WELCOME ALL
WE ARE HERE TODAY BECAUSE DR. EASTWOOD AND THE MIDDLETOWN SCHOOL BOARD FILED AN ARTICLE 78 COURT CASE AGAINST THE CITY INVOLVING THE SEWER LINE SERVING THE NEW CHORLEY SCHOOL.
THEY CHOSE THE ROUTE OF LITIGATION WHILE WE WERE IN THE MIDDLE OF NEGOTIATIONS. I FELT WE WERE MAKING TREMENDOUS PROGRESS WITH THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT THROUGH THE EFFORTS OF ASSEMBLYWOMAN GUNTHER. IT WAS QUITE OBVIOUS TO ME THAT IF WE CONTINUED TO TALK TO EACH OTHER, THIS ISSUE WOULD HAVE BEEN RESOLVED BY NOW.
IN FACT, THE CITY MADE SEVERAL OFFERS THROUGHOUT THE EARLY TALKS. ONE OF THOSE OFFERS WAS TO JOINTLY PURSUE STATE FUNDING. IF SUCCESSFUL, THE CITY, RECOGNIZING THE LONG TERM BENEFIT TO OUR CITY RESIDENTS, WOULD PAY THE SCHOOL’S LOCAL SHARE OF ANY STATE FUNDING. YOU CANNOT BE ANY MORE REASONABLE THEN THAT.
I BELIEVE WHAT IS REALLY AT STAKE HERE IS THE RIGHT TO ASK QUESTIONS, TO QUESTION OUR BOARD OF EDUCATION AND SUPERINTENDENT AND RECEIVE HONEST ANSWERS.
WE CAN DISAGREE WITH THE BOARD, BUT THAT DISAGREEMENT BY AN INDIVIDUAL OR A MUNICIPALITY SHOULD NOT BE MET WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT TRYING TO DESTROY THE PERSON WHO DISAGREES WITH THEM, USING SCHOOL RESOURCES, TAXPAYER FUNDS, MAILINGS ETC.
THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WHEN THE MAYOR AND SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT DISAGREE, THAT THIS DISCUSSION EVOLVES INTO NAME CALLING, FALSE, MISLEADING MAILINGS, CRIES FROM DR. EASTWOOD THAT WE ARE “HOLDING THE CHILDREN HOSTAGE” AND OTHER RHETORIC THAT HAS TAKEN PLACE ON THIS ISSUE.
AS YOU READ OUR RESPONSE PAPERS, YOU WILL FIND THAT THE DISTRICT’S SUPPORTING PAPERS ARE RIFE WITH FALSE OR MISLEADING FACTUAL ASSERTIONS AND THEIR LEGAL ARGUMENTS ARE MERITLESS, IN SOME PARTS ACTUALLY FRIVOLOUS.
AGAIN, OUR RESIDENTS HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO QUESTION ACTIONS BY THE BOARD OF EDUCATION, EITHER INDIVIDUALLY OR THROUGH THEIR ELECTED OFFICIALS.
WE HAVE A HISTORY IN THIS COMMUNITY OF BOARDS OF ED TELLING US THAT BUILDINGS ARE NO LONGER SUITABLE FOR SCHOOLS AFTER SPENDING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO RENOVATE THEM. FOR EXAMPLE, LIBERTY ST., ALBERT ST., ACADEMY AVENUE, ALL SCHOOL DISTRICT BUILDINGS THAT THE PUBLIC WAS TOLD NEEDED TO BE REPLACED, YET TO THIS DAY AND AFTER SPENDING MILLIONS, THEY CONTINUE TO OPERATE AS SCHOOLS.
IN THIS CASE, IN A DISTRICT THAT HAS IN EXCESS OF 40,000 RESIDENTS AND MORE THEN 15,000 VOTERS, AROUND 700 VOTED ON THE REFERENDUM. WHY? IT WAS HELD A WEEK BEFORE CHRISTMAS IN 2008! THIS TOO IS WRONG.
WE NEED TRANSPARENCY AND TRUTH IN THIS PROCESS AND WE ARE NOT GETTING IT HERE FROM DR. EASTWOOD OR THE BOARD.
OUR PAPERS CLEARLY SHOW THAT DR. EASTWOOD IS NOT BEING TRUTHFUL TO THE DISTRICT AND HIS VERY OWN BOARD IN MANY AREAS.
WE SHOW EVIDENCE THAT WHILE DENYING TRUMAN MOON IS CLOSING AS AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, DR. EASTWOOD SUBMITTED DOCUMENTATION TO THE COURT AND THE STATE INDICATING IN HIS OWN WORDS THAT THE SIZE OF THE NEW SCHOOL IS NECESSARY BECAUSE THE NEW SCHOOL WILL COMBINE THE OLD CHORLEY AND THE TRUMAN MOON POPULATIONS.
ALSO, WHILE THE CITY TAKES NO POSITION ON THE DEMOLITION OF CHORLEY, WE POINT OUT THAT THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT IS NOT THE ONLY STATE AGENCY TO WHOM EASTWOOD HAS TOLD ONE THING AND THEN TOLD THE PUBLIC AND HIS BOARD JUST THE OPPOSITE. WE SUPPLY DOCUMENTATION OF CORRESPONDENCE WITH NYS OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND VIDEO RECORDINGS OF PUBLIC BOARD MEETINGS FOR THE PUBLIC AND BOARD TO COMPARE.
WE HAVE VIDEO OF DR. EASTWOOD STATING VERY LOUDLY TO THE BOARD THAT THE FIRST TIME HE HEARD ABOUT THE SEWER ISSUE IS WHEN I CAME TO THE BOARD MEETING IN APRIL OF 2010. THIS IS NOT TRUE.
WE SUPPLY A VIDEO OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT’S ARCHITECT STATING THAT MR. TAWIL, DPW COMMISSIONER, NOTIFIED THE DISTRICT IN OCTOBER, 2008 OF THE SEWER PROBLEM. WE PROVIDE E MAILS INTO MARCH OF 2010 ADVISING THE DISTRICT THAT THE DESIGN ENGINEER HAS YET TO MEET WITH THE CITY ENGINEER TO REVIEW PLANS.
WE DOCUMENT CLEARLY THAT IN OCTOBER OF 2008, THE CITY REQUESTED PROJECTED WATER USAGE FOR THE PROJECT. THIS WOULD BE USED TO EVALUATE SEWER REQUIRMENTS. THIS WAS NEVER PROVIDED TO THE CITY UNTIL DECEMBER OF 2009. THE DISTRICT HAS NEVER GIVEN AN EXPLANATION WHY THEY WAITED SO LONG. YET, DR. EASTWOOD CLAIMS PUBLICLY THAT THE CITY IS DELAYING THE NEW SCHOOL.
THROUGHOUT OUR LEGAL RESPONSE PAPERS, YOU WILL FIND MANY MORE EXAMPLES OF DR. EASTWOOD SAYING ONE THING TO THE STATE AND ANOTHER TO THE BOARD OR PUBLIC.
DESPITE ALL OF THIS, I CONTINUED TO REQUEST MEETINGS WITH THE DR. EASTWOOD AND THE BOARD IN HOPES OF RESOLVING THIS ISSUE. THE RESPONSE WAS CLEARLY NO!
I ATTENDED BOARD MEETINGS, ONLY TO HAVE MY MICROPHONE SHUT OFF.
WE HAD ONE VERY BRIEF MEETING WHEN WE EXCHANGED DOCUMENTS ON THE CASE. THE OTHER MEETING WAS HELD JUNE 30, IN ALBANY WITH ASSEMBLYWOMAN GUNTHER AND THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION FACILITIES, MR. CHARLES SZUBERLA.
I FOUND THE MEETING TO BE VERY PRODUCTIVE AND HOPEFUL. THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE ASSEMBLY EDUCATION COMMITTEE, ASSEMBLYWOMAN NOLAN, ATTENDED BRIEFLY AND OFFERED HER SUPPORT TO FINDING A RESOLUTION.
WE, THE CITY AND DISTRICT, HAD AN OPPORTUNITY FOR STATE FUNDING ON THIS PROJECT. GUNTHER AND SZUBERLA REQUESTED MORE DETAILED COST ESTIMATES TO MOVE THE PROCESS ALONG IN A POSITIVE MANNER.
THAT NIGHT, THE CITY COMMON COUNCIL PASSED A UNANIMOUS RESOLUTION OFFERING TO SHARE THE COST OF THE EVALUATION WITH THE DISTRICT IN HOPES OF EXPEDITING THE STATE AID. DR. EASTWOOD AND THE DISTRICT SAID NO.
WE OFFERED TO BOND THE PROJECT FOR THEM TO AVOID DELAYS, THEY SAID NO.
WE OFFERED TO SHARE THE COST WITH THEM ON A 50 / 50 BASIS, AGAIN THE DISTRICT SAID NO.
WE MADE OTHER OFFERS OF SETTLEMENT THAT INCLUDED PAYING THE DISTRICT’S ENTIRE LOCAL SHARE OF THE PROJECT, THEY SAID NO.
RATHER THEN NEGOTIATE; THE DISTRICT WENT ON A PUBLIC RELATIONS SMEAR CAMPAIGN, USING TAXPAYER DOLLARS.
AS WE SHOW IN OUR PAPERS, THESE ACTIONS ARE MORE THEN A DISAGREEMENT AMONG ELECTED OFFICIALS.
FIRST OF ALL, THE COST PRODUCING AND MAILING THESE MUDSLINGING, MISLEADING DOCUMENTS PROBABLY EXCEEDED THE COST OF THE DISTRICT’S SHARE OF THE SEWER EVALUATION.
IT IS CLEAR THAT THE INTENT OF THE DISTRICT UTILIZING OUT OF CONTEXT QUOTATIONS IN THE TAXPAYER FUNDED MAILINGS WAS TO DECEIVE THE PUBLIC.
ONE MAILED DOCUMENT CONTAINED THE NAMES OF 8 BOARD MEMBERS PRINTED ON THE BACK.
I WOULD HOPE THAT AFTER WATCHING THE VIDEO TAPE AND COMPARING THE MAILING TO THE TRANSCRIPT PROVIDED, DR. EASTWOOD AND THE BOARD WOULD CLARIFY THAT THESE COMMENTS IN THE MAILING WERE INAPPROPIATE.
WHOEVER CHOSE TO QUOTE ME OR MISLEAD OUR PUBLIC AND USE TAXPAYER DOLLARS TO SEND IT OUT IS WRONG.
WITHOUT RETRACTION BY DR. EASTWOOD, THE BOARD AS A GROUP OR INDIVDUALLY,
THEIR FAILURE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THIS TYPE OF BEHAVIOR WOULD CONSTITUTE PROTECTING A “LIAR OUT OF CONTROL.”
THAT PERSON SHOULD BE IDENTIFIED AND REPRIMANDED FOR ABUSING TAXPAYER DOLLARS.
WE HAVE PROVIDED A TRANSCRIPT AND VIDEOTAPE OF MY COMMENTS. YOU BE THE JUDGE AFTER REVIEWING THEM.
IF THAT WASN’T ENOUGH, THEY DID A SECOND MAILING WHICH CONTAINED SEVERAL FALSE STATEMENTS.
THEY CLAIM THE CITY DOESN’T HAVE ENGINEERING REPORTS. WE PROVIDED THE REPORTS TO THE DISTRICT LONG BEFORE THE LAWSUIT WAS FILED.
THEY CLAIM THAT CITY NEVER USED ITS SEWER CAMERAS TO INSPECT THE LINE CONDITION. NOT TRUE. WE SUPPLIED THE PICTURE OF THIS LINE TO THE COURT.
THEY COMMENT THAT THE CITY PREVIOUSLY APPROVED THIS PROJECT. NOT TRUE. THE CITY APPROVED ONLY THE SUBDIVISION IN 2009 AND REQUESTED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FROM THE DISTRICT.
IT IS NOT PRODUCTIVE FOR THE CITY AND SCHOOL DISTRICT TO BE ENGAGED IN THIS SUIT. AS JOHN PERRINO STATED DURING ONE OF THE BOARD DISCUSSIONS, THE CITY NEEDS A GOOD SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THE DISTRICT NEEDS A VIABLE CITY. WE NEED TO WORK TOGETHER.
WE CAN DISAGREE, BUT WE SHOULD DO SO RESPECTFULLY AND HONESTLY.
OUR POSITION IS THIS IS AN ISSUE OF FAIRNESS. THE MAKE UP OF THE DISTRICT IS THE CITY IS ONLY 50% OF THE DISTRICT. BY SHIFTING THE COST OF THIS SEWER LINE TO THE CITY, 50% OF THE DISTRICT WOULD BE PAYING FOR 100% OF THE COST.
WE PROVIDED SEVERAL CASES STATEWIDE WHERE THIS TYPE OF COOPERATION BETWEEN SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND MUNICIPALITIES HAVE TAKEN PLACE. IT IS CLEARLY LEGAL AND WE DEMONSTRATE THIS TO THE COURT.
WE STILL HAVE TIME TO RESOLVE THIS ISSUE WITHOUT LITIGATION. AFTER VIEWING BOTH SIDES OF THE DISAGREEMENT, I CAN ASSURE THE BOARD OF EDUCATION THAT THE CITY WOULD LIKE TO SETTLE THIS MATTER SO WE CAN JOIN HANDS AND WORK TOGETHER TO BRING ABOUT A NEW SCHOOL AT CHORLEY.
NOW WE’RE UP TO DATE ON THE ARTICLE 78 AND THE CITY RESPONSE. WE WILL BE POSTING ON OUR WEBSITE THE DISTRICT’S CLAIM AND OUR RESPONSE FOR PUBLIC REVIEW.
ANY PERSON WHO WOULD LIKE IT E MAILED TO THEM, PLEASE SUBMIT A REQUEST TO MAYORDESTEFANO@YAHOO.COM. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO REVIEW A HARD COPY OF THE PAPERS AND WATCH THE VIDEO, YOU CAN DO SO IN MY OFFICE DURING REGULAR BUSINESS HOURS.
QUESTIONS ?
