Sag Harbor School Board Defends its Negotiating Position; Ready to Meet

Posted on 23 October 2009

The Sag Harbor School Board of Education released a letter to Sag Harbor residents on Thursday, October 15, saying the board plans to “schedule negotiation sessions in the near future.” School board president Walter Wilcoxen reiterated the board’s intent to return to the negotiating table at a Board of Education meeting on Monday evening. On Wednesday, Wilcoxen reported that the school’s attorney Tom Volz had proposed three separate dates to meet and start negotiations with the Teacher Association of Sag Harbor (TASH). Wilcoxen said the board would meet with TASH within two weeks at the earliest or by early November at the latest. But TASH president Eileen Kochanasz later confirmed that the organization could meet with the board on either October 30 or November 3.

Although the meeting was well attended by members of the Teachers Association of Sag Harbor, Wilcoxen contended he wouldn’t answer questions as the board hopes to refrain from negotiating in public.

Wilcoxen did note that “the board has spent more than several meetings going over our negotiating concepts and positions.” He added that superintendent Dr. John Gratto planned to speak with the board’s attorney Tom Volz and would instruct him to reach out to the TASH representative to plan a future meeting. 

“Communication between the parties must continue in order to identify options that could address each side’s concerns,” stated the board in the letter. “We look forward to working with the teachers to resolve all outstanding differences and settle the contract in a mutually beneficial manner.”

In the letter, the board recapitulated the history of the negotiations — since they first began in February of 2008 — and referenced the fact finder’s report from August 2009. However, the board also highlighted data revealing the fiscal condition of the community. According to the board’s letter, the Sag Harbor School District has the lowest combined wealth ratio compared to the Bridgehampton, East Hampton and Southampton school districts.

“Combined Wealth Ratio is defined by the State Education Department as ‘based on a combined wealth, which weights income and property equally … each wealth ratio was computed by dividing the district’s wealth by the state average wealth as defined by law …’ The purpose is to measure the relative wealth between districts based on a State standard. A district of average wealth would have a Combined Wealth Ratio of 1.0,” explained the board. According to the data presented by the board, Sag Harbor has a CWR of around 4.85, Southampton has a CWR of 8.47, East Hampton has a CWR of 7.45 and Bridgehampton has a CWR of 20.87. (These figures are based on data from 2007.) At the board meeting, TASH member Jim Kinnier contended these figures were taken out of context, saying the Sag Harbor School district remains the 14th richest school district in the state.

The board also presented the property tax levy as a percentage of the general fund expenditure, which in other words “measures the degree to which a district depends on the residents to pay property taxes and to support the cost of education.” The board showed figures from 2008 where 87.8% of the district’s expenses are derived from property taxes and not other sources like state or federal aid. This figure is compared to 79.7% in Southampton, 73.8% in East Hampton and 65% in Bridgehampton. The board added that the reliance on residential households is further exacerbated by less commercial development in Sag Harbor compared to East Hampton and Southampton.

During a later interview, Wilcoxen said the board released these figures because TASH has argued that if Southampton and East Hampton school districts were able to give their teachers raises over 3.5 percent then Sag Harbor should be able to make the same commitment. 

“[The board's] view is that we are not the same. One of the main things we wanted to say to the community is that we have less wealth to tax,” explained Wilcoxen.

The board also mentioned that they expect post-retirement health benefit costs will increase from $352,000, which the district spent last year, to $740,000 by 2014.

In some of the closing remarks of the letter, the board said: “The Board desires to reach an agreement that, in its entirety: (1) will result in the community supporting the district and teachers (2) will be fair to teachers, (3) will further the academic achievement of students, (4) will recognize the current economic realities and (5) will be supported by the best available data.”

Asked why the board published the letter now, board member Mary Anne Miller said she thought the figures were “an important piece of information for the community as a whole.” She added that the board is continuing to work on the data. Of the acrimonious personal note the discussions between TASH and the board have taken recently, Miller added “I am not judging [the teacher's] character. I am committed to education too … [But] without the finances we can’t do anything.”

A copy of the letter can be found on the home page of the district’s website at

Be Sociable, Share!

This post was written by:

- who has written 496 posts on The Sag Harbor Express.

Contact the author

3 Responses to “Sag Harbor School Board Defends its Negotiating Position; Ready to Meet”

  1. dorothy sherry says:

    I wonder how many of the teachers are property owners and taxpayers in Sag Harbor or live in other communties…I know teachers in the past have suffered from low wages but now think they are almost even with other workers in the village or maybe even greater wages…I thought 90% of taxes were for schools in our district..anyway lots of questions and feel that the Express could do a article in paper to clear up some of these questions arising now…thanks

  2. adriana anne says:

    There is a singular lack of integrity when the Board says it won’t negotiate in public, while it sends a letter providing facts/figures justifying its position and advocating they they, the Board, are simply protecting the community.

    I think that this is an example of bargaining in bad faith.

    They pose as being open, yet are not. They justify not having honest debate in public on the grounds that they will negotiate in private. Yet, they are sending out communications to the public where the public cannot hear the Board directly face to face, and certainly cannot hear point by point discussion/debate.

    This has tremendous implications for fundamental fairness and credibility as it effects the entire community, not just the teachers.

    The Board is in a leadership position and is engendering a false sense that the teachers’ are being unreasonable, in a kind of echo chamber.

    In fact, the Board is demonstrating in public, the primary complaint the teachers’ have expressed: that the Board is not truly “negotiating”.

    The Board clearly doesn’t like negotiating. It is not the first time the Board has publicly displayed a disregard for procedure and fairness.

    What comes to mind is the hiring of the new Superindendent in a decision that certainly caught the community off guard, deciding themselves that they had gotten enough input from the community into this decision. When they presented their choice at a Board meeting, if memory serves correctly, they had an intermission in the meeting, and, when it resumed, some of the Board members had “left”; others stayed, as did the new Superindentent.

    Similarly, the Board created a report card for the new Superindentant, did the grading themselves (ie they decided how he performed in community, teacher, student relations) certainly not providing the underlying data, and decided that he merited a pay raise.

    I don’t think the common denominator is “teachers” greedy or otherwise. I think the common denominator is the mindset of the Board.

    I think that mindset needs to be challenged, as it is a mindset that will certainly not promote constructive and creative thinking which is so very very necessary if the community is to be a constructive and creative community.

    It is the human resources and human creativity that will transform the current economic situation, making the best use of it for good, and helping the community as a whole marshal all of its resources for creative solutions that will improve the economy of the entire community.

    The mindset and behavior of the Board is probably something that we can’t afford at such a time as this.


  3. I do not even know how I finished up right here, however I thought this post was once good.

    I do not recognize who you are however definitely you are going to a famous blogger
    if you are not already. Cheers!

Leave a Reply

Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off-topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Terms of Service

Follow The Express…

Pictures of the Week - See all photos