To the Editor:

Re: The proposed New York State 2 percent tax cap, personally, I find NYSUT’s immediate, massively expensive, responsive TV informational add to inform overtaxed “John Q. Public” of the impending horrors about to befall the unfortunate students in this overtaxed state with the passage of a 2 percent tax cap.

They glibly refer to the tax cap as a political ploy to advance the political stature of those who proposed and favor a more realistic financial approach to a runaway system.

They also fail to touch upon the personal negative financial impact that would directly affect their financial well being focusing on a negative educational effect.

Lets get real. For those of us who pay school tax in the Norwood-Norfolk School district, please refer to the pre-budget and board of education election news letter dated April 2011.

Page 2, the administrative component listing employee benefits with a proposed cost of $388,330. Now look at page 4 with a budget item for non-administrative employee benefits listed at $4,730,602! Combined total topping out at $5,118,932!

Am I being led down the Yellow Brick Road of stupidity? This proposed tax cap would only have a a detrimental effect on the educational student body? Perhaps our educational mental manipulators are trying to lead us astray from the real issues.

They would prefer that we believe that there is no excess fat in the system; but how is it possible to continue to build larger, more elaborate school facilities with a known fact of diminishing student enrollments?

A prime example among others, Colton-Pierrepont with 335 students who within the past four or five years expended millions on physical enlargement of the facility.

Perhaps these educational gurus can elaborate on the educational benefits of Potsdam’s artificial turf football field and stadium, where now it has been stated that it is equal to a NFL facility!

Lets consider the multilayered, high-income administrative personnel in our schools. How about a $500 per day expense for a retired superintendent to fill the void while attempting to fill the vacancy?

Oh yes, and a retired school teacher, as he was departing a school consolidation meeting, reflecting on a Long Island superintendent whose salary was $5000,000 with a retirement package of $300,000 with benefits. Bare Bones? No fat in the system?

Ask yourself, can you run your personal financial program with these rules? Can you set your annual increase in personal income by increasing taxes? Can retirees demand an increase in their fixed income?

This is obviously a culture of educational dreamers who have developed and perpetuated this money pit from the State Education Department in Albany effectively creating a trickle down effect within all the school districts. Education is now big business.

My interpretation of NYSUT’s message is: “How dare you taxpayers of limited educational success try to limit our self-righteous purpose of only trying to improve the educational experience in our beloved state.”

I say Gov. Cuomo is on the right path of reality, and he should be supported.

Obviously the individual taxpayer does not have the no-fat, unlimited funding that NYSUT has available to get an opposing message out.

However, listen to the one part of NYSUT’s message that makes sense in their opulent TV add. “Contact your State politicos and express your concerns!

Robert R. Haggett

Norwood