Dominick Profaci
Dominick Profaci. (Photo by Lauren Thomas)
Dominick Profaci lost by 48 votes in the 2010 school board election. Despite the loss, he stayed engaged with the schools by helping to found the New Paltz Central School District Foundation for Student Enhancement. Right now, Profaci is the vice president of that not-for-profit fundraising organization.
Profaci, 44, works professionally as a financial advisor with Edward Jones. He’s lived in Gardiner for 20 years. He has three kids — two are in the district and one just graduated from high school but went to the New Paltz schools. His wife is a teacher in the district.
Q: Why are you running for school board?
DP: I decided to run for school board basically for the same reasons I decided to run a few years ago. The only reason I didn’t run again last year was for health issues. Really, the reason I’m back into this is because I think I can offer something to the district, offer something to the kids and the taxpayers.
Because I am pro-education. If you want to know my platform: it is one of preservation; one of trying to maintain the status of education in our district, and if anything enhance it, not dismantle it — as we’ve seem to be moving towards, unfortunately. A lot of it really has nothing to do with the people on the board. It really has to do with the way we’re structured currently and the way schools are being funded.
So my platform is one focused on trying to preserve what we have, and if nothing else, make it better. And actually, that was a reason why I got involved in the Foundation, because I thought that would be one way to help. And actually, I’m sure the Foundation will continue even if I do have to leave.
My background also includes 15 years of engineering experience, on the civil and environmental side, where I spent a good deal of the last 10 years of my time as an engineer doing municipal evaluations looking for cost-savings measures, optimization strategies and streamlining. So I have that to bring to the table as well. Those are the types of things I think I can offer, and my managerial experience — things of that nature. I think that could go a long way in helping out.
Q: What are the top three issues facing the New Paltz schools, and if you got elected how would you address them?
DP: Well, the top issue right now really is the shift away from state and federal funding that’s available to the district. So that is a key issue, because in my opinion no matter what we do on the district level — looking for cost-savings measures and optimization strategies and all that — in the end if the state continues to eliminate funding, the way the tax structure’s currently designed, that difference in cost has to be shifted to the taxpayer.
And it’s all based on property taxes, which is in my opinion an inequitable and outdated system. It’s just something, I think, we as a community as well as a board need to get more active with. So that is an area I plan to get more active on — whether I’m on the board or not — because I think that’s a big thing we need to focus on.
The other issues, unfortunately, come down to things like the retirement systems — all the things like that, which are really out of our control to a great degree because of union issues and how they’re designed. I am pro-teacher. I am pro-education. So I’m going to be very light-handed when it comes to things like that. But they are systems that will need change and will need discussion.
The cost of health care is skyrocketing all across the country, and the reality that the districts will continue to pay the lion’s share of health care for the teachers really can’t continue forever. And I think most teachers have come to that resolve, or that know-how, that at some point they’re going to have to kick in more just like everyone has done on the private side. So those are big issues. They’re big cost issues that are where the predominance of the costs are.
The third issue, and this is a big pet for me, is the thought process behind consolidation. Because right now we have the four campuses. The reality is, even though it’s nice and it makes us unique as a district having the four campuses, really the costs involved in maintaining and operating four campuses really is insurmountable. For the long term, it’s really not something that can be continued as a reality.
So even though there’s these big issues on the state side and the federal side, we do need to become as streamlined as possible on our end. And some of that’s going to come down to some form of consolidation with regards to the campuses. Whether we go to two campuses or three, it’s got to come down from four.
Q: This year school board members settled on a $50.31 million budget that would raise the tax levy by 4.4 percent. Would you have voted yes for that budget too? Why or why not?
DP: If I was on the school board currently, would I have voted for the 4.4? Absolutely. I’ve been involved in most every one of those meetings. So I’ve been there listening in, and the reality is the 4.4 percent budget was a way of trying to maintain program at its current level — and trying to maintain the level of education that we’re providing to the children of this district, at minimum the level it is today.
The 4.4 percent budget was just a means of trying to get us close to that as possible. Now there’s still cuts in the 4.4 percent budget, but at least it is maintaining program at current levels. Absolutely, I would have voted 100 percent for the 4.4 percent budget, and I will be voting yes for that budget as a taxpayer here in the district.
Q: After briefly promoting $12.3 million in fixes to the four school buildings — known as the “Health & Safety Bond” project — the board took it off May’s ballot. Do you support those repairs? Would you have approached the decision to remove that bond project differently?
DP: Number one, yes. I support the repairs 100 percent because they are health and safety issues. They’re not spending monies to do major renovations. They’re not spending monies — because if we have the idea of consolidation, I’m not a proponent of spending a significant amount of money on any of the schools until a consolidation plan is devised and we have a long-term facilities plan in place for what our design is.
But the $12 million is essentially Band-Aid repairs. It’s to bring those schools up to code requirements so that the children can continue to go to those schools in safety and not worry about the buildings coming down around them. And that’s the main priority for that Health & Safety Bond. So absolutely, I back that 100 percent.
Would I have voted to take it off? I’ve been debating that one for quite some time with myself, and I understand fully why the board decided to take it off. And it was really because of the repercussions of what happened with the land acquisition vote — because that went down so badly. And I think a lot of it was misinformation in the community. I think people really didn’t understand the long-term benefit of why that land acquisition was important. And I don’t think, unfortunately, that the district touted enough that it was absolutely necessary in order to do some form of consolidation. We needed that land in order to do consolidation.
So I understand why they took it off. They wanted to regroup and really make sure the information was getting out there why this project is necessary — make sure people do understand, the voters do understand, that it’s really necessary in order to protect the kids. That it is a health and safety issue. It’s not spending money frivolously for expansion or anything of that nature — it’s purely health and safety related.
So I think from that perspective, I also would have said let’s push it off. The downside of it, which most people will probably tell you, is that by pushing it off it will cost more. So that’s the downside. I guess it’s a risk-reward type of thing.
Q: New Paltz school board members are currently developing a long-term facilities plan that could call for the closure of two schools and a consolidation down to two campuses. It could also call for the closure of one school and a consolidation to three campuses. Do you support that consolidation? If not, how else should the district move forward?
DP: I support it 100 percent. I think although it’s unique and nice to have the four campuses, separating out the different age demographics — and there are benefits to that. I think the long-term perspective — and with the idea of trying to maintain programs as being our focus and maintaining teachers, and maintaining the level of education — the facilities in which we provide that education (aren’t as important). We need to now take a step back and say, “Do we really need four campuses to deliver that education?”
What we need are campuses that are safe and conducive to education. And if that can be done in two or three campuses, that’s the approach we should take. Because there are obviously operational savings by only maintaining and operating two or three buildings versus four.
Q: How will your previous experiences help you if you got elected, and how would they be an asset for those who vote for you? In other words, why should people vote for you?
DP: The first one would be the engineering experience, and that will bring lots to bear. And that engineering experience — which really for the most part, especially the last years I was in the engineering practice — was focused on streamlining, cost savings and evaluating municipal programs for that. That will all be brought.
That’s going to be, I think, a big benefit to the community. And from a taxpayer’s perspective, it’ll make them feel better that someone obviously is looking at the budget on a line-by-line basis — and thinking about how can we optimize these things if we can. Understanding that some of these things you just can’t do. And I’m learning that quickly, even though we could probably do some of these things that I typically would have done on the private side, we unfortunately may not be able to do them with public education because of state mandates. So there’s going to be things we’re going to be limited in doing, even though in the private world they make total logical sense to do.
I am a financial advisor currently. I am very familiar with finances and how they work — so that experience also would be brought to the table.
