Details

Written by Stacie M. Waldman

Published: 12 March 2015

Created: 12 March 2015

Last Updated: 12 March 2015

Hits: 11645

Measles is back in the news after a late 2014, early 2015 outbreak that began at Disneyland in California in December and made it's way into the lives of 154 people in several states by the end of February. Measles was declared eliminated in the United States in 2000. Eliminated, in this context, means that the vaccine coverage was high in order to achieve herd immunity (where the entire population is protected because of the immunization status of the masses) and the public health response to a case of measles was quick and strong. Eliminated means that there was a reduction to zero of the incidence of the infection (measles) as the result of deliberate efforts, but continued intervention (i.e. vaccination) is necessary.

The goal of any public health program focusing on any disease is treatment if necessary, prevention if possible, followed by elimination and eradication (defined as a permanent reduction to zero, worldwide, making intervention efforts unnecessary). Fast forward to 2014 when there were 644 cases of measles in the United States. Why has this happened when measles was previously eliminated? Why is measles a threat once again? Enter the "vaccine debate."

Is the measles infection dangerous? Is the MMR vaccine safe? Why are some people opposed to vaccines? Is your child at risk for once eliminated diseases in this area and what are the laws in New York State to protect freedom but also protect the most vulnerable populations?

Why are measles dangerous?
The CDC states the following on its website: Measles is highly contagious and spreads to others through coughing and sneezing. The virus can live for up to two hours on a surface or in an airspace where the infected person coughed or sneezed. Measles is so contagious that if one person has it, 90% of the people close to that person who are not immune will also become infected. Infected people can spread measles to others from four days before to four days after the rash appears. Measles can be a deadly disease and is the most deadly of rash/fever illnesses in children. Thirty percent of children are hospitalized with measles. Short-term side effects of the disease include ear infections that may result in permanent hearing loss, encephalitis, and pneumonia- the leading cause of death from measles. The long-term side effect of measles, other than hearing loss, is SSPE, a rare but fatal disease of the nervous system. This develops 7-10 years after a person has measles.

Kristin Becht shared her personal story of her 8-month-old son who contracted measles at a daycare in the U.K.

"It was 2008 and we were living in England at the time but came back to the U.S. for Christmas. Our lives were turned upside down when Thomas got really sick the day after Christmas, then got worse and worse. We took him to urgent care then the ER three times and it took days for him to receive a diagnosis. He had developed severe bilateral ear infections, pneumonia in both lungs, and severe viral conjunctivitis, all complications of measles. It was only because my mother-in-law had had measles as a kid and had a "hunch" did it finally lead to some answers. Once we got discharged from the hospital (after four days and nights), we got messages from our daycare that there had been a measles outbreak. We were told an unvaccinated toddler at the daycare became ill and infected one other toddler who was unvaccinated as well as ALL 14 babies in the infant suite who were too young to be vaccinated. I believe seven babies were hospitalized. Ironically, the hospital there turned away twin babies in the ER because the covering doctors were both pregnant. Now here's the part that makes me sick to my stomach as I read about it again. The long-term effects of measles...they can develop even 10-15 years later in a seemingly healthy, recovered child and include hearing loss and a complication called SSPE (subacute sclerosing panencephalitis). SSPE can occur up to ten years after measles and the risk of developing SSPE is higher if one has had measles earlier in life (before age two). It is not common but it is FATAL. Thomas will be seven soon so I have nine more years to continue to be concerned about the long-term side effects of measles.

I am not against people's right to choose to vaccinate their kids but I would also implore that person to consider not putting their kids in a public daycare or another situation that could lead to exposure of kids who are unable to be vaccinated. A person infected with measles is contagious before being symptomatic. I was quite ticked off at that mom and her blatant disregard for the health of the other kids just because she "didn't get around to it." She should have hung out with us while my baby was screaming for two hours straight, then only to go limp and motionless in my arms."

Is the MMR vaccine safe and safe to give on the CDC schedule?
The short but proven answer is yes. The physician who falsified data in The Lancet medical journal (citing the MMR vaccine as causing autism) has had his medical license revoked. Although side effects are possible, most are mild and transient in nature. Doctors report that many parents come in saying of course they're not against vaccinating, that would be crazy, but they want to spread the injections over a longer period of time or separate the vaccines and give the child more injections. "What people failed to realize," said one pediatric doctor, "is that separating the vaccines is only increasing the amount of adjuvants or 'chemicals' as some like to say that are being injected into the child, often the main reason for wanting to separate the shots." The CDC lists side effects to MMR as mostly being rashes or fevers. "In addition, the MMR vaccine has been linked with a very small risk of febrile seizures, most often in children between 12-23 months old. Febrile seizures can happen any time a child gets a fever. Most happen in children 14-18 months old. Because the risk of febrile seizures increases as infants get older, it is recommended that children get vaccinated as soon as recommended (12-15 months old for the MMR vaccine)." By waiting, you may actually be putting your child at increased risk for side effects or for the disease itself in the case of measles. The American Academy of Pediatrics (62,000 physicians strong) is aligned with the CDC vaccination schedule and urges parents to vaccinate and not delay vaccination.

Then why are some people opposed to vaccinating?
The list could go on for a while. I posed the question of vaccination on a couple of "moms" facebook pages in the area and the debate became heated. Here's what I learned.

Misinformation on the internet and scare tactics (like Dr. Sears uses) have worked to put Sears' vaccine book on some best seller lists. Several well-meaning parents quoted Dr. Sears' book as the authority on vaccine information, but fail to recognize or legitimize the criticism that it has garnered -- including incorrect (or spun) statistics, failure to provide full information, and his now famous quote about telling his patients it may be in their child's benefit to avoid vaccination. "I also warn them not to share their fears with their neighbors, because if too many people avoid the MMR, we'll likely see the diseases increase significantly."

A few moms discussed their distrust of the government and believe the government is excessively lobbied by big pharmaceutical companies who turn a profit in the vaccine business. However, publicly available data shows that big pharma counts vaccines as only 1.82% of their business (profits) -- and even though that number is large in terms of dollars, it's a low priority for lobbyists. Furthermore, sickness causes hospitalizations and visits to the doctor and sickness is treated with medications, so big pharma is "winning" either way if you think that pharmaceutical profits are a reason to avoid vaccination.

Some parents cite the increase in autism, diabetes and asthma as reasons to avoid vaccinations or to alter the vaccine schedule. If you Google "vaccine safety New York," the first two sites that appear are sites dedicated to scaring parents away from vaccinating their kids. There are links all over the pages where people can donate money to help support these sites and allow Google to affix them to the top of a search. For example, one site has a big heading that says "parents, make an informed choice" followed by a table suggesting that vaccines are the reason that autism, learning disabilities, asthma, and diabetes are on the rise. Although it never claims that vaccines cause autism, it display scary statistics that claim that the incidence of autism in the 1990's as 1 in 555 and 1 in 50 in 2013.

Is my child at risk for once eliminated diseases in this area and what are the laws in New York State to protect freedom but also protect the most vulnerable populations? New York State has some of the most stringent vaccine laws in the country. Connecticut and New Jersey have more lenient policies in terms of mandatory vaccinations. Personal or philosophical exemptions are not allowed in New York. A religious exemption must show "genuine and sincere religious beliefs" and have signatures from a clergy or a lawyer then approved (or not). A medical exemption must be certified by a New York licensed medical doctor and must show that immunization may be detrimental to the child's health. Both exemptions must be approved and may be rejected if evidence is insufficient.

Most Westchester area schools have very high (if not 100%) vaccination rates in part because of the difficulty in getting exemptions. However, there are some exceptions. See Lohud for a list of the vaccination rates by school in our area.

Although personal and philosophical exemptions are not currently allowed under New York State law, some politicians are pushing for these exemptions to be permitted Assemblyman Tom Abinanti of Greenburgh was one of the signature creators on a bill designed to allow philosophical and personal exemptions to vaccination. Although he publicly admits that the vaccine-autism link has been fully discredited by over 40 clinical studies, his son has autism and he believes, "...the perceived risk of vaccines is too great to force parents to vaccinate." Furthermore, he is quoted as saying, "There are a large number of kids for whom vaccines are not appropriate, but nobody is looking to see how large the number of people is." I reread that quote several times, but he is claiming there are large numbers of kids for whom vaccines are not appropriate but no one knows what the number is, therefore how can he say the number is large?

I spoke with Abinanti's director of communications, Doug Rosenthal, who did not want to answer any questions on the phone, but said that Assemblyman Abinanti "has removed his name from the bill and that the bill was never meant to be passed anyway.". Rosenthal said "the bill was just meant to open up a discussion and put together a medical board to consider the issue." He did not respond to my follow up emails and phone calls. Although he withdrew his name, his statement said, "I'll be drafting new legislation that calls for the formation of a medical panel that includes the New York State and New York City health commissioners and other public-health officials to consider the best way to protect public health and minimize risk of harm."

What are your views on vaccination? Please comment below and please keep replies to comments respectful.

Scientific sources for accurate vaccine and disease information:

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/measles/
http://www2.aap.org/immunization/illnesses/mmr/measles.html
http://www.vaccinesafety.edu

Details

Written by Joanne Wallenstein

Published: 19 March 2015

Created: 19 March 2015

Last Updated: 19 March 2015

Hits: 6601

The Scarsdale High School Drama Club will present Neil Simon's comedy Fools in the high school auditorium on Friday March 27 and Saturday March 28 at 7:30 pm. Directed by Sarah Kate Robbins, the comedy is set in Russia, where Leon Tolchinsky is ecstatic. He's just landed his absolute dream job teaching in the idyllic, Russian hamlet of Kulyenchikov. However, there's a slight catch! Kulyenchikov has been cursed with chronic stupidity for 200 years and it's up to Leon to break the curse and teach the citizens something ... anything within 24 hours. And then there's the girl ... Leon's fallen in love with the beautiful Sophia Zubritsky. The tension mounts as Leon fights the odds and the clock and tries to teach Sophia what 1+ 1 is. This hilarious and zany comedy will have you rolling in the aisles.

The show will be preformed on March 27th and 28th at 7:30 p.m. in the Scarsdale High School Auditorium. Tickets are available online at www.shsfools.eventbrite.com and at the door. Student/Senior tickets are $10, Adult tickets are $20.

Buy tickets now for what promises to be an amazing evening for theatre-goers of all ages! This show guarantees laughter for all.

Rehearsal photos courtesy of Jon Thaler. See more here:

Details

Written by Melissa Hellman

Published: 03 March 2015

Created: 03 March 2015

Last Updated: 03 March 2015

Hits: 12754

The Board responded to community concerns about changes to the curriculum and budgeting decisions at a March 2, 2015 budget study meeting. Parents requested that Mandarin be added to the Middle School curriculum and others questioned the decision to delay Spanish instruction until second grade. There were also questions about the budget for professional development and staffing changes. Shortly before the meeting, the District Administration posted a detailed FAQ on the Scarsdale Schools website to address these questions.The meeting was used to summarize and highlight portions of the document that includes detailed responses to the issue of adding Mandarin to the middle school curriculum, additions and changes to the literacy initiatives in the early grades, professional development and other items. Community members are urged to read the document and present questions to the Board for response and discussion.

The public comments portion of the meeting included several additional statements of support for Mandarin instruction. Board of Education President Mary Beth Gose assured the audience this request has been heard and it will be seriously studied for the 2016-2017 school year as described in the document below. Also, Fox Meadow PTA President Margot Milberg expressed her concern again about the proposed reduction in front office staff at the school and did not feel the Administration adequately answered why a position is being cut there.

The next meeting to discuss the budget is scheduled for March 11 at 8:15pm (following a joint Board of Education/Village Board meeting), which is expected to focus on financial issues. Following that is a meeting on March 18 at 6:30pm. The Board stressed that they welcome feedback and questions and will continue to listen and respond until the final budget proposal date of April 20, 2015. All meetings will be televised and available on Video-on-Demand.

Here is the FAQ:

2015­2016 Scarsdale Budget Q's & A's from the Community

Q: Will Scarsdale be offering Middle School Mandarin 2015­2016?

A: To begin, let's review High School data:
For background, we have been offering Mandarin at the High School since 2011­12, so we are currently in our fourth year. Here is the enrollment information for the 2014­2015 school year:

Mandarin 313, section 1: 13 students. There are no native or heritage speakers. Mandarin 313, section 2: 14 students. There are two heritage speakers. Mandarin 323, (one section): 11 students. There are two heritage speakers. Mandarin 334, (one section): 10 students.
Mandarin 343/344, (one section): 11 students. One student is a heritage speaker.
Mandarin 355, (one section): 9 students. In this first­time AT Mandarin course, there are two native speakers and two heritage speakers.
Grand totals: Of the 68 students, there are seven heritage speakers and two native speakers.

The enrollment of first­year Mandarin students is as follows:
2011­2012, 50 students (open to all students in grades 9­12) [2%*/14%**] 2012­2013, 18 students [5%*, 11%**]
2013­2014, 16 students [6.25%*, 18%**]
2014­2015, 27 students [pending]
* Drop rate during the course.
** Discontinue rate at the end of the year (does not include graduates).

As you can see, our Mandarin students currently make up less than 5% of students enrolled in a World Language. This compares to 59.5% in Spanish, 21.6% in French, and 2.6% in Latin.

Current Middle School Practices:

The Middle School offers students a choice of Spanish or French. Once students choose a language in grade six, they study that language for all three years. At the sixth grade level, World Language classes are taught one period every other day,alternating with reading. In grades 7 and 8, World Language classes are taught one period each day.Each of the four Middle School houses have three sections of Spanish and one section of French.

When students enter the High School, they have several choices:
● Students may choose to continue with the language they were studying at the Middle School at either Level 2, Level 2 Honors, or Level 3;
● Students may choose a different language to study: French, Spanish, Latin, or Mandarin;

or

● Students may choose to study two languages; either two different languages from the one they studied at Middle School, or continue with the same language and add a new one.

Moving forward: We have a plan to consider the addition of Mandarin to the Middle School curriculum in 2016­2017 that includes the following:

● We will review current World Language offerings, the Middle School schedule, and staffing requirements.
● We will survey students and parents for interest, clearly conveying that:
- A minimum of 60 students per grade is needed to offer Mandarin at the Middle School in order to staff and schedule effectively.
- Students must continue the study of the chosen World Language for all three Middle School years.
- World Language classes will not be leveled to accommodate incoming students with prior learning in a particular language.

● We will set a timeline to gather and analyze data.
● We will meet with principals, department chairs, teachers and other administrators to gather further feedback and weigh options.

This comprehensive and collaborative process is necessary for proper implementation, and thus precludes implementation of Mandarin for the 2015­2016 school year.

Q: What is the rationale for the proposed addition of elementary Reading Teachers and elimination of Spanish in first grade?

A: For the past several years the Assistant Superintendent for Instruction and the Elementary Principals have been discussing how to support primary students (Grades K and 1) in their literacy development in both reading and writing. The following issues were identified:

● Time for literacy instruction during a comparatively short elementary teaching day.
● Consistent approachin literacy implementation across all grades and schools.
● Professional Developmentneeds of teachers in specific strategies to help all readers grow and develop, particularly non-classified struggling readers.
● Reading Teacherswill be added to support general education students in reading and writing, especially in the early grades Kindergarten and 1st.

Proposal: The focus of this proposal is not to address a deficit, but to make sure students are gaining the strong fundamental skills that will allow them to engage in what is a very rigorous Scarsdale curriculum. It is imperative that students receive support early on to help maximize their potential later.

Time: Provide more time for literacy learning in grade 1 by phasing out Spanish in Grade 1 in 2015­2016:

● Grade 1 will gain an additional 80 minutes of literacy instruction.
● Current first graders would continue Spanish in Grade 2 in 2015­2016.
● Spanish would start in grade 2 thereafter.

Consistent Approach and Professional Development:
● Provide professional development in literacy instruction for teachers that is consistent across the five schools (Teachers College Reading and Writing Project).
● Restore the ELA Helping Teacher position to support teachers in literacy, to coordinate a consistent K­5 Literacy Program, and to create and lead data teams to analyze student achievement data.

Reading Teachers:
● The addition of reading teachers in each elementary school will support students in reading and writing.
● Reading teachers will provide additional time for Learning Resource Center teachers to serve classified students, who require ongoing intensive support in reading and other areas.

Q: About what percentage of non-classified K­3 elementary students do you anticipate will require extra support in order to achieve faster progression in reading?

A: The proposal to add reading teachers will address students who show early signs of difficulty. The goal of early intervention is to lessen the need for support as students reach the later elementary grades. It is reasonable to estimate that in any given year 6­10% of students, or one to two students per section in the primary grades, would benefit from the extra support of a reading teacher. It is important to understand that this is not a remediation of students with extreme difficulties, but an effort to maximize fundamental literacy development for students who may find the acquisition of reading skills more challenging. At the same time reading teachers will extend the learning for all students.

Q: Can you explain the proposed change in reading support, along with the new state­mandated Response to Intervention (RTI) program, in the context of Scarsdale's overall approach to the development of our youngest learners? For example, is the balance of direct instruction versus hands­on, experiential, inquiry­based learning now shifting?

A: Literacy learning has been and continues to be the centerpiece of elementary education in Scarsdale. Without the ability to read well, students are challenged to absorb our deep, rich Scarsdale curriculum. We continue our firm commitment to support all of the unique programs that make Scarsdale...Scarsdale.

Our developmental approach in educating our youngest learners is unwavering. At the same time this budget proposal provides more targeted support for learners in the early grades, a need that has gone unmet for the past six budget years. Since 2008, the Assistant Superintendent for Instruction and the Elementary Principals have requested an increase in Learning Resource Center (LRC) teachers to support nonclassified struggling readers.

● The first priority of LRC teachers is to support the needs of classified students as identified on their IEPs.
● As a second priority, LRC teachers support students in grades 4 and 5 who are not classified, but did not score proficient on state tests and qualify for "local effort".
● As a third priority, depending on LRC teacher availability (which varies by school), support is given to struggling students in grades K­3.
● LRC teachers do not have adequate time to meet the needs of all.
These requests preceded the State raising the cut scores on NYS tests; the focus all along has been on strengthening student literacy learning by front­loading targeted intervention to struggling students in the earliest grades in order to address reading issues sooner rather than later, when such issues may be more difficult to resolve. Research shows that direct reading instruction by a skilled reading teacher gets results in students learning the fundamentals that are so important, such as phonics.

Due to the recent recession and related school budget concerns, additional LRC staffing was not provided, and was not even included in the superintendent's proposed budget requests.

Response to Intervention (RTI), now a state mandate, formalizes a process that had been in place in Scarsdale for many years. While our RTI implementation has been widely discussed and publicized, it does not signal a shift in direction in our educational philosophy.

Q: Why is elementary Spanish instruction (FLES) set to begin now in second grade rather than first grade, as there was a study presented to the BOE that showed that FLES was working for upper grades?

A: Delaying the start of Spanish instruction until second grade is a difficult decision, but given the short elementary day, it is a way to provide more time for literacy instruction in first grade while still preserving the FLES program as a whole.

Q: What is included in the proposed staff development budget?

A: There are several categories:

Program Improvement $389,099
Arts and Aesthetic Education $84,633
Interdependence Institute $26,936
Scarsdale Teachers Institute $297,340
Center for Innovation $50,000
Sustainability Initiative $50,000
Curriculum Research/Assessment $50,600
Professional Development $275,410

● Teacher Grants$125,410
-This allocation, which is distributed through small grants to individual teachers,
was negotiated through the STA/BOE collective bargaining process. ● Enhancing Instruction $150,000
-The $87,000 increase in this line will fund staff developers from the Teachers College Reading and Writing Project to provide a consistent approach to literacy instruction in all five elementary schools.

Q: About what percentage of the increase in the staff development budget represents real growth in opportunities for professional development, as opposed to increases in salary related costs? Is professional development in all categories keeping pace with teacher demand?

A: Three categories represent real growth:
● Enhancing Instruction. The $87,000 increase in this line will fund staff developers from the Teachers College Reading and Writing Project to provide a consistent approach to literacy instruction in all five elementary schools. This represents a non­salary related increase.
● Program Improvement. The $35,000 increase represents $8,000 in salary­related costs (per diem summer work costs) and $27,000 in expanded opportunities for summer days (75 additional days teachers work on curriculum revisions, K­12). This represents real growth of approximately 10%.
● STI (Scarsdale Teachers Institute). The $26,000 increase is contractually­based on the collective bargaining process. This represents a 9.5% growth over last year.

Q: In order for the broader community to fully understand the available choices and what is at stake for our schools in this budget process, have you identified any educational needs that are not being addressed in this proposal? Have recently identified needs changed, or is addressing them being deferred? (In the last two budget cycles, the Administration expressed a need for various enhancements that did not end up in the school budget, such as, for example, restored Middle School library staffing, Middle School Mandarin instruction, and a High School Computer teacher and Robotics teacher.) Also, do shifts in staffing in the proposed budget require any compromises to the quality of existing programs and/or services that the community should understand in order make informed choices this budget season?

A: As was mentioned in the Superintendent's letter prefacing this year's budget, the approach that was utilized this year was to meet with district­wide leadership to determine needs based on current work, goals and initiatives. School administration feels that we have adequately addressed all major needs and succeeded in enhancing instructional and other programming. There are certainly other considerations which are not represented in this budget, but there was a deliberate attempt to focus our work with targeted outcomes and strategies, and we will continue to prioritize our needs each year to reflect emerging and evolving needs of our students, families, and schools.

After six years of budget retrenchment, we are fortunate this year to strike a comfortable balance between our resources and needs, while preserving and extending the educational programs we value. We believe the quality of proposal represented in this budget will only continue to move our District forward on its current positive trajectory.

Financial and Other Staffing Questions

Q: From the Bond process last year the community got a clearer idea about how we have invested, or not invested, in our buildings, and what we need to do going forward. In order for the community to gain a similar understanding of our investment in the area of educational programs/services and professional development, can you tell us what this proposed budget does in terms of new educational programs or services, as well as real growth in opportunities for professional development (as opposed to salary related cost growth)? And would it be possible to gain some historical perspective from seeing the growth in our investment in these areas over time – including before and after the Recession?

A: The first question is addressed in several of the questions above. In terms of the second question, professional development in Scarsdale is complex and multifaceted. In terms of direct impact on District initiatives, we have identified the following four areas on which to focus to evaluate growth in our investment: summer curriculum improvement, Center for Innovation, Interdependence Institute, and other professional development. It should be noted that the budget document contains other areas of development as well; however, the categories identified here are most representative of District priorities.

What this chart demonstrates is that efforts in 2007­ to 2009 to provide additional funding in teacher development were derailed by the Great Recession. Spending in the five years following 2008 show relatively small increases and, in fact, two years of decreases. (Exception: in 2012­13, the double digit spike is attributed to the development and funding of the Center for Innovationwith a price tag of $100,000.) The proposed 2015­2016 budget is the first material increase other than 2012­2013 that represents an investment in human capital and development. As many who follow District progress know, there have been several significant curricular and programmatic initiatives that require intensive training for teachers and other staff members. Some of these include the following: Singapore Math, global connections and World Languages, balanced literacy, and technology and STE[A]M.

This budget recognizes that continued progress is predicated on the investment we put into our teachers to ensure consistency and alignment between practice and our evolving District goals.

Q: Does the fact of the current budget proposal falling nearly $400K below the tax cap have implications for future budgets that, perhaps, will make it more challenging to invest in new educational programs and/or services?

A: Many people would say that you shouldn't tax your citizens if you don't need the money to support your programs. Others would say that any district budgeting below the Tax Cap is a missed opportunity to build the budget base for the future.

With the exception of the second budget in 2013 (subsequent to the defeat of the first) the District has not budgeted "to the cap." We have operated by identifying the program needs, and asked the community to support appropriate funding. The issue of building the tax base has not been presented as a goal; however, it is certainly something to consider strategically.

Previous Boards of Education have been clear about not wishing to budget "to the cap," and it seems to the administration that this argument cuts both ways. If it's not acceptable to eliminate programs to get to the tax cap, then why would you tax up to the tax cap, even if it's unnecessary? With one notable exception, this community has a long history of supporting its schools and the budget. At some point we may need to budget above the tax cap and we have felt it is easier to sell that if you can also argue that you have budgeted below the cap in the years it was not needed.

Q: Understanding that current budget assumptions are a snapshot and could change materially, could you nonetheless provide us with historical perspective on this year's projected numbers, and on this year's large unplanned budget surplus in particular? For example, can you tell us the last year the District began the budget season in a comparable financial position?

A: Historically, this year is not unusual. The current year projection has provided approximately $2.6MM more in surplus than was originally included in the 2014­15 budget. This has arisen because of a significantly larger than anticipated teacher retirement savings, as well as changes in pension estimates. Looking back at the last six years, we see that we ended the 2013­14 with a surplus of $2.2MM more than planned, while we ended the 2012­13 year with a surplus of only $60,000 more than planned. The previous five years 2007­08 thru 2011­12 all ended the year with between $3.1MM and $3.7MM more than planned, primarily because of positive claims experience with the District's self­insured health plan, which is difficult to predict accurately, and unanticipated turnover savings from retirements.

Q: At the 1/12 Board Work Session there was some reflection regarding past decisions to take on greater financial risk by reducing various budget reserves in order to limit tax levy growth. It was then noted, "We've been lucky." How would you characterize this proposed budget in terms of tolerance of financial risk? And what key examples illustrate this?

A: The 2015­16 budget makes strategic adjustments which address every one of the specific financial risks that were detailed in the Moody's rating warning issued in May 2014 and received just days after the approval of the 2014­15 budget. We will be issuing bonds in the next several years, meaning that we would like to reflect as little financial risk as possible. The structural budget changes of reducing the fund balance appropriation for future budgets ("prior year surplus") from as high of $6.8MM in 2011­12 to $3.8MM in 2014/15 to $500,000 in 2015­16 is a prime example of reducing financial risk. This, coupled with the re­establishment of the health care reserve and the elimination of a budgeted operating surplus, makes the 2015­16 budget the first that will be structurally balanced in many years. These steps will very likely remove the negative outlook from Moody's.

Q: As you crafted this proposed budget, what metrics did you use – and do you normally use ­­ to determine the community's financial health?

A: We use several different metrics to assess the community's financial health. First, we review Median Household Income ($208,750, 2010)and Per Capita Income ($100, 428, 2010)statistical trends, placing Scarsdale at the top of Westchester County (MHI,$79,585, 2010; PCI,$47,204, 2010). Another metric is the STAR (School Tax Relief) data, which tells us that approximately 55% of District residents earn below $500,000, while 45% earn more than $500,000. We also analyze the real property tax­base growth factor, which is the increase in value of real property in the community during a specific time period. Over the last three years, the average growth in real property value has been 1.2% each year.

Q: There is a reduction in physical education. .8 Secretary/.1 PE. Fox Meadow largest of the schools. Can you explain this?

A: The reduction in physical education staff at Fox Meadow is directly attributable to the reduction in the number of class sections in the building. No students will receive less instruction in PE as a result of this reduction.

There have been several cuts to administrative staff positions in recent budgets, and more are proposed in this budget. None of them are palatable, and may have an impact on our ability to deliver services down the road. The part­time secretarial position at Fox Meadow, however, will not end up being a significant reduction. I believe the intention is to provide additional office assistance for the school using a part­time aide, so the actual reduction in staff time will be more insignificant than it appears.

Q: Village Finance hearings have included $50k for a comfort station at the tennis courts. Hope you will put it in.

A: The Assistant Superintendent for Business has discussed this item with the Village administration and supports the plan as it was recently proposed by them. The Village will manage the construction and provide the cleaning and maintenance of the facility. It would provide a cost­effective benefit to both Middle School students who take gym on the courts or the field, as the lower entrance to the building is locked during the day, and to the community at large, who uses the courts after school and on weekends. The proposal, however, will be to use funds from this year's budget surplus to pay for the construction, rather than request a budget appropriation for 2015­16. The question is still under deliberation.

Q: Why are we not adding $22,500 to the amount to the Teen Center to match the original amount?

A: The funding for the Teen Center is proposed at the same level as last year.

Q : Looking through Westchester Putnam SBA, our reserves very low in comparison. Can you explain why?

A: It's not surprising to hear that other districts have higher reserves than we do. In particular, other districts have a much higher need for tax certiorari reserves. Scarsdale's tax roll is mostly composed of residential properties, These tend to produce fewer tax challenges than commercial properties. Districts with large amounts of commercial property within their borders will need larger tax certiorari reserves; these may be as much as 10% of a district's budget. Although we do not base our reserves on what other districts are doing, by comparison, Scarsdale's tax certiorari reserve is projected to be approximately 2.4% of the budget at the end of the year.

The District has an additional risk factor that other districts don't have, however, and that may affect its financial health: the self­insured health plan. Although the plan has literally saved millions of taxpayer dollars since inception, its potential volatility dictates the need for a reserve. Such a reserve was maintained until June 30, 2014, when it was depleted after having been found to be out of compliance with recent interpretations of state law. Scarsdale's health care reserve was recently reauthorized, but at the moment, is not funded. This financial plan proposes funding it at a $2.25MM level as of June 30, 2015 as a guard against future plan deficits. At that level, the health insurance reserve represents only 1.5% of its budget.