.
Feedback

Lowey: Westchester Won't Escape Sequestration Cuts

Educational cuts could mean $22K less for Briarcliff Manor, $36K for Pleasantville, she estimated.

Congresswoman Nita Lowey spoke on Monday about the widespread impact in the Lower Hudson Valley if sequestration goes into effect as scheduled on Friday, March 1. She characterized the $85 billion across the board federal program cuts as “senseless.” 

In Westchester and Rockland counties she predicted school districts would lose $4.4 million in federal funds. On average, each school district would be cut by $100,000, the Congresswoman estimated.

In Westchester, White Plains, Port Chester/Rye and Lakeland would be the hardest hit with cuts of $156,363, $119,589 and $94,784 respectively.

Briarcliff Manor is expected to lose $22,378, Lowey said, while Pleasantville would see $36,327 in cuts.

Nearby Pocantico Hills Central School District would also lose $6,898, accordin gto Lowey's estimates.

In Rockland, East Ramapo stands to lose $843,520 and Clarkstown would be cut by $121,614. The impact on Nyack would be $50,067, Nanuet $30,397 and Pearl River $33,620. 

(See attached PDF for specifics on other school districts.)

Camp Smith in Cortland would receive $3.1 million less in federal funding. Out of the 62 National Institute of Health grants totaling $25 million that are earmarked for medical research in the two counties, $1.3 million of 5.3 percent would be cut over the next seven months.

"We’re facing a self-inflicted economic wound, and action cannot wait," said Lowey during a conference call. "I hope that the Republican leadership will come to the table so we can find a reasonable, bipartisan solution to avoid these senseless cuts."

Lowey said the effects of sequestration might not be felt for one or two weeks but then organizations will have to let people go because the funds will not be available to pay them. In the case of first responders, $860,000 would be trimmed from the training and equipment budgets for volunteer firefighters and law enforcement officers.

The State Criminal Assistance Program would not escape the cuts. The program, which covers jail, costs for local governments housing undocumented aliens who commit crimes, would be chopped by $62,955 in Westchester and $22,354 in Rockland.

Lowey said sequestration would result in national job losses up to 750,000, a slowing economy and cuts in services that will affect everyone. The ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee depicted sequestration as a Republican policy pushed forward by members of the Tea Party. She emphasized it is not the balanced approach required to addressing the federal deficit and debt.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Pleasantville-Briarcliff Manor Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Lisa Jenner May 19, 2013 at 05:57 pm
I also agree with Mr. Venditti with his assessment that more money does not necessarily mean betterRead More education. The districts to which we like to compare ourselves outperform us in many areas, and they do so at a better cost. Our BOE and administrative team need to look at other districts and learn from them.
Lisa Jenner May 19, 2013 at 05:51 pm
I agree with Mr. Venditti regarding the tax burden in Briarcliff, and, as usual, I disagree with Mr.Read More Valenti. My oldest son, a Briarcliff High School graduate, has secured a job in Westchester and is looking to purchase his first home. Briarcliff is not even in the running for him, because the taxes are so high. He is looking in nearby communities where the taxes are not so burdensome. While this story is anecdotal, it does support the statement that potential buyers steer clear of Briarcliff because of the taxes.
Mike Valenti May 19, 2013 at 04:59 pm
Mr. Venditti and his crew are the same folks who sponsored the likes of Janet Marinaccio, GuyRead More Rotundo, Eric Bashford and Rosella Ranno. The community has spoken loud and clear in the last several elections as candidates sponsored by this group have been soundly defeated. The track records (and more importantly the comportment) of the aforementioned board members spoke volumes as to the agenda of this group. They are out of touch and out of clout. The community has made it clear that candidates sponsored by this group must never again control our school board. Continued...
Mike Valenti May 19, 2013 at 02:53 pm
Mr. Linder, This is YOUR post folks are responding to and your ideas. I find it curious at bestRead More that you began a public forum comment blog but advocate throughout your responses that the discussion should be taken off-line and out of public view. this really doesn't position you well as an advocate for transparency.
Sonny (Louis) Linder May 18, 2013 at 05:07 pm
CORRECTION TO LAST POST: The last sentence should read: "Let's continue to share, butRead More face-to-face." Thx - Sonny
Sonny (Louis) Linder May 18, 2013 at 06:06 am
Thanks, Jon - you raise important considerations and in a calm, dispassionate way, which IRead More appreciate. As for alternative funding mechanisms, in hindsight I believe they should have been examined and addressed this earlier this year had the decision-making been opened up to the public in a completely bidirectional manner much earlier in this year's budget cycle. A real take-away from this situation, in my opinion, is that we in the community were not given the opportunity to sit down together with sharpened pencils in a public forum and allowed to vet and actually challenge the Administration's assumptions in order to arrive at budget alternatives with the Administration and Board. The comparison you make with Washington is indeed apt in that it reflects the way decisions have slid back to being made in a vacuum and handed down to the voters instead of in a democratic fashion based on budget-to-actuals instead of budget-to-budget figures combined with the practice of over-reserving for expense items while under-estimating revenues. Although the Board did indeed reach out to me and 2 others asking for suggestions, when we re-iterated our request for an open meeting format to include other financially savvy community members, these requests were consistently ignored. Which is why we are in the current position we are in having to decide on Tues on a tax levy cap-busting budget requiring 60% super-majority. Which the public will decide, of course, and we will live with the consequences: either it passes, or the Board and Administration will be forced to rein in the excesses. And much as I love open debate, I restate that online posting leaves does leave a lot to be desired. Let's continue to share, but not face-to-face. Respectfully - Sonny
JanFisher May 17, 2013 at 10:55 pm
It is so wonderful that, recognizing the importance of STEM and following the recommendation of ourRead More educators, Sal Maglietta and Jon Satran agreed to bring on the district's first director of instructional technology.
McKey Rivers May 10, 2013 at 07:36 pm
Thank you Dr. Sternberg for your thoughtful letter. You hit on an important facet of this electionRead More few if any others have stated: electing Mr. Wasserman and/or Mr. Linder will provide the added benefit of diversity of thought as the Board continues to address difficult, ongoing educational and financial issues. There is a woeful absence of synergy produced by articulation of different views among the current Board members. The absence of a “check and balance” on the current Board is reflected in the inexplicable decision to cancel the May 13 BOE meeting (scheduled since last summer), which is the last meeting prior to the May 21 budget vote and board election. Is there no business for the Board to conduct at this critical juncture or could it be that the Board does not want Briarcliff residents to hear members of the community question the Board about the proposed budget right before the election? Electing either Mr. Linder and/or Mr. Wasserman will immediately benefit the public as the highest vote getter will be seated on May 22 and thus participate in formulating a second budget for public vote that, notwithstanding current BOE scare tactics, can be tax levy compliant and not involve additional program elimination or reduction. There is no doubt that electing Mr. Wasserman and/or Mr. Linder to the Briarcliff School Board will substantially benefit the entire Briarcliff community and provide a much needed check on Board decision making.
Herman Sexton May 10, 2013 at 03:48 pm
Electing Paul Wasserman alone would add a diversity of thought. The guy hears at least a dozenRead More voices in his head. Have you ever spoken to him? Did you pay attention when he was running for Congress for a few weeks? Ugh.