Why Review Past Arguments?

To the Editor:

It is unfortunate that some people completely misunderstood the point of my April 11 Letter to the Editor [“Multiple-Year Comparisons Of School Costs Are Unfair”] on multiple year comparisons being unfair.

The letter indicated that there were 119 public meetings over the budget cycles since 2006 where there had been public reviews, scrutiny, hours of probing questions and extensive follow up that constitutes the community’s due diligence. This has been and continues to be the process on an annual basis. District administration and the Board of Education take its statutory charge very seriously and have exercised a great deal of time, effort and energy in examining budget requests.

The due diligence gets done each year based on the facts as presented annually. The appropriate dialogue for those issues was included in those meetings and their minutes. Why review all those past discussions and agreements now? The budget grew for reasons that were determined to be necessary at the time. To bundle years and countless hours of debate does the community a disservice. The questions posed may be good questions, but need to be discussed prospectively, not retrospectively.

In addition, I don’t use people’s names in public correspondence out of respect for their personal reputation.

Ron Bienkowski

Newtown Public Schools

Director of Business

3 Primrose Street, Newtown                                          April 25, 2012