I was disappointed with Mr. (Geoffrey) Hicks’ budget presentation. The rhetoric mimicked November’s start of the budget process. I expected we would hear recommendations from Mr. Hicks as to all the options available, but he fell far short. His presentation consisted of laying out a budget based on no changes and asking the board, “What should we do?”

The only option presented by Mr. Hicks was a budget that included the 2.9 percent cap increase and splitting the difference of the shortfall with staff and program reductions and an additional 3.7 percent tax increase. This would represent a tax increase of approximately 6.6 percent to the residents. In one year!

There was no discussion about the pros and cons of creative thinking — such as consolidation of high-level positions with neighboring school districts; privatization of busing, housekeeping and building maintenance; tying our key executives to a bonus based on performance; and creating one elementary campus that would create efficiencies in energy, information technology, busing, staffing and reduction in administrative staffing. There was no discussion of potential modifications to the teachers’ contract.

Finally, Mr. Hicks, stop telling us you get the same retirement benefit as the teachers. We know that. I only wonder how hard you are negotiating with the teachers on behalf of the taxpayers.

As taxpayers, we can say no. New York passed a tax cap stating that if a school district presents a budget with an increase more than the calculated cap, 60 percent of voters must approve it. If residents vote down such a budget twice, then the increase in property taxes is 0 percent.

The School Board should present a budget below the cap. If it does not, we should work tirelessly to vote it down.

More information can be found at www.clarencetaxpayers.com.

Roy Olsen

Sawmill Road