PTSA FORUM – February 7, 2007 – 7:30pm

“CANDIDATES FORUM”

Candidates Standing for School Committee and Board of Selectman

This special-event PTSA Forum gave attendees the opportunity to meet the current candidates for Selectman and School Committee. The evening was devoted to questions from the public. The election is on Monday, March 5^th.

After a general welcome from Debora Hoard, PTSA co-president, Joan Zahka took over as moderator. Our panel of candidates follows:

For Selectman: Jeanne Krieger, George Burnell, Leo McSweeney

For School Committee: Tom Diaz, Olga Guttag, Margaret Coppe, Alan Seferian

Each candidate gave a two-minute introduction including personal background, reason for interest in the position, and relevant professional background and experience.

Candidates spoke in alphabetical order with School Committee candidates followed by candidates for Selectman.

[ed. Note: These are not verbatim quotes for the most part, but summaries of each candidates’ comments and their answers to attendees questions.]

Candidates for School Committee

MARGARET COPPE (MC): Inspired by a 9^th grade bio teacher, she majored in biology. She lived in Lexington and realized there was a need for trained scientists in the schools. Works as Science Department Chair in Wakefield public schools. Worked with PTA, League of Women Voters, Town Meeting (24 years), and ShhAir (against expansion at Hanscom airport). Parent of three children who attended Lexington Public Schools.

Will work to see that all students can be successful. Insure fiscal responsibility.

WEBSITE: www.coppe4schools.org

TOM DIAZ (TD): Retired computer industry executive. Running for 2^nd term. Before election to School Committee, had been with Town Meeting since 1997. School Committee membership is hard work, sometimes called thankless; but people do say thank you. It is an honorable thing to do for the town, and it’s an honorable job. Sponsored initiation of financial accountability committee. Champions consolidation of all town maintenance departments. Helped recruit Superintendent Paul Ash. His daughter attended Lexington Public Schools.

WEBSITE: www.diazforsc.org

OLGA GUTTAG (OG): Running for re-election to 2^nd term. “Please vote, whether or not for me.” Olga grew up in the Czech Republic. A lot of her values were formed by an upbringing in a an oppressive culture. Trained her to make resources stretch. Lexington schools certainly need that. Most proud of stabilizing our school system’s administration. Proud of work pushing for us to get facilities in order; also 20 years of volunteering in the schools helps her understand that. Has kids who have graduated from LHS and one who is a junior at LHS. Olga understands that we work better as a team; we need to deliver the money so our school officials can deliver the education.

WEBSITE: www.olga4schools.com

ALAN SERFERIAN (AS): Corporate CFO, Cadmus Group in Watertown. US EPA client. Works on the indoor air quality project at LHS. Alan has three children in Lexington schools: high school, middle school and elementary. So, he hears the problems of the schools through the kids, a different lens than from the teachers or administrators. Main issues: Fiscal responsibility; openness & transparency; and inclusiveness.

WEBSITE: www.alanseferian.org

Candidates for Board of Selectmen

GEORGE BURNELL (GB): Grew up in town, a product of the schools. An Air Force veteran, worked in corporate manufacturing firms and then returned to Lexington. He served for 28 years on Town Meeting, including many years of committee work. He would like to apply experience on financial committees and on Town Meeting, and his business acumen, to the town through Selectmen’s Board. Through work in the corporate world and consulting business, he has learned creative ways to allocate resources.

WEBSITE: www.burnell4selectman.org

JEANNE KRIEGER (JK): Concerned about future of Lexington. Concerned that the town is stressed by municipal taxes, which depend heavily on residential property taxes to maintain our infrastructure. Rising health care costs and a diminishing corporate tax base pose increasing challenges. Retired from managing in the corporate sector where she managed a budget comparable to the town budget. She has spent close to 30 years in town government.

LEO MCSWEENEY (LMC): Oldest of 8 children, moved to Lexington from Arlington as a boy. Raised his family here, has grandkids in Lexington schools. Boston State (UMass Boston) graduate, was once a teacher, owns his own small business. Former member of Board of Selectmen, on Housing Committee.

Questions Submitted By Attendees, Presented To Candidates

Question for All Candidates: On Monday, January 22, there was no heat in the Science, Math and Foreign Language buildings [at the high school]. Labs have suffered because of dangerous air quality. What are the budget plans to address the dangerous HVAC system at LHS?

MC: Safety issues are impacting education in science. The real issue is to have a plan. No. 1 priority is to fix it, but not being incumbent, I don’t know current budget figures. Regarding an override: When parts are not passed, things don’t happen, things are cut. We must go for the full amount.

TD: Just learned about the problems in science labs. Don’t know where conditions stand. Capital dollars are set aside to improve HVAC this year, but it may take several years to accomplish the full job.

OG: Unless you have reasonable space, you are doing the school community disservice. In my first term, I have improved oversight of building projects. There is money in our capital budgets, we have to fix it [the facilities problem].

AS: Typical reaction to budget pressures is scrimping on maintenance: we must fix the facilities and rely on a 1^st class maintenance superintendent.

Question for All Candidates: Did you work for, support, or oppose the last override? Why, or why not?

GB: I worked for it. I was part of the speakers’ bureau. Overrides are required when we have worked hard to stay within the budget; and when we cannot, we go to the townspeople.

JK: I agree. I was very disappointed that some of the questions did not pass. What are the factors that contributed to that? The families who depend on quality of education in Lexington are the big losers. We must make very clear what the impacts of those losses are.

LMc : We have to look at the whole community. I supported the “No” campaign. The schools aside, I felt that a lot of the folks in town would have a lot of trouble paying for it. I didn’t work for any of the questions.

MC: I believed that the people who were presenting this override had worked hard and made reasonable choices. I supported it.

TD: I worked for the override. Before presenting it, I had worked to cut $700K from the original override proposal, and supported all 4 questions.

OG: I supported all 4 questions. I heard from many constituents that many people would have trouble paying increased taxes. I worked as hard as I could to not gamble all on one question.

AS: I was conflicted on Questions #1 & #2 (language/music) and voted “No.” People will not give a blank check to an organization that does not have its fiscal house in order.

Question for Selectman Candidates: Why do we separate out the school piece of the budget when there is an override?

JK: Selectmen set the questions. I look at it as an opportunity to ask the community what level of services they want. We’ve always had a bundled override. That, I believe, is the way to put out an override. Every need affects every citizen. We broke it out in response to community members’ wishes.

GB: Most of us dealing with managing the town finances did not want to pit the town services versus school services. We (on the Finance Committee) favored a bundled override, but there was a strong feeling from many residents that they wanted it unbundled. I do not believe that is what’s best for the town.

LMc: My sense is that people would react in a better way if they could see that they had a choice. Obviously there are two different ways to look at it. The schools are obviously equally important to other services.

Question for all Candidates: Describe the current financial crisis and how would you resolve it.

MC: Assuming the question refers to the current Superintendent’s budget which is driven by contractual conditions, I would build bridges to voters to get them to understand and support an override.

TD: Energy conservation, try to enhance revenue for state aid. A substantial override will be needed, but we’ll make it as small as possible.

OG: On the smaller crisis right now, the superintendent is addressing it. Systematic destruction of education through state and federal cuts exists long term. No system is perfectly efficient. We will have to give the voters a choice: what do they want in an education system? Go for a small, clearly stated questions that address specific needs.

AS: I was stunned by current budget. We should present a series of reasonably sized questions. I like the idea of giving the community as much choice as possible.

Question for School Committee Candidates: Is it proper to use the book Who’s in a Family in schools? Should parents be able to opt out?

OG: I don’t believe that parents ought to be able to opt out of any curriculum, other than those mandated by the state. Should these topics be introduced in lower grades? Yes. Sensitively, so as not to create conflict of one family against another

AS: I’ve looked at the book and it seems perfectly benign. You can chose to read what you want from the book bag at home. My children bring the book bag home and it all looks harmless to me.

TD: We want to create an environment in our schools where children from all families feel safe.

MC: As a teacher, you have to deal with sensitive issues. The administration has handled this situation quite well.

Question for all Candidates: Politics have in become polarized in Lexington. What responsibility do you have to change this?

JK: How do you expand your communication and solutions to include all views? We have to listen and include people in the decision-making process. On the [selectmen’s] board, we listen to each other.

TD: Last year I worked to achieve unanimity on a budget override, but we accomplished it by listening and communicating. The unbundled override was divisive.

OG: We, as elected representatives, represent everyone in town. We must have contact with everyone. It is our job to make sure we can deliver based on what all constituents want. We must have contact with constituents who no longer have kids in the schools. We have to listen to all voters.

Question for School Committee Candidates: How will you supervise the superintendent?

AS: I’ve spoken to [Dr. Paul] Ash. He’s engaging and reasonable. It’s the School Committee’s role to supervise. It is a collegial and cooperative relationship and I would continue that.

OG: It is our responsibility to hire and supervise the Superintendent. Contractually we do an evaluation, we have to give constant feedback. A good manager’s job is not only to “tell” but also to “listen” to your employee. We brainstorm, we challenge each other, and that is highly productive.

MC: I have thought about it a lot. I do evaluate teachers as Science Department Chair [in Winchester]. You’ll be looking for evidence of what is done and evaluate what impact their actions are having on students. Clear directions, clear expectations, and a clear view of what the results were/are are essential.

TD: Our Superintendent understands how to run a school system. We must not micro-manage, but we do manage him. We have a performance review form. We gave him constructive criticism; we do focus on financial management. Ash responds well.

QUESTION for Selectman Candidates: What are your thoughts on the Community Preservation Act (CPA) report?

LMc: Citizens of this town Ok’d the CPA. Projects have all been approved and go on to Town meeting. The projects are good for the town.

JK: CPA allows us to do projects we would not otherwise be able to do. There are 15 or 16 proposals before for us this spring...preserving or maintaining our historic landmarks, affordable housing...I favor using those funds for seed money to be used for projects like the connection of greenways.

GB: My concern is that we will get reduced premium for the dollar in coming years. I’m hopeful that we will be judicious and reserve funds that will pay for the ones [projects] down the road. We must be judicious and prioritize.

Question for School Committee Candidates: Beyond fiscal responsibilities, what are the key responsibilities [of the office you seek]?

OG: The school committee works together to establish policies of the system, the vision of the system. The school committee is responsible for hiring and supervising the superintendent. Also, we are the evaluating overseers of the budget. The budget is one of the places where we are required to “micro-manage;” that’s where we need to do that.

TD: Managing the superintendent. Other than that, what we have to say about policymaking power, the school committee is like a small legislature. State government takes over where we leave off, but for the most part we legislate the educational mission.

MC: What drives your schools is your students. My educator background gives me insight into how policies can affect the teachers in the classroom.

AS: The span of responsibilities of the school committee is very broad. Certain members have specific expertise. Finance and administration are my strengths.

Question for School Committee Candidates: What are some of your ideas for protecting programs while maintaining our aging buildings?

TD: Money for building maintenance is sequestered. It’s a commitment we made to voters. We must advocate for and set aside funds for buildings. We must work to get state aid reinstated. We are still behind where we were in 2002.

MC: Personally, if it came down to buildings vs. programs, I’d vote for programs. It’s a town-wide problem. Until we get the people of the town to realize we can’t pick one over the other, we cannot really solve it.

OG: I disagree with Margaret. The science labs at the high school are an example of what happens when you consistently favor programs over buildings. Facilities and learning are integrally tied. We have safety concerns, health concerns, all related to facilities.

AS: We simply cannot continue to defer maintenance. The “White House,” it’s a disgrace. It’s symbolic of what happens when we defer maintenance. Ultimately, we would have more money for programs if we funded maintenance and avoided big repair bills.

Question for all Candidates: How will Lexington balance the desires of all citizens within the restraints of Proposition 2 1/2?

GB: Long-term – negotiations, creativity, planning. Short-term – you are going to end up cutting programs. So we have to get going with the long-term work.

JK: I don’t think we can serve all the citizens without an operating override (budget-permanent) and a debt exclusion (capital projects-short term). We will more than likely advance the DPW [Department of Public Works] building. It’s been looked at for 17 years. Do it right the first time.

LMc: It is very difficult. I think the trust that the average citizen has in the leaders will have to be earned. I have things thrown in my face from 20 years ago. We have to gain their [the voters’] trust, get people to support what we need to do.

AS: We have so many talented individuals living right here in Lexington. Why don’t we use them? A volunteer bank could be established to save money on things we’re paying people to do.

OG: Prop 2 ½ is an unrealistic piece of legislation. It does not reflect inflation and increases in the cost of living. As for volunteering, if you look around town we already have so many people volunteering their time. We have serious needs; you don’t usually get people donating bricks. More to the point, we must focus on our negotiations, on health benefits. At the same time, we have to be sure our employees do not feel they are being exploited by the townspeople.

TD: In the long run, to minimize overrides, we must conserve energy. It’s what we can control. We didn’t need overrides in the ‘80s because we had adequate state aid.

MC: It’s not possible to achieve our goals without an override. In the ‘80s we also had surplus cash, which we spent down.

Question for all Candidates: If you had to chose three projects to work, on what would they be?

LMc: 1. Work on keeping what we already have in place. 2. New DPW complex. 3. New senior center.

JK: 1. Attempt to reduce reliance on property tax, seeking adequate state taxes, easing tax burden on lower income families 2. Efficiencies in operations while adequately compensating employees. 3. Infrastructure

GB: 1. Finding small changes in all ways we do business 2. Be tougher negotiators 3. Pro-active commercial development

AS: 1. Budgeting and financial systems: real-time or near real-time spending data to avoid “shocks” 2. Better communication with the public: Minutes of meetings available shortly after the meetings; notes on presentations distributed in advance. 3. Update website.

OG: 1. Restore citizens’ trust in school committee 2. Channel most resources to classrooms. 2. Facilities OR work with other school committee members on how to control Special Education (SPED) costs 3. Serve on negotiating committees

TD: 1. Lobby to increase state funding 2. Roll back parent fees 3. Reduce class size

MC: 1. Restore lost curriculum 2. Services for at-risk students 3. Reduce parents’ fees.

Question from the Floor

QUESTION: Is foreign language core curriculum? If yes, what would you do to restore it to elementary curriculum?

AS: It’s a question of prioritizing. It is very much core.

OG: Yes, it’s core, and we ought to start in kindergarten because the earlier you start the better. We have to find the money...looking at energy, economies in SPED, accounting and so on...

TD: A Spanish teacher told me that a student who learns Spanish in 3^rd grade will be a Spanish speaker, rather than a person who took Spanish in school.

MC: Definitely a core subject. I don’t know how to restore it without more money.

QUESTION: Why has it taken so long to talk about saving energy?

TD: I don’t have a good answer for the general questions, but for this building (LHS), we have deferred maintenance. We have a capital plan to fix the HVAC. We also need to negotiate for better rates from our energy suppliers.

OG: That has been one of my great frustrations since before I was on the School Committee.

AS: It’ a question of deferred maintenance.

MC: The new school administration (Mr. Hartigan) has a plan. The buildings were not built to be energy efficient and would require a major retrofit.

GB: We have been working at it for years. Technology changes. Schools were built with the best facilities available at the time, they now need to be brought up to date. Each year there are new enhancements, but we have not invested enough in it over the last 20 years.

JK: I subscribe to the thought that we did not build the buildings to be energy efficient, then we failed to pass the override, which would have upgraded those facilities, and now we are playing for it year after year after year.

LMc: We pushed aside the topic for years and years, but now we have a chance to address it. The conversation has been getting more attention at Town Meeting.

QUESTION: It seemed to me that everyone said that it was a problem the override failed. What have you learned to prevent failure of future overrides? Are we going to do something different?

Leo: I think that we need to get more trust universally amongst all of the citizens. Will it take them seeing success of programs the Selectmen put forth?

JK: We have to make a stronger case for the impact the need for resources has on the schools.

GB: I think everyone rather expects the same thing: Better communication, selling the idea, getting that trust we talked about is part salesmanship and part having done your homework to make sure you’re not asking for things the public thinks aren’t worth the money. It’s dedication to doing the job and explaining it thoroughly.

AS: I desperately hope that a modest, carefully structured override will pass. I hope that we can write it tightly, go out there, and sell it.

OG: First of all I think we need to structure our questions very carefully. We must run a non-divisive campaign. We need a “slam dunk” override that wins by a wide margin to unite the community. We have a common goal to pass the override.

TD: It is important to have a clean and clear structure to the override, but it is a political process. Whatever we come up with, we have to go forward together.

MC: What I’ve learned is that if an override fails, we’ll get and pass a smaller inadequate one next year.

SUMMARIES:

LMc: One of the main reasons I want to get back into being a Selectman is because Lexington is a really special community, and to keep it that way we need to do it together. I’ve been listening to a lot of people and hearing what they have to say. Health and safety come first.

JK: There’s plenty of work to be done. We’re only going to be successful if we work together. I value the relationship with voters. We must reduce dependence on property tax; increase community tax base and state aid. Also, we need to increase efficiencies, conserve energy, and negotiate wisely. Maintenance and capital projects are critical. Upgrades to the DPW building are long overdue.

GB: I’ve had a great career that was launched here in the Lexington schools. I’ve been in international business and I know what our students will be up against competing internationally. I’ve been a teacher at Northeastern. I know the value of education. That transfers for me as a Selectmen to work with the School Committee to make sure the buildings and programs support the kids.

AS: People can and do donate bricks. I’ve volunteered but never been called. I thought Tom was dismissive and discourteous. I would use my experience and expertise in finance to achieve fiscal responsibility.

OG: Our schools are sitting at the edge of a cliff; they could plunge from being excellent to very good to mediocre depending on who you election to the School Committee. I got into the School Committee interested in pedagogy, but became a number cruncher to be sure our professionals have the resources they need.

TD: I think public education is a responsibility. I would like to lower fees. I would work on state aid initiatives. I would like to reduce class sizes to give teachers more time with individual students.

MC: I bring a unique perspective as teacher and long-time activist on behalf of Lexington. Without the money you cannot do what needs to be done for the kids in the classroom. I know that, so I would support fiscal responsibility and clear reporting.

The formal session was brought to a close by PTSA Co-president Marlene Stone who thanked participating candidates and the volunteers who conducted the session. Many individuals convened in small groups to carry on the discussion. Next PTSA FORUM: Wednesday, March 14 at 7:30pm at Lexington High School.

Respectfully submitted, Marilyn Rea Beyer PTSA Secretary.