Report outlines alternative funding plans
School board debates school or community foundation



GUILDERLAND — The school board here is discussing whether it should back a foundation to accept private donations.
If it does, should the foundation be just for the school or should it be town-wide"

A recent report from a school committee indicates Guilderland may be ripe for the picking, although the report says the town has no history of philanthropy.

Donald Csaposs, a member of the committee who wrote about community foundations for the report, told The Enterprise this week, "I certainly hope the town gives this a fair hearing."
Csaposs is the development director for the town of Guilderland but said he did the committee work as a "freelance" volunteer.
A community-based foundation, he said has "a wider outreach and outflow," although Csaposs said the committee members had "a very sharp and unhappy division of thinking" on which kind of foundation would be better.

Casposs cited a neighboring suburban town, Niskayuna, which he said had launched a successful community-wide foundation in the late 1990’s, that now takes in several hundred thousand dollars a year.

Hy Dubowsky, board member-elect, and the committee’s chair, presented the report to the school board last Tuesday.
Dubowsky said that a community foundation would strengthen the relationship between the town and school, which is "not quite what it should be."
"I’ve been saying that for 20 years," said Csaposs. "Heck, I’ve written letters to the editor of The Enterprise complaining that the town board and school board meetings are on the same night."

"Low-hanging fruit"

After years of debating whether public schools should accept private funds, the school board’s majority finally, in November, agreed to have a committee study the matter.
The committee’s 27-page report stresses many times that "a great deal of non-traditional funding is already taking place."
"There’s an awful lot of commercial stuff we do in this district," said Dubowsky.

The district is already involved in direct product sales; it contracts with vendors for student goods and services for such things as yearbooks, school photographs, and vending machines. The school lunch fund generates between $40,000 and $50,000 each year from cafeteria vending machines.
"We believe there are low-hanging fruits that can be plucked," said Dubowsky.

Schools throughout the district also participate in cash or rebate programs like the Campbell’s Soup label program.

Parent groups — supporting sports, music, drama, and art — are involved in direct-product sales, ranging from candy bars to gift wraps.
Dubowsky said the committee agreed it didn’t want to "infringe" on club fund-raising activities.

Advertising is already prevalent on vending machines and in programs for sports events and clubs.
The report states that the committee’s recommendation for corporate sponsorships, contracts with vendors, and limited pouring rights — granting a beverage company exclusive rights to sell on campus in exchange for a fee — "are simply a logical extension of the revenue-generating activities already in place."
The report goes on, "Following the competitive bidding process, and remaining aware of the Court’s interpretations of the application of First Amendment protections afforded to ‘restricted use educational facilities’ serving youth, we believe there are revenue-generating opportunities that we have been reluctant to explore."
The report also states, "Our position, to proceed while ensuring the safety of our children, mirrors that of the National Association of State School boards, which accepts the need for commercial ventures to ensure the vitality of the public education system."
While some committee members wanted to use alternative revenues to reduce taxes, the majority of the committee thought the funds should be used to "enhance existing program resources or support new programs," the report says.
"A compromise position may be to limit the use of alternative revenues to one-time expenditures...," the report concludes. "Regardless of the path the board chooses, the consensus of the committee is to move forward."

Foundations

The second part of the report examines the two types of foundations — school and community.
"The absence of de facto competing entities in Guilderland creates a unique opportunity at this moment in time to create a vehicle for philanthropy in a community with a demonstrable level of capacity but with a limited level of philanthropy...," the report says. "There has never been an appropriate conduit for individuals, families, and businesses to use to maximize the impact of their giving through leverage to create a better quality of life for all constituencies within the ‘Greater Guilderland’ community."

Dubowsky listed several advantages to the community foundation besides strengthening the relationship between the town and the school.
He also said it would "create a sense of greater Guilderland," serving multiple constituencies. A community foundation would also create a "bigger net" for donations, which, he said, could be earmarked for specific purposes.

Drawbacks include the school district’s lack of access to funds since the foundation would be serving multiple constituencies, and weakening the district’s control over funds, Dubowsky said.

Kenneth Runion, supervisor for the town of Guilderland, could not be reached for comment this week.

The report says that most school-based foundations operate as an independent entity with no formal or legal relationship to the school district; foundations can specify in their bylaws whether the school board will be involved in voting or not.

Guilderland High School alumni appear to be an untapped resource, the report says.

Advantages to a school-based foundation, Dubowsky said, include more board control in funding decisions and building ties to alumni. He listed drawbacks as more limited access to capital and more limited opportunity for the town and school district to form links.
"Most importantly," the report says, "at some point there must be an active core of district residents willing to assume a leadership role to start a foundation as well as devoting large amounts of time and effort that will be necessary to pursue whichever interest might be preferred. Fundamentally, launching either a school or a community foundation is not a function of the Board of Education."

Board views

The next step will be up to the school board, and opinions varied last week.
Board member Colleen O’Connell, who served on the committee, said there is "no true history of real philanthropy in Guilderland....We know people with four cars and half-a-million-dollar homes," she said, but it’s not clear they will part with their money.
Board member Cathy Barber said that Guilderland’s not having a history of philanthropy shouldn’t stop the board. She called that a circular argument and said, "It probably depends on what sort of effort you make."

Board Vice President Linda Bakst, attending her last meeting, has opposed alternative revenue sources for her entire nine-year tenure on the board.
"It’s not wise for the school board to go down this road at all," she said.

Elected representatives have accountability, said Bakst, which a foundation board would not have.
In referring to leadership roles in creating a foundation, Bakst said, "I would be concerned if it became the role of the school board to do that kind of solicitation...People have not come forward to galvanize that movement."
Bakst said she does support "maximizing contracts we have."

School-board member Barbara Fraterrigo, a long-time trustee of the Guilderland Public Library, said that, based on what she had learned working on the library board, she would certainly not support a town-based foundation.
With a school-based foundation, she said, any funds generated "would go to the kids."
Fraterrigo said, "If you have a vested interest — meaning the children — your energies can only go so far."
She also said that, 15 years ago, a dynamic leader from her hometown had started an alumni association which has "done amazing things in terms of scholarships," and that town had had no history of philanthropy.
"It’s going great guns," said Fraterrigo.
School board member Richard Weisz, who had pushed for the committee to be formed and served on it, said he was "more predisposed" to have a school foundation.

He then asked how the administration would propose to seek corporate sponsorships. He suggested the duties might fall to the board’s newly-formed business-practices committee.

Someone with ideas, Weisz said, is needed to reach out to the community.