that worries me is there are a lot people looking for work, but are there a lot of great people looking for work?
Ms. Hundt: When you are talking to potential superintendents, they are going to be very interested in the relationship to the board because that's who they report to. It's very naive to think we are going to attract the most talented, best-qualified experienced uperintendents when there is already such a lack of them to begin with.
Mr. Kiffer: If things are so terrible, Dr. Lichtenfeld and Dr. Benedict would have left. Our district remains very desirable, and good people are looking'' for challenging positions. It's been a couple of decades since we hired a superintendent, and to foresee all of these Armageddon developments when we have to hire one is simply not true. In expressing the idea that the kids are going to be hurt, that's demagoguery.