Moms Against Liberty

 In the late 90s, parents in Clarence demanded that Harry Potter books be banned because they "promoted witchcraft." 

Just a few years later, a group began agitating for the banning of a wide variety of books for various reasons. It became a topic of discussion at a school board meeting in 2014. A lot of people turned out in order to combat any notion of banning books. Indeed, nothing was banned and the whole effort fizzled.

It fizzled in large part because kids showed up to defend their constitutional rights. They showed up to defend their intellect and their maturity. They argued for the idea that they are capable of critical thinking and to put material that some might find objectionable within their proper contexts. 

There is, therefore, something downright Orwellian about "Moms for Liberty." You cannot simultaneously be for "liberty" and also for banning books and censorship; these are irreconcilable concepts. 

"Moms for Liberty" is part of a nationwide (read: astroturf) influence group that had its genesis in battles over Covid restrictions, masking, vaccinations, and distancing/closures. Now that Covid restrictions are a thing of the past (despite the fact that Covid itself remains very firmly a part of our present), a new raison d'être is to demand the removal and banning of allegedly "obscene" and "pornographic" books.

What is reproduced above purports to be a press release that the local branch of "Moms for Liberty", which is very active in Hamburg, issued a few days ago. Much like the lists brought forth in 2014, it singles out specific literary works and reduces them to a sentence or two about something they contain to which these "Moms" object.

Gender Queer: "It is available" at two high school libraries. It is an autobiographical graphic novel that discusses the author's own experiences about sexuality in high school. In fact, the description explains that the author discovers that they are asexual. 

Started as a way to explain to eir family what it means to be nonbinary and asexual, Gender Queer is more than a personal story: it is a useful and touching guide on gender identity—what it means and how to think about it—for advocates, friends, and humans everywhere.

The first thing a parent who objects to this can do is to instruct their child to not read or take out this book. Problem solved! Nowhere is it indicated that this is required reading for anyone, but any notion that a coming-of-age book be out-of-reach for kids who are coming of age is absurd on its face. When "Moms for Liberty" crow that it is the number one most "challenged" book, they are really saying that they not only don't want their kids to lay eyes on it - they demand the right to dictate to you what your own kids do or don't see. 

I can guarantee your Snapchat-addicted teenagers have seen a lot worse, and that their minds are far more open to this than yours. No one is forcing your kid to read it.

Lawn Boy: Also a big target for book banners, "Moms for Liberty" objects because it contains text concerning the sexual abuse of an adolescent boy. Indeed, the right-wing agitation against this book has led - directly and intentionally - to death threats against its author. I suspect that the real objection isn't over a few sexual passages, but the fact that it explores the coming of age of a gay, immigrant adolescent and themes not only involving sexuality but racism and bigotry. Again, there is no accusation that it is on any mandatory reading list and surely parental rights extend to the right of a parent to instruct their child not to look at this book. This is not, however, a license to withdraw the book from all. 

The Bluest Eye: "Moms for Liberty" complain that it contains sexually explicit language including descriptions of rape. It does, but it's not the whole book and it doesn't serve to encourage such behavior., This 1970 Toni Morrison novel also happens to explore issues surrounding racism, bigotry, and in this case sexual abuse. One might argue that having high school students read about things like sexual abuse helps them to develop empathy and to regard sexual abuse with appropriate abhorrence. Query what goal is aided by shielding teenagers from literary works that depict man's inhumanity against man. 

But Morrison's novel is not part of any curriculum, according to the complaint, nor is it on a mandatory or recommended reading list. The objection here is to its very presence and existence on the library shelves. Setting aside, again, a parent's right and ability to instruct their own children to avoid the book, and the fundamental constitutional unfairness of attempts to ban it for all, this is not some prurient pornography but passages that advance the story and help the reader to understand the brutal, criminal treatment of the book's youthful protagonist. 

Looking for Alaska: The objection here is that the book contains passages having to do with oral sex. One scene of sexuality does not a 300-page book make. Again, it deals with the pain and anguish of coming-of-age to adulthood - something every high school kid wrestles with. It also touches on death, drunk driving, and peer pressure - all topics that kids need to hear about. 

The "Moms for Liberty" spokesperson portrays herself and her group as victims of mean parents who are perfectly okay with their kids reading "pornography" in school. I don't see any pornography here. All of this is a lot closer to Judy Blume than Penthouse Forum. It promotes an ideology that equates "liberty" and individual rights with a concomitant right to restrict the rights of others. There is no fundamental accusation that any of these books were required reading for anyone. Even the Mom for Liberty who complained that she found one of these books on a summer reading list surely knows that these lists typically contain a long list of proposed titles, from which the student is entitled to select a few. Surely if a parent is worried about their child seeing something objectionable, they are free to select a more appropriate book, but one's personal objection or opinion about what constitutes "pornography" does not come with a right to demand removal of the title altogether. 

But perhaps the funniest/saddest thing about this whole thing is that "Moms for Liberty" seems unironically to be using this list as its source. The irony is just so palpable and so widespread! "Liberty" through bans! Selecting books to ban by using the *checks notes* lists of most-challenged books put out by the Office for Intellectual Freedom of the American Library Association.

But please make no mistake about it: these objections to sexual content are a masquerade and a pretext. The real objection has to do with LGBT rights, race, discrimination, and whatever they can label as "woke" or "CRT." It is a distinctly right-wing partisan organization with particular right-wing partisan points of view.

Being angry about masking is so last week. The new outrage is so manufactured as to be almost artificial. When these people start to demand that the Clarence School Board restrict what books your kid is allowed to read, understand that this is un-American censorship and that your liberty and your kids' liberty are under threat.

On Outside Provocateurs and their Local Apologists and Allies

We are sick and tired of anti-mask antics. We are sick and tired of the endless parade of people getting on mic to denounce things they have decided make up "critical race theory".

We don't care about your YouTube-based research. We don't care about your chiropractors and dentists and faith healers and assorted quasi-medical quack holistic healing-essential oils-ivermectin-betadine-hydrochloroquine disinformation. We don't give a shit about your accusations that children are being "muzzled" or that Pete Harding is "media" or that Steve Mannion has any business in Clarence whatsoever.

(By the way - and you know who you are - we saw you chatting Mannion up after the SRO kicked you all out Monday. Must've been a nice chat because it sure didn't seem as if you told him to go home. Interesting.)

But muh "parental choice," say you. Well, we prefer to behave as responsible adults. Just like with seat belts in the 80s, we believe that masking and vaxxing isn't an issue of "personal choice" but public health.

Let's break it down - the state says schools have to have kids masked. The Clarence CSD runs several schools. Kids in those schools have to wear masks lest they be subject to discipline. If two kids are in close quarters and both are wearing a mask of some sort, the likelihood of one of them transmitting a virus to the other drops exponentially. That's it.

Even if you are too stubborn to believe that bit of science, then think of a mask as something that the school requires - just like kids aren't supposed to fight or vape or do drugs or drink on campus or dress in a way that is violative of the dress code, lest they be subject to discipline.

Let's say you're right - that wearing a mask does nothing for your particular kid. What it does, however, is it helps to protect the most vulnerable people in the school.

Just like when you're not supposed to bring nuts to a class where a kid has a nut allergy. If you did that, you'd be an asshole and you'd be teaching your kid that it's ok to be an asshole.

Again: teaching your kids it's ok to violate rules that exist to help the most vulnerable people in the school is you teaching your kid it's ok to be an unempathetic, selfish asshole.

So, sure, go ahead and submit all the petitions you want. Flood the BOE meetings with angry mobs from in and out of town to flout and denounce a mask mandate that you know full well the BOE has absolutely zero authority to overrule. Show your neighbors, friends, and colleagues that you literally could not care less about the people in the school who are most at risk. (Maybe, just to really underscore the point, tell them to f off out of the district and go to the online BOCES course).

To be honest, it all seems a lot more like my student first, rather than students first. You'd think that by now the most prominent local group advocating against masking would have the self-awareness (if not common decency) to reject and denounce the outside provocation and agitation from insurrectionist scum Pete Harding and Christian nationalist Steven Mannion. Alas, no such luck. Can you not submit your "screw the susceptible kids" petition yourselves? You need the guy who lit stuff on fire at the Capitol to help you? Maybe you all appreciate the assist. Maybe it was an invitation. (Remember the tete-a-tete, mentioned above.)

Congratulations. Bring in outside anti-mask provocateurs who refuse to abide a simple requirement, and you get this:

No agenda items except those in the Call to Order were completed: the Pledge of Allegiance, roll call and some announcements. Items left on the table included but were not limited to three field trip requests; information about fall events; a report on Clarence Center Elementary; a report on physical education, health and athletics; finance and personnel items; and correspondence, which included one email petitioning for “parental mask choice” and eight emails supporting mask requirements and/or commenting on conduct at the Aug. 30 board meeting.

You think these antics make you look good? You think inviting these outside people is a good idea or strategy? You think "civil disobedience" means not wearing a mask in a HS library *when there are literally students on site* is ok? How about Pete Harding roaming the darkened halls of the High School building and live-streaming it like some prospective shooter casing the place, that make you feel all warm and fuzzy?

We honestly long for the days when all we had to worry about was math-inhibited vandals who wanted to defund the schools. As wrong as they were, at least they weren't out to infect people with a virus. (Oh, and to the extent that "parent choice" on masking is something you think is a good idea, see the link in comments.)

Enough.

A Statement Regarding the Statement on the 8/30 Clarence Board of Education Meeting

 9/1/2021

The people behind Clarence Watchdog would like to issue a statement regarding a statement regarding the Clarence Central School District Board Meeting, which was held on August 30, 2021. 

1. While no speaker explicitly identified themselves as "speaking on behalf of Clarence Students First", it was clear from various Facebook posts that the individuals who belong to and follow the public and locked, private Clarence Students First groups were in attendance and spoke. Clarence Students First, as an offshoot of the regionwide DiPietro-aligned entity, has been at the forefront of school board agitation and disruption over Covid-related closures last year, and quarantines and mask-wearing this year. When a large contingent of parents comes to insult, threaten, and condescend to the board about following a statewide mask mandate, it is no surprise what group is part of that agitation. It is most notable here that the only winner out of Students First's aligned and/or proxy groups' several lawsuits has been the law firm it retains. The rest of us may not be able to see what's going on with your top-secret clique, but we're not stupid or gullible, either.

2. Pete Harding, a January 6th insurrectionist who is currently under arrest and out on bail, awaiting trial for federal crimes in the U.S. District Court for D.C., appeared at the very end of this school board meeting to deliver an "attaboy" to the anti-mask, Covid-denying people who all claimed that masks harm children, don't protect against Covid, and are tantamount to child abuse. He used the first person plural in referring to efforts that he threatened would continue to take place - supposed criminal or civil liabilities and penalties that the Board of Education would face if it continued requiring masks or vaccinations, notwithstanding the fact that vaccinations are already required. It doesn't really matter whether Pete Harding is "affiliated" with any of the myriad "Students First" organizations - his thoughts, words, deeds, and threats are all indistinguishable from those of the people who do claim such affiliation. The undeniable fact is that Students First has an ally in Pete Harding and vice-versa. 

3. WNY Students First is in no position to encourage or condone who does and does not speak at a BOE meeting anywhere, given that it is not, in fact, a board of education and does not set or enforce the rules of any BOE. 

4. WNY Students First claims to be "nonpartisan" but this is not borne out by facts. It has aligned itself with people like ultra-right wing Assemblyman David DiPietro, whose upcoming political fundraiser will supposedly be setting proceeds aside for Students First. We have no idea whether this is in any way violative of Students First's 501c4 status, but the idea that the group is "nonpartisan" is absurd on its face. 

5. Contrary to your statement, Pete Harding the insurrectionist's tone and demeanor were in no substantive or stylistic way different from the "rest of the speakers." One man yelled and ranted about a "plandemic" and that "no one is getting Covid" and that quarantines are "Nazi shit." One woman attacked teachers for having the audacity to ask that kids wear their masks properly in class. Please don't urinate on our legs and tell us it's raining. 

6. Is this one about us? We think it's about us. Nobody here stands against parent voices except for "Students First". Why do we say this? Because "parent choice" over masking (or otherwise treating Covid as if it doesn't exist) is a blatant usurpation of the choice of parents who do take it seriously. If parents, en masse, decide that they will send their unvaccinated children to school unmasked, Covid will spread. Kids will pass it to each other, and to adults with whom they come into contact. It's happening now down south. How does the "choice" of one parent to completely disregard the advice of doctors, (thereby adversely affecting others), honor the concomitant "choice" of the parents who do not wish to spread or contract the virus? Your "choice" ends the second it harms us. We have seen the posts and tweets from members and putative leaders of Students First and its various sub-groups, allies, and proxies, and we think that this particular point is nothing more than a lot of projection. I mean, we're not suing anyone. We're not demanding special treatment. We are countering the misinformation and malign demands of your groups. If "trust, integrity, and accountability are the key to a healthier, more inclusive district," then stop acting as if it's no big deal for kids to get sick from Covid. (Given the Students First membership's frequent pivoting into anti-CRT agitation, this cri de coeur for "inclusivity" has a more than just a tinge of irony).

Students First purports to provide "students and families an organized and active voice regarding the education of students within their districts" but has a really really massive problem when it is faced with even the most gentle pushback or dissent. The Board of Education is specifically elected for this stated purpose, so something else is afoot. Students First has routinely and relentlessly attacked the superintendent, members of the board individually, the Department of Health, the Governor, the County Executive, the Health Commissioner, other parents who disagree, and people who leave dissenting comments on their various and sundry Facebook pages and groups. It takes a lot of chutzpah for Students First to whine about its supposed good intentions and kind inclusivity while it's filing lawsuit after lawsuit and asking when will our kids just "be allowed to get sick again". 

The Clarence School Board Election 2016

Our perennial opponents were leafleting mailboxes this past weekend with this:

I checked the records on Via Cimato and Northfield to try and find out which properties were being referenced. I could not find one with the exact tax figures represented on this sheet. 

As for the tax figures, note the very convenient date range. Had our intrepid propagandists taken this back 10 years, rather than 5, they'd have a much different conclusion. The tax rates were much higher in 2004 - 2007, before the stock market crash, and many homes are only now paying a similar dollar amount as they did back then. The net increase, therefore, for many homes in a 10-year range is negligible. Perhaps that's why they did it this way - to make it seem as if the district was just raising taxes for the heck of it. 

But let's, once and for all, rebut the lies and misinformation about enrollment. These charts are wrong and misleading. Kindergarten class numbers are already starting to recover. Corcoran's propagandistic use of these graphs just takes the decline and assumes it will continue and projects outward. 

Let's take a look at more recent figures, from the Superintendent's presentation in February 2016. Here is the nutshell version: 

Enrollment is already stabilizing. Although district enrollment will decline by about 1% per year for the next 5 years, elementary school enrollment is already poised to rise. 

Elementary Schools: Two methodologies were employed that both predicted that fewer than 300 kids would enroll in kindergarten for the 2016 - 2017 school year. As of right now, both projections were significantly off-the-mark, and it's possible that it was off by as many as 80 kids. 

Looking more broadly at elementary school enrollment, look at the class sizes based on the actual census so far, and the projected census based on trends: 

Or, more significantly, 

Now, if you look at the data from the task force's projections, you'll find that the rebound is expected to happen sooner rather than later: the current projection for 2018-19 is 1,848 vs. 1,800, and if you go back further to 2013, the revised 2020-2021 elementary enrollment projection would be a net loss of zero students. 

As for the remaining schools, here are the revised projections: 

But Ellie doesn't break it down district-wide. She only goes by elementary, middle school, and high school. Her document claims the following: 

• Elementary schools will go from "2,300-1,500" students from 2010 - 2023; 
• The middle school will supposedly go from, "1,200 - 900" students; and 
• The high school will go from, "1,700 - 1,200" students in that timeframe. 

All are false. We don't have projections to 2023, only to 2020-2021. In that time: 

• Elementary schools will go from 2,141 to 1,911; 
• Middle School will go from 1,211 to 979; 
• High School will go from 1,667 to 1,409

Corcoran's figures for elementary decline is 400 students off; for middle school it's 80 students off, and for the high school she overexaggerated by 200 kids. That's 680 students she just omits. 

Now, the chart above shows a net gain from 2015 - 2021 of almost 100 elementary school students. If you go back to 2010, K-5 enrollment was 2,141 - not, as Ellie claims, 2,300. No credible projections to 2023 exist, so if we go just by what we have - 1,911 - we see that Corcoran's claim of "1,500" is wildly off the mark. 

Here is the high school chart: 

Actual HS enrollment in 2010 was 1,667. It is anticipated to drop to about 1,409 by 2021. That is not, as Ellie Corcoran suggests, a drop from "1,700 - 1,200" students, but from 1,660 to 1,400; but a drop of about 258 students. 

And the middle school: 

Corcoran suggests a 2010 - 2023 enrollment decrease here of "1,200 - 900" students. Actual 6-8 enrollment in 2010 was 1,211 students. Here, it is projected by 2021 to be 979 students, a drop of 232 students.    

As for overall district enrollment, the actual number in 2010 was 5,019. The revised projection for 2020-2021 is 4,299. That is a drop of 720 students over the course of 11 years; about 65 students per year. But if elementary school enrollment trends continue to be wildly in excess of the projections, that districtwide decrease will be much smaller come 2021. 

But look at the way she presents the data: she makes it seem as if the district of 5,000 kids is poised to lose as many as 5,200 students.  

• The reality is that enrollment declines are stabilizing sooner than expected. 
• The reality is that we lost 50 teachers since 2010 already. 
• The reality is that there are fewer elective choices for students. 
• The reality is that enrollment figures aren't nearly as dire as Corcoran would have you believe. 
• The reality is that teachers and students have been forced to do more with less. 
• The reality is that the current budget takes an influx of state cash and allocates it justly and equitably; 
• The reality is that class sizes are too big for elementary students especially; 
• The reality is that, while we received "more in state funds than ever before", the district has not been made whole. The state still owes us $70 million, which local taxpayers have had to make up to properly and adequately fund our district and avoid educational bankruptcy.
• The reality is that the decrease in gasoline and natural gas prices has put more money in people's pockets and acted as a de facto tax cut that far exceeds any increase in school taxes.
• The reality is that the Gap Elimination Adjustment was ended, not "restored", and there are still $20 million that the GEA has taken from the district that have not yet been restored, and we have not been made whole.
• The reality is that a 3.11% tax cap is positive - it's because of town growth and growth is good. The tax levy (not tax rate) is increasing by 2.76%, which is less than the tax cap, and this is the third consecutive below-cap levy increase.
• The reality is that local taxes have had to make up the $70 million in state aid that would have been due and owing had it not been for the Gap Elimination Adjustment.

The reality is this: 

and this: 

and this: 

VOTE YES ON MAY 17th. 

POLLS ARE OPEN FROM 7am - 9pm at the HS Gymnasium, off Gunnville Rd. 

VOTE FOR JAMES BOGLIOLI AND JOHN FISGUS FOR SCHOOL BOARD

Duty

Former Councilman Joseph Weiss' house caught fire Friday night. The Buffalo News reports $600,000 in damage - half to the structure, and half to its contents.  Thankfully, no one was hurt. Other reports indicated that the fire started in the chimney and spread to the rest of the house.

Four short years ago, Joe Weiss was kicked out of office, in part, due to his sanctimonious, disingenuous, and hateful criticism of Clarence's volunteer fire districts. There was more to it than that - his demeanor was Paladinoesque, he threatened to subject the town to a 1st amendment lawsuit over the denial of an annual 4th of July fireworks permit to a critic, but supporters of the fire districts went out of their way to secure his ouster. 

Just a few weeks ago, he raised his nasty head to vilify the school district and teachers in the pages of the Buffalo News - this site quite accurately called him a "cartoon villain". Last year, he threatened physical violence on a person leafleting outside the school budget vote. 

No fewer than four volunteer fire departments - District One, Harris Hill, Clarence Center, and Newstead - answered the call to put out the fire in Weiss' home. Volunteer firemen and women from four separate fire districts took time out of their Friday nights - and risked their lives - to go save the life and property of a man who had nothing but hatred for them. 

The members of four separate fire districts answered the call and save a man who called them a "gestapo". Evidently, opposing Joe Weiss makes our firefighters Nazis. 

He had called for the closing of Harris Hill - one of the companies that came out to save his home and life. 

He complained about tiny increases to budgets that cost taxpayers pennies, and denigrated the work that they did. 

He responded to politicos who called our volunteer departments a "taxpayer bargain", thusly:

Conversely, there are no three-alarm fires in Eden corn fields. Arson, a rarity in the ‘burbs, is more frequent in poverty-stricken urban areas. Abandoned homes inBuffalo, a common arson target, number close to 14,000. How many in Clarence,Elma, Alden? Yet our politicos compare Lackawanna to Amherst. 

Granted, paid firefighter companies present challenges. Salaries run high because former politicians granted wages and pensions that far exceed those in the private sector. But with smart planning and good management, a remodeled system using a combination of paid tem using a combination of paid firefighters and volunteer members could be markedly more efficient and cost effective. 

The idea that the all-volunteer force is a financial bargain is simply an illusion — the smoke and mirrors, a combination of defective logic and obfuscation. The truth is that a number of first ring suburban firefighter crews are vastly over-equipped. The truth is that more than 95 percent of the action is emergency medical calls, where metro ambulance companies are a viable option. Some would prefer that you believe differently. A number of them see it as an easy way for votes this November, and political suicide to question the status quo. I beg to differ.

The truth is that Weiss' home re-kindled Saturday morning (a common occurrence) and a second alarm was called. All that equipment being used at taxpayer expense to save the home of someone who didn't just call for town fire departments to be frugal, but heaped scorn, sarcasm, and derision upon them. 

When Weiss proposed arbitrary cuts of town funding to fire districts, other councilmembers refused, saying, “I’m not going to play with people’s safety.”

Hopefully Mr. Weiss' home can be saved, and all are safe. Even cartoon villains don't deserve loss of life or property. 

But more importantly, I hope the firefighters who came to save Weiss' home stay safe as they put out the rekindled blaze Saturday morning. They risk their lives day in and day out to help others. 

As for Weiss, even though he wasn't there for them, they were there for him.

Joe Weiss: Cartoon Villain

Joe Weiss (via Facebook)

Last year, former Councilman and current asshole Joe Weiss issued a threat to a local pro-school canvasser at an elementary school fun run outside the high school, in the presence of two students.  

But the highlight of my day came as I was passing out palmcards as families were making their way from an elementary school track meet next to the polling place. I was chatting with two 15 year-old student volunteers when a taller man dressed like a fake lumberjack ambled his way right up to me. I asked him if he was on his way in to vote and he said that he wasn’t, and asked me what my name was.


I told him, and he came even closer — his body touching mine, ever so tenderly, and got right in my face. He declared that I had once told him to “go fuck [him]self” in an email a few years ago. I responded, “Did I?” He said, “Yeah.” I said, “Are you [former Clarence town councilmember] Joe Weiss?” He replied, “Yeah. and I want to tell you to go fuck yourself”. I thanked him, never backing down from where I stood, and as he skulked away I added, “nice language around the kids.”

He stopped, turned, and said, “You know, I really should kick the shit out of you right now”.

Weiss may indeed be a dangerous, belligerent man of whom people should be wary, but he is also a purveyor of facile regurgitation of half-truths and nonsense.

I just finished planting another money tree. Like the majority of my Clarence neighbors, my property assessment went way up. This new tax bite now requires residents to possess a money orchard.

Property assessments went "way up" in April and May of 2015 - a year ago. Yet for some reason this detestable oaf decides that 12 months later is the right time to whine about a town process that recognizes the fact that housing values in Clarence continue to rise. 

Joe Weiss' house is now assessed at $650,000, up from $556,000 in 2011 - 2015. Sounds like it was dramatically undervalued. He gets no STAR rebate. The only explanation for that is that his income exceeds the upper limit of eligibility for STAR; his household earns over $500,000 per year. 

Why, you ask? One reason is that even with declining enrollment, the Clarence teachers were given a 3 percent raise on top of their yearly step increases. And at the same meeting that the music department bemoaned their lack of funding, the superintendent himself claimed a nice plump raise.

A "yearly step increase". Here's what this means, as per the Clarence Bee: "Under the terms of the agreement, teachers on the top step of the salary schedule will receive raises of $1,500 in each of the three years. Teachers on the salary schedule will receive $175 in addition to their step increment for the first two years of the contract and $180 in addition to their step increment in the third year of the contract. Increment step increases are mandated by the state, and the total raises represent less than 1 percent more than that during the life of the contract."

Joe Weiss was demonstrably absent from the school board meeting where the music department expressed its need for increased funding - funding that the anti-tax geniuses like Joe Weiss took away in 2013. 

It’s not only the cost of Clarence schools. We have dozens of fire trucks for a handful of fires. These are housed in shiny, sprawling volunteer firefighter campuses that sport workout rooms, banquet halls, ball diamonds, spacious parking lots and impressive acreage, all which require maintenance and upkeep.

People in Clarence will recall that Weiss was hurled out of office thanks to his endless scapegoating of the volunteer fire departments and their members for taxes. "Spacious parking lots" for me, but not for thee. 

We in Clarence pay more for our trash collection – being the only major suburb that allows for several companies rather than one low bidder. That traffic adds to more wear and tear on our roads. We get nothing for our recyclables and enjoy a daily blizzard of paper and plastic blowing about our streets.

Yeah, I remember that. Anti-tax people like it that way because "no new taxes". Thanks to their "free market" nonsense, Clarence residents pay significantly more for trash pick-up than similarly situated towns that enjoy a townwide contract or municipal trash service. 

So, you may wonder, where is our government? Well, our town fathers know we are too lazy to get involved or bother to vote. Any official who criticizes the status quo is easily defeated thanks to big turnout by firefighters and teachers, because fewer than 20 percent of us show up for primary elections.

Sour grapes from a time long ago. 

So, what? We live in a third-ring suburb and by the time the abandoned homes, crime and poverty reach us, we’ll be settled in Florida or taking that long nap in the funeral home.

I smell a euphemism here. 

Everything is just ducky in Clarence, as long as your money tree stays green.

Yours is greener than most. Stop whining, loser. 

In 2007, Joe Weiss' school tax bill on his mansion was $8,315. In 2016, it's $9,324. If it had simply gone up by the rate of inflation since 2007, the bill would now stand at $9,509. 

Nice try. 

They'll Vote No. We Must Vote Yes.

That didn't take long. The coalition of "no" has decided - SURPRISE, SURPRISE - to vote "no" again this year. Let's take a look at their rationale, such as it is.

No one is against teachers and administrators getting an adequate salary; but these same professionals pay very little toward their health insurance, and have extremely profitable pensions, and when the stock market is in a decline, the taxpayers make must make up the difference. 

Pensions aren't "profitable". Profit is what you get when you run a private business and take in more money than you've spent. Schools aren't private, and they're not a business. They don't make things for private profit; they provide a public service. Schools are public entities chartered to educate children and prepare them for life and/or college. That's it, and in order to accomplish that task, school districts must follow the law and retain qualified professionals to undertake the role of educating children. In order to attract qualified, educated candidates, school districts must offer something to attract people who might otherwise go to the private sector, where profit is a thing and pay is higher. 

Public school teachers in New York State are qualified, educated, certified professionals who earn a salary, benefits, and a pension. The pension is administered and regulated by New York State, and neither the teachers nor the individual school districts have any say over how they're administered. To scapegoat public schoolteacher pensions to excuse your "no" vote is ludicrous. As for health insurance, teachers  have benefits that some - but not all - in the private sector might envy. Rather than use that as a justification to punish them - to fire them through budget rejection - ask yourself why you're not entitled to similar benefits. 

Teachers also have tenure which means that teachers, who are not up to speed, cannot lose their jobs; and to make it worse, they get yearly salary increments to boost. They also work only 9 months. Teachers claim they work hard, and most of them do, but that is also the case in most other segments of the work force.

A teacher might want to look at the punctuation in the preceding paragraph. Teachers only work 9 months? Tell that to the teachers. I'm sure they'll tell you otherwise. They prepare for their curricula, syllabi, and lesson plans months in advance. They have to now stay up-to-date on what is, for many of them, a completely new way of teaching core subjects, and they're now analyzed and graded based on how their pupils do on standardized tests. 

Tenure is built into the state Education Law. That is a statute that can only be changed by the legislature in Albany with Governor assent or a veto override. After a probationary period, tenured teachers are entitled to undergo what amounts to an arbitration process before they can be fired. To suggest that they "cannot lose their jobs" is false. They can. 

The problem is that this is not the case w/ the private sector. In the private sector, tenure is absurd. If you do not perform, you lose your job, and in most cases, employees do not get yearly increments equal to teachers. Employees also pay approximately 50% or more toward their health insurance, and work 12 months, with only a few weeks’ vacation.

This is simply untrue and completely insane. People who have employment contracts have "tenure" as set forth within the terms of that contract. At-will employees can be fired or quit at will, but employers will be required to uphold the terms set forth in an employee handbook. Private sector union workers may be entitled to "tenure" insofar as a dismissal arbitration process might have been bargained-for. 

Where is it true, as a blanket statement, that private sector employees "do not get yearly increments equal to teachers"? How much did the teachers get last year? What was the average for American workers? There are as many variables in answering that as there are employers in the United States, so what we're left with is averages and statistics. Some people get raises, others don't. Some people get raises much larger than the teachers, some don't. Some people make much more than teachers do in the first place, others don't. Many people with postgraduate degrees earn far, far more than teachers - even ones in the public sector. 

As for the "race to the bottom" for benefits and vacation time, not all employees pay that much towards their health insurance. In fact, I'd wager that very few of them do. Businesses need to attract and retain employees, and they hardly do so by treating them like garbage. The same goes for school districts, who want to attract and retain excellent teachers. 

Why am I comparing both? The private sector employee benefits depend on the profits and loss of the company. The teacher benefits are carved in stone, and taxpayers pay for these increases, many of whom are on fixed incomes.

They're not carved in stone. They're written in a binding legal contract, and tax payers pay for the teachers' salaries just like they pay for potholes to be filled, the town hall to be lit, and snow to be plowed. even people on fixed incomes. 

Administrators claim these increasing taxes are for the children; but that is not the case. A perfect example was when the Clarence music department gave a presentation of suffering children because the department was understaffed; yet within a half hour, the administration was voted a pretty sizeable raise.

3% per year is not "pretty sizeable" unless you think that the work that principals and other admin employees have to do with new, complicated state mandates and oversight are worthless. 3% per year is completely within the bounds of the nationwide average for pay increases, as School Trustee Jason Lahti made clear at that same meeting. 

Paying administrators and teachers - without whom you don't have a school district - is "for the children".  Paying them a good wage with good benefits and room to grow attracts and keeps good administrators and teachers, resulting in good students. 

What can we do about it? Unfortunately, we must keep voting “no” on the budget, until they get the picture that our taxes should “go for the children” first, and that the taxpayer cannot afford to keep paying for employee luxuries which are not in line w/ the private sector; and we must vote for impartial board members who do not rubberstamp these luxuries.

Define "luxury".  A 3% raise? A 3% raise is weak. Good health benefits? The district self-administers, saving thousands. There is a shortage of teachers, but they're attracted to New York districts because the pay and benefits are fair. We could be like Kansas, which treats its teachers like McDonald's employees and is having a very hard time attracting or keeping them in the state. 

You can't keep comparing the private sector to what teachers earn because it's like comparing apples to oranges; it's like comparing Pepsi-Cola to the US Army. They serve different purposes. The schools don't make widgets, nor do they turn a profit on any manufacturing or service they provide. They are a non-profit, government entity chartered by New York State and subject to its laws. 

If you want to vote "no" just be honest about why. You hate the teachers and their remuneration, so you don't really care about how a "no" vote might affect the children. You already know that it will - 2013 showed us. 

You can bleat on and on about how the music department needs more people, but it needs those people because of the people lost in 2013, when you succeeded in pushing a "no" vote. 

You can bleat on and on about how "employee luxuries" need to be rolled back so that the district can somehow magically hire three additional music staffers at, presumably, the low, fast-food pay and benefits you demand. Good luck with that. 

Clarence schools, as set forth in the image above, has lost almost $70 million in state aid that was owed to them thanks to the withholding of foundation aid and the added insult of the Gap Elimination Adjustment, whereby the state balanced its own budget on the backs of New York's students. Instead of targeting the real culprits - Albany politicians - the "no" coalition wants to target students and teachers and threaten palpable, genuine, irreparable harm year after year. 

Just be honest about it: no one believes that you care about the students. I've known this for a fact ever since 2013 when I and many others similarly situated went out-of-pocket to undo some of the harm you did. Stop pretending and just tell the truth: you will advocate for a no vote every year, and you'll manufacture an excuse for it around your conclusion.