One more disclaimer before I get to the point of this post: I neither have an interest in writing about the merits of the positions taken by the parties to the negotiation, nor about whether or not the teachers are asking for too much (or too little). These issues have been debated in the community for many months now, and I have nothing new to add. However, the fact that the teacher’s contract negotiations have been hotly debated in the community for many months — now that’s interesting. Does anyone debate your salary? Mine? The guy who delivers your mail? The clerk who checked you out at Walmart? The CEO of Exxon-Mobil? No, the only salaries that I can think of that get publicly (and hotly) debated are those of our public school teachers. Why is that?

Well, there is a simple answer — which no doubt has already occurred to you — but like most simple answers, it only appears to address the question, while missing the key point entirely. It’s because we get to vote on the school budget, the vast majority of which goes to the salaries of the people who work in the schools, most of whom are teachers. And, as we know, once the budget is passed, it becomes a tax bill that we have to pay. So, the argument goes, since we pay the teachers’ salaries, we have a right to have a say in how much they make. Sounds simple, right?

No, not really, since there’s an important question that no one is addressing: whose salaries don’t we pay? Whether it’s through taxes (e.g., the guys in the highway department or the clerk in the planning office), or via more direct transactions at Walmart, Amazon.com, or with a local handyman, we all pay each other’s salaries, through the money we spend or the taxes we pay. Where do you think the Schiavonis get the money to pay the workers at the IGA? They get it from you when you shop there, of course. If, next month they have to pay their workers higher wages, then they may have to charge you more for the meat, vegetables and dairy you buy. They have no other secret source of money with which to pay their workers. Neither does any other business. But, when was the last time there was a public debate about the produce manager’s salary? Or the plumber’s? (And, I think he definitely makes too much.) Does anyone write a letter to the editor criticizing the employees of the Variety Store because of a raise they asked for? And what about the CEO of Bridgehampton National Bank? I’ll bet the interest rate on my home equity loan would be lower if he made less.

What about the other (non-school) branches of government? After all, we pay the salaries of everyone in government with our tax dollars. The difference is that we don’t get to vote, even indirectly, on the salaries of the majority of government workers. However, we do get to vote on the school budget, and so we feel we have a right to decide how much teachers should earn. I’m sorry, but I think it is both logically and ethically indefensible to pick one group of employees out of all others and publicly criticize them for wanting the same thing that we all want: to make as much money as we can doing the jobs we’ve chosen to do.

At this point I have to say LOUDLY, that this has nothing to do with whether or not Sag Harbor’s teachers are greedy, selfish, or unreasonable. Maybe they are. Maybe they’re not. In this discussion, that’s beside the point. Perhaps you were greedy, selfish and unreasonable the last time you negotiated with your boss. Shall we discuss that here? No, I didn’t think so.

Basically, what I’m saying folks, is this: get a grip. Teachers, just like the rest of us — including me and you — have the right to ask for what they think they need to live the lives they want to live, without being publicly pilloried for doing so. This is America, after all, where we all have the right to chase success, however we define it, in whatever way we choose.

But this year…this year they assure us they’ve got it figured out and the fund-balance, like little bear’s porridge, will be just right. As I said, learning on the job is good. I really mean that. Now, what about those accounting errors?  They are the other villain in this year’s budget scenario, yet the Board was a little less specific about those. However, the District’s new business official, Janet Verneuille, assures us she’s got a handle on it, and from the depth of knowledge she displayed at a recent budget presentation, I’m inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt. I’m also inclined to giver her a word to the wise…it’s not necessary to try to defend or even explain the mistakes of your predecessors. They were their mistakes, not yours. Defending them makes them look like your mistakes. Correct, don’t defend.

Which, by the way, is advice the School Board should take to heart as well. In the current political climate — yes, the School Board is political — you can’t win an argument with the public. The public is angry, and that anger is not aimed at anyone in specific. Are you an elected official? If the answer is yes, just assume that the public is pissed-off at you. The best thing you can do is to publicly accept your role in whatever mistakes were made, apologize sincerely, and then be completely transparent about what you are doing to fix the problem. Don’t defend, don’t argue, and especially don’t get arrogant.

Unfortunately, when there’s a lack of leadership, defensiveness, argumentativeness and arrogance often appear to fill the void. Former Board President Walter Tice got it exactly right at Monday evening’s Board meeting when he admonished the board for expecting the public to, again, vote on a budget in which the dollar amount of the single largest expense — teacher’s salaries — is a guess that can’t even be revealed to the voters.  Tice advised the board to get the contract settled before the budget vote so that the public could have confidence that the proposed budget accurately reflected the amount the District would need to meet its obligations — not too little, and certainly not too much. That being a concept the board and administration have had difficulty with in recent years, they should carefully consider the wisdom of Mr. Tice’s advice.

The good news is that leadership can be learned on the job. All that’s needed to get the contract negotiation ball rolling again, is for one or more Board members to accept the fact that it is the Board’s job to get it done and to stop making it personal. As things stand right now, the animosity directed by some board members towards the teachers’ union is palpable, and that’s not appropriate. This is not an ego battle. Board members must put aside their personal feelings and their preconceived notions of whatever it was they thought they could “accomplish” in the negotiations, and actually start to negotiate.  A leader would recognize that “winning” is no longer the most important point. (It actually never was.) Preserving the vision, the quality, and the harmony of the District is what’s important now. A leader would know this, and would do whatever is necessary to make his or her colleagues understand it as well. I know that leader exists on this board. I just hope that he or she is ready to start learning on the job.

The John Jermain Memorial Library, the public library in Sag Harbor, NY, donated to the community by Mrs. Russel Sage in 1910.

Over the intervening near century, Sag Harbor has made good use of her donation. The library has remained in its original home, adapting its programs and collection to the whims of various eras. Over the years, the inside of the building has seen a few changes — mainly the addition of many more “stacks” — the library term for bookshelves — to accommodate its growing collection. In addition a small renovation was undertaken about 15 years ago to allow the basement, formerly a storage area, to be used as a public space with a handicapped accessible entrance and bathroom. Minor repairs, and necessary replacements (the boiler, for instance) have also been undertaken, and paid for from the library’s operating budget, with monies provided by the taxpayers of the Sag Harbor school district, as are virtually all of the library’s operating expenses.

Other than the work on the basement, however, the taxpayers have not been asked to foot the bill for any refurbishment or expansion of the library building in its entire 99 years of existence. We’ve all been getting a free ride courtesy of Mrs. Sage’s commitment to high end materials and quality construction. She built it to last, and last it did…until now.

Members of the community who attended the public meeting hosted by the Library on the evening of Monday, April 20th, saw a presentation by Victor Conseco, president of Sandpebble Builders, the firm hired by the Library to do a cost analysis of its plan to refurbish and expand the building. As he spoke about the various factors that must be taken into consideration: restoration, code compliance and expansion, Mr. Conseco flipped through a depressing slide show of disrepair. From a decaying roof, to water-damaged plaster, from inadequate wiring to masonry in need of serious repointing, his presentation revealed the kind of wear and tear that is nearly invisible to regular users of the library, but jumps out at a fresh pair of eyes, especially ones trained to see these conditions.

So, as it turns out, while Mrs. Sage did a great service to many generations of Sag Harborites in providing us a library building that was seemingly capable of lasting forever, her meticulous attention to quality also misled us into believing we did not have to plan and pay for the care that any heavily used, aging structure requires. For generations, we’ve continued to rely on Mrs. Sage’s investment to pay dividends by providing us with a functional, usable library. As with any investment, though, the capital must be preserved. In this case the capital is the building, and it has been, if not squandered, at least diminished by our lack of attention.

No one can deny that Mrs. Sage’s investment in a library for Sag Harbor has paid a bountiful return on her investment. However, at this point in the building’s life a new injection of capital is required. It’s our bill to pay, and it’s long overdue.

However, I’d like to focus for a minute, not on the unfair reassessment, but on the general tax rates on the East End, as compared to those in the surrounding areas. Over the years I’ve lived in Sag Hampton, I’ve heard lots of complaints about high taxes. In the late ’80s and early ’90s when I served on the local school board, that issue was the 800 lb. gorilla in the room at every school board meeting. More recently, I’ve read that high taxes were driving lower and middle income families out of the area. I’ve always nodded and agreed with those doing the complaining — ’cause, like I said, no one (including me) likes to pay taxes.

But, quietly, I’ve always wondered about this. My taxes, in fact, never seemed that high to me, especially compared with what I heard people were paying elsewhere on Long Island. But, I never voiced this opinion, thinking that maybe there was something I didn’t understand. I certainly didn’t want to advertise to others that I thought my property taxes were low. I thought it would seem arrogant, or something…

Then I read this in last Sunday’s New York Times. Oops, maybe I wasn’t crazy after all. And then I saw this, also in the same Times article. Wow! I’m not moving to Pelham, that’s for damn sure. It’s certainly a shock to see that taxes in the various communities that make up Sag Hampton are among the lowest in the New York metro area — and  that’s across the board from Quogue to Montauk.

So, while there are many factors driving lower- and middle-class residents out out this area, it seems that taxes may not be one of them. OK, I know school district spending is out of control, and needs to be reigned in. But all that means is that we could be paying even lower taxes. So, what am I missing? If you think I’m wrong about this, leave a comment and let me know where I’m going wrong. Or, if you are one of the few who doesn’t mind paying your tax bill, I’d like to hear from you too.