Here's your Platfom - AGAIN

What do the candidates for School Board stand for?  What do they want?  What's their platform?  If you really don't know the answers to these questions, lets review our Six Questions segment from the spring.

We asked all six candidates the same six questions and we posted their answers.   Here are their answers:

Dr. Lobby , James Rearic and Larry Robb from Region I, Amy Lhote and Chris Choncek from Region II and Stan Berdell from Region III. 

Please read the responses and then ask yourself you you still have questions about their platform.  If you do, we urge you to contact them.

Let's Focus on the Facts!

It's time to focus on the facts and stop allowing things like planted, threatening letters, ridiculous referendum questions and tax payer-paid  propagandana to overshadow the good old facts.

ELDERTON

We have a high school that was reopened that will graduate 26 this year.
There are a total of 280 students in grades 7-12.
42 classes with less than 10 students.
21 classes with less than 5 students.
There are over 10 classes there with 1 student.
EHS employs 36 teachers, 25 of which were NEW HIRES.
Cost per student is $14,650, MUCH more than the other schools.
There are three principals at that school.


FORD CITY

We are building a second gymnasium in Ford City on the third floor with a glass ceiling! WHY?
Gyms and cafeterias increase the education value for our students how?
The school is full of mold and raw sewage, it has severe structural issues – remember the falling balcony from a few years ago?!


KITTANNING

The Kittanning Junior High has more students in it grades 7-8 than 7-12 at Elderton.
We are going to close Kittanning Jr. High and merge it into the Senior High. Why?
Class sizes are going to be bumped to 30-36 while Elderton benefits from 5.


THE BUDGET

First they say our schools are over crowded at 90-95% capacity.
Now Chapp says that we are getting rid of nearly 70 positions due to LOW ENROLLMENT.
We can’t have it both ways – Over capacity and Low Enrollment.
Which one is it?
We are going to cut nearly the same amount of teachers that we hired to reopen Elderton. Elderton will stay the same, class size wise, but all other schools will have HIGHER class sizes due to this.


STAN CHAP

View the contract here

We have a Superintendent who is making as per his contract:

Salary History for Chapp: ( 3.9% increase for each year of contract)
Year 1: $150,000.00
Year 2: $155,850.00
Year 3: $161,928.15
Year 4: $168,243.35
Year 5: $174,804.84

*$3,000 annually in a tax sheltered annuity = $15,000 over 5 years

*$2,500 annually for holding a doctoral degree = $12,500 over 5 years

*$3,800 annually for disability insurance = $19,000 over 5 years.

* These figures do not include healthcare benefits he will receive

*116 unused sick days carried over from his past employment.

This totals to $857,326.34 for the contract life and DOES NOT include his fully-funded health care.


BILL BILL - aka William J. Williams

We have a SECOND Superintendent being paid $500 per day. That’s $2500 a week, $5000 plus a month, roughly $130,000 a year.


GARY MATTA

Our new Solicitor, hand picked by the current board majority.
He has a file at The Auditor General’s office for his misuse of funds in the Duquesne School District.
He pretty much bankrupted that district and ours is next.

Check out his file:  http://www.auditorgen.state.pa.us/Archives/Investigations/DUQ-Report.html

Armstrong County Voters, you are too smart to not see this for what it is.  You need to get out to vote tomorrow, and you need to vote for CHANGE!

Region I - Bethel, Burrell, Cadogan, Ford City, Ford Cliff, Manor, Manorville, North Buffalo and West Kittanning.  VOTE FOR: Paul Lobby and Larry Robb for the four year term and James Rearic for the two year term.

Region II - Applewald, East Franklin, Kittanning Boro, Rayburn, Washington, West Franklin and Worthington.  VOTE FOR:  Chris Choncek and Amy Lhote

Region III - Atwood, Boggs, Cowanshannock, Dayton, Elderton, Kittanning Twp, Pine, Plumcreek, Rural Valley, South Bend, Valley and Wayne.  VOTE FOR:  Stan Berdell

ASD Board Members Appalled by Administration's Actions

ASD Board members Chris Choncek, Jim Rearic and Joe Close issue the following statement:

Over the last few days, the Armstrong School District Administration has orchestrated a public relations campaign at taxpayer expense to promote the political agenda of the board majority. To spend district funds on such PR just days after voting to eliminate nearly 70 jobs in the name of cost cutting is a slap in the face to both the taxpayers and those employees about to lose their livelihoods.

As stewards of the taxpayer dollars, we are appalled at these blatant actions. For a 'newsletter' to be mailed to all district residents extolling the virtues of the proposed $80 million renovation arriving in homes just days before the Election reeks of politics. As board members we were never consulted on the content of this mailing and are troubled by the fact its contents are far from the norm of previous newsletters.

Coupled with the paid ads appearing in local newspapers 'explaining' the referendum questions it is clear these media efforts are coordinated to promote the agenda of the board majority at taxpayer expense. To state a no vote on the referendum means approval of the $80 million renovation plan is subjective at best. There is only one question on the ballot and the rhetoric contained in these taxpayer paid advertisements is not only opinion - but a main platform of those members of the board majority running for re-election.

Mailings and advertisements are not cheap and for the ASD to send out such propaganda at the taxpayer expense less than one week before the election is insulting to the constituents we represent and highly unethical behavior by professionals paid by taxdollars to serve the public - not a certain segment of the ASD board of directors.

This board majority has already spent millions to pay architects, bond agents and attorneys who do not even live in our district to advance this ill-conceived renovation plan. Now they are wasting more tax dollars promoting this boondoggle. It's bad enough the taxpayers have been stuck with the bill for the projects; they shouldn't have to foot the bill for the promotion of political agendas.

We demand the Armstrong School District administration and the board members responsible for this action personally reimburse the district taxpayers for this unauthorized use of taxpayer funds.

Six Questions for Chris Choncek

Chris Choncek is running for one of two seats in Region II, which represents Applewald, East Franklin, Kittanning Boro, Rayburn, Washington, West Franklin and Worthington. We've also heard from Dr. Lobby and Amy Lhote and look forward to hearing the anwers to these same six questions from all of the other candidates.

1- Since there seems to be quite a bit of negativity within the district, what do you feel is going right with ASD at this time?


Parents and taxpayers are becoming more engaged with school district business. They are holding the Armstrong School Board more accountable to its decisions and direction. It’s especially encouraging to see this in all areas of the school district, not just in one municipality or attendance area. It is my hope as we move forward that we can continue to keep the community engaged and seek their input as we try to improve the education in our district while still being responsible to the taxpayers.


2- What are your ideas to improve student performance?

I think it’s important to rely on the educational experts to arrive at new and effective ways to improve student learning. However, it is our responsibility as board members to keep up with the latest trends and initiatives that could potentially improve student learning. This knowledge should be shared and discussed with the rest of the board, as well as the administrators for possible follow-up action.


As an aside, I would like to see a reduction of the “teaching to the test” phenomenon we’ve experienced over the last few years as an attempt to improve PSSA scores. I think we’re doing a huge disservice to our students when we’re forced to provide a less varied curriculum with fewer courses in some subject areas simply due to the fact that they aren’t included on the PSSA exams. I realize that this issue goes beyond the control of our local school board, but it needs our attention nonetheless.


3- What is your biggest concern with ASD?

I’m very concerned that most of the decisions being made at this time are made without any regard to education and fiscal responsibility. It’s bad enough when there’s an overemphasis on one or the other, but to make decisions that negatively impact both the education and cost could put this district into a level of financial distress that will take many years to alleviate.


4- What is your perspective of the referendum question that has been placed on the ballot?

I think it’s an unnecessary distraction. The more we talk about it, the less we talk about the elections for the open school board seats. Our focus as voters should be on choosing the best candidates for those positions. The referendum is utterly confusing and convoluted. In addition, it’s non-binding so no matter what the outcome is, the board doesn’t have to act upon the results. Let’s simply put our efforts into getting those with common sense elected like Lobby, Rearic, Robb, Berdell and Lhote.


5- What do you feel is the primary job of a school board?

The primary role of a school board director is to focus on the vision, goals and policies of the district. The board “oversees” the education of the students. It is important to recognize that this governing body does not run the day-to-day operations.


A school board represents the entire community in advocating for quality education while still being effective stewards of the district’s resources.


6- What attributes, talents and abilities will you bring to our district?


As a 19-year administrator in higher education, I’ve had to rely heavily on data-driven decision making processes. I feel as though the skills I possess in statistics and measurement can be utilized to further enhance the effectiveness of the board.


In addition, I’ve held numerous positions on various committees and boards throughout my professional and personal careers. I recognize the importance of communication and collegiality in effective group decision-making and I hope to promote these attributes on the new school board.


Finally, the direct experience I gained over the last four years as an incumbent school board director will be extremely useful to the new board as I’m intimately familiar with school district processes and policies. I also have experienced the “highs” of making good decisions, as well as the lows associated with “bad” ones. All of these experiences (good and bad) have resulted in learning opportunities and will undoubtedly be used to help us make better decisions in the future.

Choncek Clarifies Position

I’ve been asked to clarify my position regarding the current issues facing the Armstrong School District. Most of what I’m about to state has been supported by the documented decisions I’ve made over the last 3 ½ years serving as School Board Director.

First and absolutely foremost, education has to be the major focus of this district in general, and of the School Board in particular. All too often, school board debate is dominated by discussions about “buildings” instead of the critical issues pertaining to education. The board needs to facilitate a shift in emphasis from facilities to education.

Unfortunately, because of the current school board majority’s action to borrow $82 million to renovate Elderton, Ford City and Kittanning High Schools, my immediate attention has to be directed towards further discussions about buildings. It’s important to state that I do not support the borrowing of $82 million for the current renovation projects. This is reflected and reinforced through my voting record in which I voted against any matter supporting these renovations. I have clearly stated my reasons for opposing this plan, but will briefly review those reasons below:

1.  Most people would agree that this is a bad time to borrow money. Contrary to the opinion of those who support the renovations, these are uncertain economic times. Further, with a looming pension crisis and significant budget cuts from state subsidies, this is the time to be fiscally responsible. It is not the time to be accruing additional debt.

2.  Furthermore, student enrollment is declining across the district. It is expected to decline in the future according to the Department of Education’s most recent enrollment projection report. Because of this continual decline, buildings are underutilized while the cost to educate students has steadily increased. It doesn’t make sense to invest money to renovate schools that are already extremely underutilized.

3.  Members of the current Board majority have made several claims that we (as a Board) haven’t addressed the needs of school district facilities in over 30 years. That statement is completely inaccurate. In fact, over the past 15 years, school district documents show that we’ve spent over $7.5 million on capital improvements that included such projects as roof and window replacements, upgrades to HVAC, electrical and phone systems, repairs to masonry and other structural components. To say that we’ve ignored the buildings is simply another poor attempt to trick the taxpayers into thinking that the renovations are a good idea.

4.  Finally, I reject this renovation plan simply based on the fact that the plan calls for little improvement to actual educational space. The plan focuses on gymnasiums, auditoriums and cafeterias. While these areas may be important to the overall development of students, they hardly justify the expense of an $82 million bond disguised as a project to improve education.

Thus, I have very good reasons for opposing the renovation plan put forth by the current board majority.

At the time of this writing, the board majority is desperately attempting to place a referendum question on the ballot asking voters whether they support building a $155 million comprehensive high school. This is a sham. To me, it demonstrates the complete lack of respect the board majority has for the taxpayers. I oppose the building of this comprehensive high school at this time for the same reason I oppose the renovation plan. In other words, in these uncertain economic times, this is the time to be fiscally responsible to the taxpayers. It is not the time to make hasty (and costly) decisions just because you feel as though you’re being backed into a corner. In addition, building a new comprehensive high school was never really on the table for discussion at any school board meeting during my tenure.

I strongly wish that I could provide the voters a definite answer as to what I would do with the bond money should I be re-elected. Unfortunately, there are just too many unknown variables to do so at this time. For example, some critical questions that need answers as part of our due diligence before proceeding include:

1.  How much of the bond money will have already been spent by the time the Board re-organizes?

2.  If one option is to return the money borrowed, what is the true cost to the district? What penalties are incurred as a result?

3.  What are other possible uses for the bond money besides renovations or building new? For example, is it feasible to use bond money to pay off existing debt?

How, may you ask, am I going to deal with this difficult predicament this district finds itself in? If I don’t support the renovations and I don’t support building a new comprehensive high school at this time, then what do I support? I support thoughtful decision-making using accurate data and sound advice from the administration, as well as from ethical and reputable legal and financial counsel. Thus, my ultimate goal is to use these tools to make the most financially prudent decision for the taxpayers. I trust that my prior experience on the board and the resulting decisions I have made will provide the voters enough information to support me in the upcoming primary election.

The board majority doesn't care what you have to say....

Especially Stitt and Solak.  This was totally apparent at Monday's Open Caucus meeting.  Four speakers and two board members appealed to the rest of the board to revisit the denied Student Transfers and to revote on them. 

Mr. Reesman speaks......

Mr. Crawford speaks......

Mr. Fullerton speaks......

Ms. Sperski speaks........

Choncek and Close speak, Stitt shuts them down......

Now Solak rants.............

People of Armstrong County, especially those in Solak and Stitt's areas, you need to do something.  These two board members DO NOT CARE what you think or want.  They only have their own agenda.  It is now up to you to create CHANGE!  Qualified people need to run against these two for the 2011 election.

Do we have any volunteers?

If you weren't able to attend the Town Hall Meeting in Kittanning on Sunday, March 28, 2010, you can watch the meeting in it's entirety on YouTube.  There are 14 videos. (Use the control arrows on the left and right to scroll through the 14 videos)

Questions that were subitted in advance and were in the printed program:

• Why isn’t the Department of Education getting involved?
• Do we have a long-range plan?
• Were we able to realize any savings from the closing of EHS?
• What’s the story with EHS’s secession to AR, was there interference?
• What were your reasons for voting for or against reopening EHS?
• What are your plans for the upcoming pension plan fund spike?
• Studies show that elementary schools should be kept smaller and secondary should be consolidated, why is ASD doing the opposite by consolidating KTE with EE and reopening EHS with small class sizes?
• Why does Kittanning have inadequate facilities like science labs?
• Are there plans for a Super School? If so, how can we afford it and where will it be built?
• Why wasn’t there a referendum vote?
• What were the reasons given by the board to have Lee Price dismissed as solicitor?
• What were the reasons given by the board for not entertaining any other possibilities and choosing from a candidate field of "one" to have this person as our new solicitor?
• Where did the new solicitor come from?
• What is his background?
• What other school districts has he had involvement with in the past and does he currently have involvement with on either a solicitor level or on a council level to private groups involved in activities with a school district?
• Why do you keep spending thousand of dollars to do studies and do nothing with them when you don't get the results that you want?
• Would it be more beneficial for our school district if the board members were elected at-large instead of by attendance areas/regions?
• If so, what would we need to do to go about making that change?
• Since the District's state mandated retirement contribution is scheduled in the next 5 years to increase from just under 5% to over 30% of salary expenses, wouldn't it be prudent for the District to lower salary expenditures by reducing the number of teachers?
• Armstrong County is similar to the State of Kansas where an aging population and a declining student  enrollment are causing schools to be consolidated. Closer to home, surrounding areas are closing and
• consolidating schools. Why is Armstrong County expanding the number of schools and teachers?
• Does the Armstrong School Board think like the State and Federal Governments that taxpayers have the where-with-all to pay any bill they lay on the table?

These were questions asked from the audience.  There were a few more that were asked directly by audience members, these are the ones that we had in writing.

• How many teachers were actually furloughed when EHS closed?
• What is it going to take to revers the decision back to close EHS?
• Because certain boar members will not let the Lenape half day figures alone, is there a fear that ASD could potentially choose to only go for half day because of the hybrid option and not allow student choice?
• What is your forecast for the "Elderton Transfers" vote and what will be the fallout of that vote?
• Is it ethical for a school board member to block emails from his/her constituents?
• Will EHS be on school improvement due to low PSSA scores for 08-09.  Will this process cost ASD additional funding?
• How will this years PSSA scores be configured?
• Board Director Solak posed a question on February 23's agenda on OTH-5 - Has PDE given approval for re-opening EHS?
• What recourse will parents have if transfer requests are denied?

Finally a written comment from a retired IUP professor:
I have no question, my comment would be that while I empathize with the desire to maintain a sense of community, community members need to take the energy they've used to re-open Elderton High School (at great expense to their fellow citizens) and use it creatively to find another way to maintain that sense of community. 

Truer words have never been spoken.