Details

Written by: Joanne Wallenstein

Published: 12 February 2026

Created: 12 February 2026

Last Updated: 12 February 2026

Hits: 1831

There were more people than usual in attendance than usual at the 2/9 meeting of the Scarsdale Board of Education, and during the public comments portion it became clear that some in the group had a specific agenda.

Comments on Reveal Math
Nine speakers, including a first grader came to the mic and more called in to express their concerns about the current math curriculum, Reveal Math. They highlighted issues such as excessive reading and writing assignments, fragmented concept introductions, and overly complicated calculations. Many of the parents noted that their children find the curriculum confusing and inefficient, leading to a need for outside tutoring. A petition urged a reevaluation of the curriculum. Parents stressed the importance of a clear, foundational math program to support future STEM education. They requested a formal review and consideration of a more proven alternative like Singapore Math.

Here are excerpts from their comments:

“My second grader, for example, consistently complains about Reveal math, not because the math is advanced, but because the curriculum places excessive emphasis on reading and writing assignments often requiring lengthy reading explanations and the story based response, instead of focusing on fundamental math skills, logical reasoning and step by step problem solving…. there are straightforward calculations that are often over complicated with unclear and sometimes very random and arbitrary steps.”

“We are already hearing that outside tutoring is becoming necessary just to keep up, and my husband is trying to teach my daughter at home to supplement the school curriculum. A district curriculum should not require private supplementation to be effective. We are not opposed to change, and we support strong conceptual instruction, but we urge the board to critically evaluate whether this curriculum best serves elementary students, to closely monitor outcomes and confidence and to remain open to revisiting or supplementing this decision if gaps in fluency emerge.”

“I would like to share my experience with my son's example. I talked to him today regarding a simple question, three plus eight. He said he learned three different methods to calculate three plus eight. And one of the methods he has been asked to use is called adjustment .. adjusting eight to 10, then also adjusting the three. So he got really confused a lot of times. Now he's telling me eight plus three, I have to adjust eight to ten, and also add two to the three. So eight plus two plus three plus two, equal to 15. But he said it doesn't make sense, because eight plus three, I know is 11, but with the new methodology introduced, he has been very confused.”

“It has been just heartbreaking to hear all the frustration from my kids, especially for my fourth grader, my daughter, who is a very strong reader. She loves reading books. But with Reveal Math, there are two problems. One is the questions are too long and confusing and she mentioned that no one in her class understand what the question means, so the teacher literally has to explain to them in simple languages, what is the problem we are solving for.”

The group later forwarded a petition to Scarsdale10583. Here is the introduction:

To the Scarsdale School Board and Curriculum Committee,

We, the undersigned parents and community members of Scarsdale, are writing to formally and urgently request that the district immediately reevaluate the use of the Reveal Math curriculum in our elementary schools and initiate a prompt process to identify and transition to a more effective, research-validated alternative. Our group includes 34 parents representing a broader petition signed by 240 Scarsdale residents to date, spanning all elementary schools and grade levels Of these 34 parents, 56% have STEM educational backgrounds, including several with PhDs in mathematics and related disciplines. This collective expertise underscores the seriousness and technical grounding of our concerns, some highlighted comments below: Contact them here: scarsdalemathinfo@gmail.com

Superintendent Drew Patrick and Assistant Superintendent Edgar McIntosh took the opportunity to respond to the comments and emphasized that while concerns are being heard, decisions will continue to follow a deliberate, research-based process.

The administrators thanked parents and students who spoke at the meeting and submitted letters, acknowledging shared goals around student achievement and long-term success. Patrick conveyed that he understands the concerns, including comments from families who feel their children’s enthusiasm for math has declined, and stressed that fostering both strong skills and a love of learning remains a priority.

At the same time, he said that curriculum decisions are not made by petition or volume of feedback alone. He described the process as collaborative and structured, involving teachers, building leaders and administrators, with the board acting on recommendations rather than independently determining curriculum. He also noted that the district has a contractual obligation to work with educators on instructional decisions and that any changes are rooted in student learning data, research and classroom experience.

While Patrick said an immediate reversal of curriculum changes is not feasible, he emphasized that the district continuously monitors student outcomes and makes adjustments as needed. He went on to underscore that the board conducts its deliberations publicly and that day-to-day curriculum work is led by instructional staff.
To increase transparency, the district will host a “Curriculum Coffee” on February 26th focused on how teachers build automaticity and flexibility in math instruction across grade levels. The session will include classroom demonstrations and examples of how core materials are supplemented. In addition, administrators plan to schedule a separate virtual forum to walk families through how curricular decisions are made, the research behind recent updates, and the assessments used to ensure students maintain foundational skills.

The administrators made clear that they remain committed to ongoing engagement and to ensuring instructional practices both strengthen achievement and sustain students’ interest in learning.

Comments on the Budget

At the meeting on 2/9, Mayra Kirkendall Rodriguez made the following comments:

I am Mayra Kirkendall-Rodríguez, and along with Rachana Sing, we are the PTC Budget Study Chairs. We would like to remind the Board of Ed and the Scarsdale community that it is customary in Scarsdale for PTC Budget Chairs to send in questions to the District and BOE during the budget process. We are also soliciting questions from the seven Budget Liaisons at our schools.

We will be emailing questions this evening which are about budget growth, pressures on health reserves and fund balance, the projected operating deficit, if the District plans to keep with the tax cap, and the important interconnections of the proposed series of debt issuance, the proposed budget and the long range plan.

For example, here are a few of the questions we have:
-Since the staffing requests presentation notes that each 1% budget increase equals roughly $1.92 million, would you please share the current projected percentage increase and what guardrails you are using to keep spending sustainable?

-Staffing requests add approximately 4.3 FTE overall — would you please share the multi-year financial impact, including salary, benefits, and pension costs?

-What data demonstrates that expanding elementary social work services is the most effective approach to student support?

-The staffing presentation noted an estimated $286K decrease in state aid; can that loss be absorbed without increasing the tax burden?

-Given the volatility of the self-funded health plan, what contingency plans are in place if healthcare costs exceed projections?

-Pension costs are projected to change; how do those shifts affect long-term financial planning beyond this single budget cycle?

-What are the biggest financial risks you see over the next three to five years, and how is this budget preparing for them?

-Would it be possible for the District to create a tax calculator to help residents understand the impact of the proposed budget on their household? Of course, thanks to Mr. Lennon and his team for creating the tax calculator to assess the impact of the $101.7mm series of debt issuances, often referred to as ‘the bond.’

The list of questions about the budget sent to the District may be found here.

Speaking at the 2/2/26 Board of Education meeting, Rochana Sing said:

"I want to clarify a point made by the District’s Assistant Superintendent of Business , Mr. Lennon, during the discussion of this bond on February 2nd.

Mr. Lennon stated and I quote “the presumption all throughout our process is that this bond will be a tax impact to our community”and that “the funding source will be property taxes.” He also explained that while the bond’s debt service is exempt from the tax cap, the district would increase the tax levy to cover those costs.

I want to be very clear for the community about what that means.
Tax-cap exemption does not mean taxes will not rise. It means the district has the authority to raise the tax levy above the cap in order to pay the bond’s principal and interest.

Mr. Lennon also said and I quote “this bond would not impact the deficits or the long-range fund balance projections.” That conclusion depends entirely on the assumption that property taxes are increased sufficiently every year to cover the local share of the bond after netting for State Building Aid.

In other words, after Building Aid is applied, the remaining local share becomes a recurring expenditure, and as Mr. Lennon acknowledged, that cost is funded through higher property taxes. The bond may not create a paper deficit if taxes are raised accordingly, but it does result in a higher tax burden for residents year after year and this will be in addition to the tax impact estimator

For this reason, statements about tax-cap exemption should not be interpreted to mean there is no tax impact. As Mr. Lennon himself stated, this bond does have a tax impact, and that impact should be fully reflected in long-term financial planning before the scope of the bond is approved.

Cap - exempt does not mean consequence exempt

The question is has the BOE done due diligence to find out the compounding effect of this capital bond on our annual taxes.The Board should ask for the compounding impact on the annual tax bill over the life of the bond.”

Details

Written by: Joanne Wallenstein

Published: 05 February 2026

Created: 05 February 2026

Last Updated: 05 February 2026

Hits: 813

SCNPP Campaign Chair Rosenthal, former Mayor Mark, candidate Silberfein, candidate Foley, CNC Chair Frank, and Campaign Vice Chair Huang at the delivery of the nominating petitions to the Village Clerk.The nominating petitions for Tim Foley, Ron Schulhof, and Scott Silberfein for Village Trustee were delivered on February 3rd to the Village Clerk – a critical milestone for the candidates to be placed on the ballot for the forthcoming Village Elections on Wednesday, March 18, 2026.

The petitions were filed in accordance with state election law and contained the signatures of registered Village of Scarsdale voters. The candidates filed with more than 400 voters’ signatures, over four times the number required by election law.

“We deeply appreciate the hard work of the members of CNC as well as our friends and neighbors who gathered over 400 signatures for our slate to be placed on the ballot for the March 18 election,” stated the trustee candidates, “Many people took the time to go out in the freezing cold for this important part of our local election process. Witnessing so much hard work in such cold temperatures and with so much else going on in and around Scarsdale is not just an inspiring show of support for our unique non-partisan system – it is truly heart-warming!"

"This is a time of challenge and opportunity for the village we all call home. We look forward to connecting with residents over the coming weeks ahead of the March 18 election."

Former Mayor Jon Mark, CNC Chair Amy Frank, SCNPP Campaign Chair Jeannie Rosenthal, and Campaign Vice Chair Chao Huang were on hand to witness the completion of the successful volunteer effort.

The Village Election will take place on Wednesday, March 18, 2026 at the Scarsdale Public Library, 54 Olmsted Road in the Scott Room. Voting hours will be from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.

Details

Written by: Joanne Wallenstein

Published: 27 January 2026

Created: 27 January 2026

Last Updated: 27 January 2026

Hits: 1081

It’s budget season at Village Hall, and the Board of Trustees are busy reviewing the performance and budget of each department in preparation for the 2026-27 Village Budget.

These work sessions are recorded – and if you are interested, you can watch any of the sessions here:

On January 22, 2026 the Board met with the head of the Building Department, Police Department and Fire Department and reviewed performance and requests for increases in spending for the coming year.

Here are just a few of the interesting facts we noted while listening in on these sessions.

Building Department

Since the Board of Trustees implemented changes to the Building Code in 2025, procedures for applications have changed – resulting in more review at the Building Department and by land use boards.

In discussing their work Building Inspector Frank Diodati highlighted some of the work of the department including the issuance of stop work orders for jobs without permits and identifying unsafe work conditions.

Changes in the code have also created additional work such as:
• Tracking cumulative land disturbance and non-conformities created by code changes.
• Increasing code enforcement presence to address quality-of-life related issues.
• Providing plan review to confirm proper compliance between pre-moratorium, moratorium, and post-moratorium applications.

Diodati noted that additional challenges have resulted from:
-Implementing newly adopted 2025 New York State (NYS) Uniform Code and Energy Code which became effective on December 31, 2025.
-Initiating open space and area of disturbance forms and tracking cumulative land disturbance for future applications.
-Identifying non-conformities created by code changes which requires further in-depth review.
-Making it work with new regulations on non-conforming lots.

How has the new code affected the level of building in Scarsdale? Take a look at this chart, comparing activity year over year.

Diodati reported that building permits are down from prior years as well as applications to the BAR. Diodati attributed the decrease to the moratorium in July 2024 that slowed activity. Furthermore, many more applications are going to the Planning Board before the BAR, land disturbance code has changed and there is decreased inventory on the market.

Diodati said, “Even though the process has become time consuming, I think we have the right approach.”

Police Department

Police Chief Steven DelBene was proud to report that the department expects to receive their 11th consecutive CALEA (Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies) award in March, making Scarsdale the longest accredited department in the state. He says the department “served at the highest possible level,” and their response is “predictable, transparent and consistent, no matter who is on duty.”

Overall, crime appears to be on the decline: Take a look at this chart showing year over year police activity:

He said that the department’s drone is being used at big events and allows for better planning. The drone assisted in a hit and run accident, helped to locate a missing juvenile in a wooded area and to track a burglary in progress.

The department currently has four certified drone operators and they are requesting funds to train five more drone pilots.

In addition to the drone training, the department is requesting funds to purchase new police vehicles to replace some of the cars in the fleet.
Take at look at this chart tracking crime in Scarsdale, which appears to be down from the prior year.

Fire Department
Fire Chief Chris Mytych displayed the chart below of incident responses by the department.

In 2025 there were 60 fires, as compared to 61 in 2024. There were also 591 false calls, which Mytych says are a result of alarms, equipment malfunctions or odors of gas. Of these 60 fires, all but one were put out by Scarsdale firefighters alone. He said there is very little reliance on mutual aid, due to early notification.

Another interesting chart shows response time to calls, with Scarsdale beating standards and averages with a response time of just 4.29 minutes. Mytych said, “Much like an orchestra, firefighters perform best as an ensemble.”

He reported that the department has 46 career firefighters and 43 volunteer firefighters. This year they hired two new career firefighters and recruited two volunteer firefighters.

In terms of capital requests, the chief asked to replace one of the fire engines in the coming year.

See the full report here:

Details

Written by: Joanne Wallenstein

Published: 14 January 2026

Created: 14 January 2026

Last Updated: 14 January 2026

Hits: 1038

The Water Tower on Garden Road in ScarsdaleIt’s the project that won’t go away.

Scarsdale has very little undeveloped land – and for the most part, the remaining open spaces are protected or prone to flooding.

But that has not stopped a developer from seeking approval to subdivide and build luxury homes with swimming pools on a six-acre tract where the ground water is just two feet below the surface. Since 2013, the developer has filed application after application to take down trees, truck in tons of soil and raise the grade by four feet in order to accommodate large homes with full basements.

The project is further complicated by downstream neighbors who already experience considerable flooding from runoff from the property. They have hired experts and attorneys to document how further land disturbance on the site at 80. 88 and 90 Garden Road will raise the risk of inundating their properties.

Following the last hearing of the Planning Board in September 2025, the Planning Board voted to express their intention to make themselves lead agency for a SEQR review which would cause a full investigation of the environmental impacts of the development of the property.

The applicants then withdrew their application for eight new homes and came back with a similar plan to build five new homes on the site, in addition two new homes to replace two existing homes on the site that they plan to knock down.

Though the configuration has changed, the plans still involve extensive tree removals, excavation, trucking of soils and a disturbance of the land. The applicant claims that the work will improve water retention on the property and control stormwater run-off and these claims were the subject of questioning from the Village’s engineering consultant John Ruschke of Matt MacDonald, from Planning Board members, the public and their lawyers at a packed meeting on Tuesday night January 13, 2026, scheduled expressly to review this application.

At the meeting, the Village’s consultant John Ruschke of Mott McDonald reviewed the new application and posed questions to Gabriel Senor, the applicant’s engineer. Ruschke noted that this latest iteration eliminates the retaining wall to hold the landfill and increases changes in elevation between properties.

His question concerned the classification of the existing soil as HSG-C which is defined by the USDA as “Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission.”

He questioned the use of landfill for the purpose of reclassifying soils from D to C, saying, it is a “critical design component of the proposed stormwater management plan but is not specifically outlined in the NY DEC Stormwater Management Design Manual as an accepted management practice.”

Furthermore, since the plan called for stripping the existing topsoil and stockpiling it for reuse Ruschke said the soil would need to be tested for conductivity as a C soil, and the quantity for reuse and the quantity for removal should be identified.

He had a long list of issues with the plan that you can see here:

But perhaps his main issue with the plan was that the proposed method for achieving the reduction in site runoff which the regulations say, “shall be achieved by infiltration, groundwater recharge, reuse, recycle or evaporation/evapotranspiration of 100 percent of the post-development water quality volume.” The SWPPP (stormwater pollution prevention plan) from the applicant says “runoff reduction by infiltration is infeasible due to the presence of high groundwater, and a waiver would be necessary.” But Village Code states that any waiver issued by the Village Engineer shall not result in an increase in the rate or volume of surface water runoff.” Ruschke explained, “The application is unique because they are proposing soil replacement to manage stormwater. That is not listed as an approved method by the DEC.”

Ruschke asked, “Are they following the proper steps to propose a deviation from the code? Was this a good faith effort? Good faith is to follow the example in the DEC manual. They did not use approved methods. They did not justify why they cannot use DEC methods.” He continued, “They should go through the steps and demonstrate why they can’t meet DEC requirements using approved methods. They could reduce the lot size and reduce the amount of land disturbance – but they have not. They should say they could not meet the standard and show why. They need justification for their good faith effort. If you don’t meet the requirements you should propose something that is approved. They should be going through the process and proposing something that complies.”

Following Ruschke, Planning Board Chair John Clapp said, “Your main point is that you don’t see the work for the analysis to show that they have complied with the design manual. They need to go through the steps to justify that their solution is the only one available. If the calculations are not correct, they might not be able to meet the DEC requirements for volume reduction.
They have to show that none of the approved methods will work. What constitutes a good faith effort? What is the margin for error? They say they have taken a conservative approach – but how do we define conservative? The soil is clay – I don’t think they will be able to strip it and replace it. They should test the soil.”

Planning Board member Mark Seiden questioned Senor:

Seiden: On a macro level do we agree that stormwater management is measured by a standard of care?”

Senor: Yes

Seiden: Do you agree that the DEC stormwater manual is an appropriate standard of care?

Senor: Yes

Seiden: So why are you not going with their practices before proposing a deviation? Is the replacement of soils with fill a practice that is endorsed by the DEC?

Senor: The fill is not part of the stormwater practice.

Seiden: The soil replacement is the whole theory on which this application is predicated.

Senor: We are not using the soil in our runoff calculations. We can’t lower the water table, so we will raise the ground – we are doing this to increase the clearance.

Seiden: What kind of structure is going to prevent the houses from floating away?

Senor: "Four foot thick concrete slabs underground to anchor the structures.

Seiden: Can you show us another property where you raised the ground level by removing and bringing in soil? Where this methodology has been successful? Creating a larger elevation differential by importing soil? Do you agree that you have not satisfied the criteria for a good faith effort that conventional methods won’t work?

Senor: We can’t use those methods because Scarsdale does not permit some of the them.

He added that a similar method for constructing homes on a property with high groundwater had been used on a 1.25 acre project in Port Chester.

Planning Board member Lynn Brooks Avni asked, “Did you do alternative analyses? For cluster homes or just building on two or three lots? You don’t show that you have done any alternative studies. How long will it take for the new trees to absorb as much water as the current ones.?

In public comments, Lena Crandall pointed out that trees planted in wetlands often die. She said “soil gets compacted by construction equipment and compacts the roots and the existing trees die. The new trees planted have circular root balls and often fall over during storms.”

Elaine Weir expressed concern about an infrastructure program that was dependent on a homeowner’s association for maintenance. She said, “If flood mitigation structures are not working it will impact other Scarsdale neighborhoods. Or if these neighbors fail to maintain the flood mitigation structures, will the Village be forced to maintain it? All Scarsdale homeowners could be forced to pay for this. It has long term consequences for the neighborhood and the Village as a whole.”

Attorney Helen Mausch speaking on behalf of a group of Garden Road neighbors said, “I think it is abundantly clear that this project will result in severe environmental impacts. Our clients’ experts concur with Mott McDonald’s concerns. A positive declaration would allow a full analysis of all the questions we discussed tonight. Soil, mitigation, flooding, alternatives. We need a pos dec – for full discussion and transparency.”

Brad Schwartz, attorney for Bob Falk said, “The methodology for the downstream analysis needs accurate inputs to do the analysis. For all the same reasons discussed tonight, in 2013, the Village Board conditioned the construction of the homes on Cushman Road on the de-mapping of Woodland Place and no further development on the site.”

Helen Maccarino said, “I have been coming here for years. When you disturb the ground water table, the home is protected but the water is displaced – it flows laterally – around each of the foundations. The plans show swimming pools that will displace more water – that will also flow around. The downstream issue has been neglected. I witnessed firsthand Mr. Falk’s flooding You had to wear galoshes. There is ponding adjacent to the water tower.”

Richard Cantor said, “The thing that bothers me most is the amount of damage that will be done is way out of line with the mitigation that will be done.”

Andy Rodman said I have lived on Cushman Road for 30 years. It’s hard to imagine how the water is going to get down the hill.” About the new homes he said, “Four foot basements? Explain that.” He added, “I lost 13 trees in Hurricane Sandy. I have planted 27 trees and it is hard to get them to grow in these conditions.”

During deliberations Chairman Clapp said that the Planning Board needs to have a meeting soon to decide on the SEQR. There needs to be a written determination of significance, and then the Board would vote yes or no. A negative declaration speeds up the review process. A positive declaration (that the project is likely to have a significant environmental impact) would slow things down because it would require more environmental reviews and consultant reports.

At the conclusion of the meeting the Planning Board voted unanimously to declare the board as lead agency for a SEQR review of the proposal. They scheduled another public hearing for March 18, 2026 with a deadline for further submissions from the applicant and Mott McDonald by February 23, 2026.