by Carolyn James

The Amityville School Board’s majority is not planning to purchase and install new classroom trailers for next year, despite recommendations from the Superintendent and some of their colleagues on the board who said the district should have made the investment.

"The public had the impression that we would have portables for next year, but you have dropped that $100,000 from the budget since that time," said School Trustee Toni Bean.

"Who is going to use these new classrooms?" Trustee Marietta Mee asked Bean. "We have never received any (enrollment) documentation from administration to show us that we are going to have an increase or as to what grades are going to require these additional classes."

In addition, Mee said it takes ten months for the district to order the portables, get state approvals and install them, so there is no way they could possibly be in place for the school year.

That was countered by the Superintendent Dr. Rhoda Pierre who said she had "some preliminary information" from the state and did not believe it would take that long to get the approvals. "But certainly, time is of the essence" if the district wanted to move in that direction, she said. "We would need to work diligently with the state to get those approvals," she added.

A state official said it generally takes between 6 and 8 weeks for the state to review plans submitted. But before plans can be submitted, the district must hire an architect and engineer, draw up the plans and then put out bids for purchase and installation work. That would add at least two months to the timetable.

In addition, while the state has maintained that it takes 6 to 8 weeks to get approvals on plans for building or construction, most districts have waited up to 18 weeks as backlogs have built up due to the large number of districts involved in construction projects throughout the state.

While the new budget does not cut any teaching positions, it also does not include money for additional staff, a decision that School Board President Stephanie Andrews said was made based on the superintendent’s assessment of next year’s needs. If the district was not anticipating the need to hire new teachers, then it likely based that decision on a belief that there would be no significant increase in student population next year, and thus, no need for the additional classrooms, said Andrews.

But Pierre said that her concern in making the proposal to the board was to address the problem of the district having to set up desks in the hallways for students getting remedial help.

"Irrespective of the numbers (of students) decisions have to be made as to where children are going to learn and if there is no room in the classroom, then we have to decide which component has to be outside. I would rather not have any child where there are great distracations."

School Board Trustee Patricia Cahaney said a better way to handle the problem is to focus on push-in remedial services for the students, keeping them in their classrooms with special help, something the board has been asking administration to do for two years, she said.

Andrews agrees the situation is not what she and the other members of the board would want but said it is part of the accommodations everyone is making until the Park Avenue building is completed and reopened.

"I do not like the way the students are (situated) right now," said Andrews, "However it is not going to be any different next year. What we have to do now is focus our resources on getting Park Avenue finished and getting those students back into that building where they belong."

In addition, she added that it is not clear that there would be room at the Middle School for the portables. "We already had a problem with one of the existing portables, which was encroaching on the athletic field," she said.

The decision about the portables was made as the district moved to come to a compromise between the two budgets the Superintendent presented to the school board, one a contingency fund with only legally required increases and the other her recommendation. The board approved a compromise spending plan April 22 that included approximately $400,000 in more spending than on contingency, a plan that Andrews said was the most she believed the community would support. "Does this budget do everything; obviously not," she said. "But we have to recognize the fact that last year this community defeated a proposal that was only $500,000 over what a contingency plan was so, I believe, this is the most responsible budget we can put to the public for a vote."

"I think you cut too much," said Trustee Carolyn Chikazunga as she outlined some of her concerns at a recent meeting. "If the public wants to defeat the budget ...they will do it."

Pierre said she was frustrated over the process since she did not have the opportunity to gather the information that was needed, present it to the board and lobby for what she believed was important. "We were attempting to gather the information the board wanted," she said. "We just did not have the opportunity to present it to them and discuss it."

"We have been asking the Superintendent for this information, as well as an alternate plan for using portables, since January," countered Andrews. "We never got it."