Communication issues, the district’s plan for the fund balance and concerns about the school’s math scores were some of the items addressed during a tense public comment session at Cooperstown Central School’s board meeting Oct. 18.

The board was questioned and criticized by district residents in attendance at the end of the meeting, shortly after superintendent Mary Jo McPhail recognized the board in honor of "School Board Appreciation Week" which is happening this week.

Barbara Pope opened the public comment portion of the meeting by asking why substitute aides were paid $7 per hour while full-time aides receive $10 per hour. Substitutes do the same job and have the same requirements, why do they receive less, she asked.

McPhail said those rates are set annually by the board and that they would review them to see if changes needed to be made. She pointed out that substitute teachers also receive substantially less than their full-time counterparts and that it was a fairly standard practice.

Patrick McBrearty then commented on what he called the "frightening" results of the grades three through eight math assessment, citing what he said was only a 56.6 percent passing rate for third graders.

McPhail said Monday that she spoke with McBrearty over the phone and cleared up his misinterpretation of the state’s performance report.

According to figures from the state education department’s website, 56.6 percent of CCS third-graders met all standards, while an additional 21.1 percent exceeded state standards. The overall passing rate was 77.7 percent of the 76 students tested.

That was the only grade in which CCS students passed at a rate lower than the state average (81 percent).

McPhail said the item would be back on the school board agenda for the next meeting because she wanted to clear up any misconceptions about the results.

District resident Michael Powers said he has yet to receive adequate answers to questions he posed to the board months ago, which he said was unacceptable for an "administration that is championing communication."

He said he was asked to submit his questions in writing, but did not receive a response in writing, as he requested.

Board president Tony Scalici said it was difficult to answer his questions because they were not based on actual policies and couldn’t simply be answered by the board.

Powers asked if the board would not be responding because his questions were too complex to answer.

Scalici said they would take a look at his letter again and reconsider.

Carl Good asked again about making public packets available earlier and about what was being done with the fund balance. He said he arrived for the 7 p.m. meeting at about 6:35 p.m., but did not have the ability to read it thoroughly before the meeting started.

"I cannot for the life of me go through the packet that quickly," he said.

Kathy Redding agreed and said the board didn’t present residents with enough information prior to or during the meetings.

After several minutes of back and forth comments between board members and district residents, Gail Sacchi said there was so much animosity in the room and both sides needed to back down and work together.

She said people were coming to board meetings with chips on their shoulders which in turn made the board members overly defensive in response to public comments.

"Our kids are what we’re here for," she said.

No further public comments were made. Scalici said the board welcomed the public’s input.

"We do take your comments seriously," he said. "We don’t try to be secretive."