New York Mills defeats project

[Swimmy]

New York Mills defeats project

Ok, so I was wrong in my prediction. I thought the people of nym cared about the facilities their children learned in. I was wrong.

[frankcor]

"The $8.7 million capital project included building renovations such as roof work, electrical, heating and ventilation."

That doesn't sound like wasteful, unnecessary plans for the money. It sounds to me like stuff that will have to be done eventually anyways. Without being able to borrow the funds, will the board be forced to pay for it out of annual operating costs? (and raise taxes to pay for it anyway?)

The outcome is about the same as the original vote. There must be a strong core of opposition to this plan. Can anyone shed some light on the real issues in this story?

[nhcitizen18]

It seems that many people voted against the project based on their perceptions of enrollment changes. It is important to note that classroom uses have changed over time. When the NYM school was built there was not a need for things like dedicated computer labs or special education classrooms.

Over time the utilization of things like technology in education have expanded enormously (which I view as a good thing) while the state and federal government have imposed huge unfunded mandates in the area of special education (which I view as a bad thing).

One other thing to consider is that when students got "rights" around 15-20 years ago everything in education changed. Classrooms of 30-35 kids were fine back then when you could just toss a troublemaker out and have him spend the day in suspension. Today teachers have very little power over their students which means smaller classrooms are necessary to maintain even a semblance of control.

I am not a resident of New York Mills, so the project really doesn't concern me. However it really isn't valid to compare enrollment 30 years ago with enrollment today and say that there is no need for more space. Schools are doing far more than they used to 30 years ago...that needs to be taken into account.

If I were a parent in NYM I would take a long hard look at how the defeat of this project will impact the learning environment for my child. Some may want to consider moving to another school district instead of sending their children to a dilapidated old building.

The saddest part is that the EXCEL money is gone now. If the school district ever wants to fix their roof or renovate a building in the future it will cost local taxpayers far more than it would have today. As I said though that was the choice of the residents and you have to trust that representative government works. I'm not sure I'd want to live there though.

[strikeslip]

People voted against this project because school taxes in New York Mills are already very high (exceeding 2% of the true value of real property), incomes in NY Mills are generally low (I believe them to be less than the county average), average class size in the lower grades is already low (about 21), and there is no growth in the community to make a need for expansion obvious.

The federal government has been given no authority under the Constitution to control education. It does so through the money it doles out. If federal 'mandates' are objectionable, do not take federal funds.

If schools want more space because they are doing "far more," perhaps they need to describe what the "more" is, and describe precisely how the students and society will benefit. Apparently the voters are not perceiving that the "more" is worth the expense.

Voters' decisions are heavily influenced by their own experiences, what they are presented with, and what they can afford. When they see functional illiterates coming out of schools in spite of a myriad of special programs, services, drastically lower student:teacher ratios, but historically high spending, they conclude that the problem is not a lack of spending, and not the buildings, but may be what is going on in them.

Frankly, based on the two news letters sent out, New York Mills SD did NOT present a persuasive argument for the expansions, although the repairs I'm sure would have passed had they been separately presented. In the context of a second vote, the way the second newsletter was worded, it came across as almost insulting.

strikeslip.blogspot.com/2008/01/what-again-another-nym-school-vote.html

[Ralph]

Greetings Strike!!! Glad to see you on board here.

[nhcitizen18]

Good to see you here too Strike. Its always nice to have the opposite opinion presented respectfully...and you have generally done that.

As I said I do not live in New York Mills so I never received any of the newsletters that you mentioned, maybe they were not as informative as they should have been I don't know.

This does illustrate an interesting point regarding public education and residency. Since this area has no viable private school alternatives, where your child is educated is entirely dependant on your residence. Knowing that, students and parents are far more dramatically influenced by school budget and capital project votes than other areas of the state since they cannot simply say "I'm unhappy with this public school I'll send my kids to the nearby private school".

At the moment I am very satisfied with the quality of education and the curricular opportunities offered by New Hartford. However I am fully prepared to move my family to a new community if I percieve that the quality of education or the condition of the facilities in New Hartford is deteriorating. Maybe all Utica area parents need to be ready to do that.

I have never set foot in NYM schools so I can't say what they are like. However, if they are in poor condition and the community does not support their renovation when the cost to local taxpayers is at the lowest it has been in decades that might tell me it's time to move. Instead of arguing and fighting with your neighbors it might be easier to move to an area where your neighbors more or less share your values.

I feel like I am getting a very good deal for what I pay in property taxes and I hope the majority of my neighbors also believe the same. One thing that is beginning to scare me is the large percentage of senior citizens that live in our area. There are a significant number of senior citizens who don't believe that they should have to pay for schools since they have no children attending them. This tends to bother me since the ones that complain most about schools seem very happy to take the social security taxes that come out of my paycheck.

When I hear that I should be forced to financially support retirees but they should not have any responsibility toward young children (including mine) I tend to become very resentful.

[strikeslip]

Thanks, NHC18. I enjoy the discussion.

You are correct, people will vote with their feet by moving if the school district they are in is perceived to be failing.

But the costs of education have gotten way out of line. We pay more as a percentage of our real property value than we ever have. At one time, 2% was the constitutional limit -- so that should be considered to be the upper limit of what is reasonable. NYM according to their last newsletter exceeds that. For some people, that is confiscatory, and that causes people to vote with their feet, too.

We don't seem to be getting 'bang' for the big bucks we are paying and we need to find out why.

Don't take this the wrong way, but the problem may be that we are spending TOO MUCH money on education.

As an example, one item in the NYM newsletter that caught my eye was the alleged need for larger meeting space for the Committee on Special Education. That space currently seats maybe 8-10 comfortably . . . but when I read that up to 16 people may be involved in such meetings, I had to ask myself (1) why would so many people need to be involved in the education of one child, (2) how can the efforts of so many be efficiently coordinated to produce satisfactory results, and (3) if so many are in a meeting for one child, who is minding their classes for other children? The outcome I see is that the taxpayer gets hit hard, the student gets pulled from pillar to post, and society winds up with another graduate who doesn't know enough to come in from the rain.

Schools used to be society's "organ" for transferring a defined body of knowledge from one generation to the next, to enable the next generation to carry on from where the last one left off. That concept seems to have changed. Knowledge (which can be objectively measured) seems to have been devalued in favor of "performance" (which is often subjectively measured) ... and that has spawned the need for more "activity" in the classroom and the uptick in employment and numbers of children sent to special and remedial education. I could go on, but I'll stop there.

Like too much ice cream is bad for the body, too much money and easy money from the state could be the problem in education. It makes it very easy to create distractions from the learning that must take place for these children to survive.

[Swimmy]

Or if you're in the new hartford district, too much money is being spent on non-education efforts, e.g. Deal would expand road to aid New Hartford business park.

[nhcitizen18]

Strike,

Your definition of education:

Schools used to be society's "organ" for transferring a defined body of knowledge from one generation to the next, to enable the next generation to carry on from where the last one left off. That concept seems to have changed. Knowledge (which can be objectively measured) seems to have been devalued in favor of "performance" (which is often subjectively measured) ... and that has spawned the need for more "activity" in the classroom and the uptick in employment and numbers of children sent to special and remedial education. I could go on, but I'll stop there.

I actually have a lot of agreement with you on this. I have actually looked up some numbers and have found that school districts often spend $50,000 or more per year to educate a special education student. I believe that this is way out of line and I have asked my brother (who is a teacher) and my father in law (a former Board of Education member) how and why this is allowed. It all stems from Federal and State laws such as IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act) that give the parents the right to sue if the level of services they want for their child are not provided. The following link is an extreme example, but it serves to illustrate the point:

www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/02/19/MNG8THBH4V1.DTL

Parents are suing school districts in order to force them to provide enormously expensive services to their special education children...and they are winning. The state and federal governments have passed laws that continually allow this to happen.

I understand the frustration with taxes and some areas of school spending, but I have always believed that local schools and school boards always end up being the "fall guy" for the state and federal government. Local school boards have very little power over the vast majority of school related costs and are usually just doing their best to live within the laws that strangle them. Voting down projects or voting out school board members at the local level will not solve the problem...it only makes it harder on "regular" kids in school.

The solution lies with the state government and the feds. Effective lobbying needs to take place at that level. Governor Spitzer made mention of reducing the unfunded mandates the state puts on local schools...lets see if that actually comes to fruition. I will always vote against candidates for the state legislature and governorship that do not address these unfunded mandates, but at the same time I will support my local school district by voting for reasonable capital projects and school budgets.

Just because we get to vote on local school budgets does not mean that it is the place to implement meaningful change. It just means that all the other arms of government that are not subject to a public vote (town, city, county, state, federal) get a free pass from public ire while school districts bear the brunt of public frustration.

I am all for getting more "bang for the buck", but its important to know who to demand it from.

[frankcor]

Gee, I asked a simple question ...



Thanks to all of you for such an enlightening conversation. You brought me up to speed on the real issues in the NY Mills bond vote.

You've also brought up some good general issues. I can add a few short observations:

Space: It's very accurate to say that because schools do more today than what they did 50 years ago, we need more space for all the extra stuff. And not all that stuff is related to just teaching but it's stuff that everyone agrees is worthwhile.

Here's just one little example: some schools host after-school programs for kids-at-risk. Those programs are often run by non-profits and are not funded with the school budget in any way. It just makes sense to house the program in the schools because that's where the kids are. That program requires space beyond just the gymnasium or auditorium where the program is conducted. They need office space, storage space, records-keeping space as well. That's all space that was never needed 50 years ago.

Market forces: People vote with their feet. If a populace chooses to save money at the expense of their public schools, that is their prerogative to do so.

Did you ever wonder why there are so few non-religious private schools around our area? Is it because we have several public school systems that provide high quality, effective and efficient schools? Even our city schools have islands of excellence within them.

If that weren't the case, I believe you would see more private alternatives from which to choose.

[strikeslip]

Swimmy -- I caught that in the OD too and scratched my head . . . by what authority does a School District give up tax (or in lieu of tax) dollars to foster economic development? I may blog about that in a day or so.

NHCitizen18 -- You are right, special education has become a big drain on local school districts . . . and because local school districts do not want to go through the expense to test the laws with an unknown outcome, they capitulate to some of the demands some parents make. (I was on a school board once and saw this first hand). But, conversely, without the pressure from some parents, and the changes in Federal law, school districts would have let many special ed kids fall through the cracks.

From my perspective, the special education problem has been largely created by the school districts. There are so many more kids in special education than ever before, you have to wonder whether there is something in the water or air. Some will attribute it to druggie parents, but I don't buy that. I think it is a combination of the money (again), and the shift in emphasis from "knowledge" to "performance."

There are big bucks in special ed, and the more that kids that can be labeled, and the more that services are provided, the more the money that gets sent to the districts. I've seen it happen: a kid goes into Spec Ed needing only speech therapy. Before you know it a "problem" with handwriting is discovered (requiring occupational therapy) and, because the kid is "disabled," they "need" psychological counseling to enable them to "cope" with their disability. Now the kid is pulled out of class three times a day instead of once. He/she falls behind his/her peers (a natural consequence of missing class). Now we may need "resource room" or special tutors. "Services" spawn the "need" for more services ... and hiring more people. AND THE KID DOES NOT LEARN. It is a racket.

"Knowledge" is subject to identification and quantification. It can be objectively measured. And most kids have the capacity to acquire it at varying rates. When a kid does not know something he is supposed to know, it can be easily identified. "Study harder and you will get an 'A'.''

"Performance" however, is often a function of something having nothing to do with what a teacher does in the classroom: maturation . . .which depends on genetics. "Performance" is more often 'subjectively' measured. For example, rubrics are now used to judge written papers. Teachers have to be instructed how to recognize "A" from "D" work. Pity the poor student who gets a D . . . they may be told by their teacher why they don't measure up to an A . . . but it often is something that they have no real control over (eg. "Your words were not 'expressive' enough.") We've all known kids who seem "younger" than their chronological age suddenly "blossom" at one point or another. It may be genetics, it may be environment, it may be an event . . . but it is different for everyone . . . AND IT IS BEYOND THE CLASSROOM. Maturation should not and probably cannot be forced. Unfortunately, students who may mature more slowly don't measure up to the "performance" that seems to be demanded these days -- and what is really normal maturation gets mistaken for a "defect" that requires "special education" interventions . . . which results in pullouts, missed classes, and a feed back loop that sometimes winds up in an educational warehouse (alternative ed). It borders on criminal.

[nhcitizen18]

Strike,

I am with you to a degree on the knowledge vs. performance issue at the younger grades. However my brother teaches regents and advanced placement level classes and has shown me the regents exam and the AP exam. Both of those tests look very similar to the stuff I am familiar with 25 years ago in High School and they definitely test student knowledge. In fact the AP stuff has some material that is even beyond some of the introductory college course I took once upon a time.

When I chose to move to New Hartford it was in large part due to the scores that students are receiving there...which are very impressive. Yeah I guess you could argue that the "home" factor in New Hartford might be better than in some other districts, but those types of scores cannot be achieved without quality instruction.

Regardless, I stand by my original point insomuch as the changes most people want to see in schools are not achievable at the local level. You have unfunded federal and state mandates and one of the most unfunded is special education (the federal government promised that they would fund 40% of the expenses incurred by the passage of IDEA they currently fund 8%).

The root of the problem in my opinion is lawmakers and lawyers. Our society has become a very litigious one where people will sue anyone that they perceive as having deep pockets, and that includes school districts. A law ensuring that special education children have access to a top level education is great in theory, but when the cost of educating said child from Kindergarten to 12th grade exceeds $1,000,000 then it is time to revisit some of these laws.

My father-in-law and brother have both told me numerous times that the best way to have better education is to get the state and federal government out of education. I would support a local income tax similar to what already exists in New York City and use that in combination with property taxes to have total local control over education. Get rid of these state and federal mandates, end the ability of parents to sue school districts over special education issues, give schools the authority to expel students that do not obey the rules without having to pay for their education once they are out and you will see a better system.

[frankcor]

Check your district's percentage of income that comes from federal funds. It may surprise you how small it is. But it doesn't cover the entire cost to meet the requirements to get the aid.

The feds should butt out of public education. The US Constitution reserves that task to the states, and to the people. Their proper role would be as a clearinghouse for best practices throughout the nation.