Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Beyond the loss of identity, I also think the big impediment is when SDs are of differing quality or have big gaps in resources. Given what we know about history and human nature, I suspect upper income/test score districts would probably resist being combined with lower income/test score districts.
So, how would you go about reducing compensation? What about a pay cap? A budget cap in relation to enrollment and staffing? Here is the median pay for teachers by NY school district: https://www.seethroughny.net/teacher_pay
Why would suburban districts be different than rural districts? What about counties with urban, suburban and rural districts? What about zones that could have a mixture of environments?
I think a lot of this comes down to how it is done.
I am not interested in reducing teacher compensation. Other people are interested in doing this. Ask them.
I don’t know why suburban districts would be different than rural districts. I am simply unfamiliar with them so I don’t suggest to know anything about consolidating them. I am familiar with suburban districts so I can confidently state that consolidating them would not in and of itself reduce taxes in a meaningful amount. The same may be true with rural districts as well.
Status:
"Let this year be over..."
(set 22 days ago)
Location: Where my bills arrive
19,219 posts, read 17,095,590 times
Reputation: 15538
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpdivola
Beyond the loss of identity, I also think the big impediment is when SDs are of differing quality or have big gaps in resources. Given what we know about history and human nature, I suspect upper income/test score districts would probably resist being combined with lower income/test score districts.
I don't see how "identity" would be lost when individuals associate with the school they attended not the school district. You are right attempting to merge dissimilar districts whether economics or tests score would be an uphill battle, resistance would be an understatement.
There is a mental perspective that consolidation will require "their child" to be dragged from one end of the county to the other and having to go to school with "those" kids.....
The posts about identity in relation to “quality” is why I mention that a potential way to do this would be zones within a County, but allow for open enrollment being the option for students. Meaning, you can stay within your “district” within the zone if you are satisfied, but you could also go to another school within the zone, as long as there is room and you have a way to get there. That way, you don’t force anything, but you also allow for more educational choice/freedom within the larger system, without having them go across the county.
So, to use Onondaga County, say the Onondaga East zone includes the portion of the city of Syracuse currently zoned for Nottingham HS on the East Side, Jamesville-DeWitt, Fayetteville-Manlius and East Syracuse-Minoa are the areas in that zone. Students that don’t want to go anywhere can stay put, but say you feel that Nottingham has a better Arts program than the other 3 or you like ES-M’s programs in regards to the trades options it offers(carpentry, cosmetology and students can work at its affiliated credit union), as long as those schools have the space and you have a way to get there, they can attend.
Minnesota actually allows you to go to any district within the state, if I’m not mistaken, as long as you have a way to get there. I believe that Wisconsin has the same thing or something similar and the money follows the student.
The posts about identity in relation to “quality” is why I mention that a potential way to do this would be zones within a County, but allow for open enrollment being the option for students. Meaning, you can stay within your “district” within the zone if you are satisfied, but you could also go to another school within the zone, as long as there is room and you have a way to get there. That way, you don’t force anything, but you also allow for more educational choice/freedom within the larger system, without having them go across the county.
How would this work in practice?
The theory is that the "better" schools are in the better, more afffluent neighborhoods. It is unlikley that the weathly area students will want to travel to go to the "poor" section of the county for school. However, they are the ones with means to get there.
That leaves those with fewer means wanting to go to the "better" schools, but no way to get there.
Now you are in a situation where people cry economic discrimination. NYS being what it is, we now have to provide bussing for these kids. With everyone clamoring to get into the "better" schools, there won't be enough room for everyone. That's not fair, so we will need some type of lottery system which results in some people from the "better" school being forced to go to a different school to make room for the "disadvantaged" person.
And zones? That's just another name for school districts. The only real difference is that you increase the logistical problems since students are able to attend different schools over a wider geographic area.
Everyone in NY already has educational choice/freedom. Simply move to the district of your choice.
The theory is that the "better" schools are in the better, more afffluent neighborhoods. It is unlikley that the weathly area students will want to travel to go to the "poor" section of the county for school. However, they are the ones with means to get there.
That leaves those with fewer means wanting to go to the "better" schools, but no way to get there.
Now you are in a situation where people cry economic discrimination. NYS being what it is, we now have to provide bussing for these kids. With everyone clamoring to get into the "better" schools, there won't be enough room for everyone. That's not fair, so we will need some type of lottery system which results in some people from the "better" school being forced to go to a different school to make room for the "disadvantaged" person.
And zones? That's just another name for school districts. The only real difference is that you increase the logistical problems since students are able to attend different schools over a wider geographic area.
Everyone in NY already has educational choice/freedom. Simply move to the district of your choice.
This may come down to interest in particular programs, taking public transportation/getting dropped off or even possibly walking. You may be surprised by how many people find a way to another school, if they can. People are doing it already, but it would/could be one less thing to likely worry about.
No, those that live within their "district" within the zone can stay put where they are, but open enrollment just opens up things up for those that want to go to another school within the zone. Forced bussing is not a part of the deal, either way.
If anything, this breaks down the economic discrimination, while looking to lower property taxes and increase educational opportunity with minimal transportation(not going across the county). Think about as to why Southern school districts went to county school districts, but keeping in mind the cons to some of the systems in terms of long bus rides across the county for "balance" reasons. Again, it isn't perfect and will need to be adjusted, but it can be viable.
This may come down to interest in particular programs, taking public transportation/getting dropped off or even possibly walking. You may be surprised by how many people find a way to another school, if they can. People are doing it already, but it would/could be one less thing to likely worry about.
No, those that live within their "district" within the zone can stay put where they are, but open enrollment just opens up things up for those that want to go to another school within the zone. Forced bussing is not a part of the deal, either way.
If anything, this breaks down the economic discrimination, while looking to lower property taxes and increase educational opportunity with minimal transportation(not going across the county). Think about as to why Southern school districts went to county school districts, but keeping in mind the cons to some of the systems in terms of long bus rides across the county for "balance" reasons. Again, it isn't perfect and will need to be adjusted, but it can be viable.
Public schools in suburban areas already collaborate to provide non-traditional programing through the BOCES system (things like carpentry, auto mechanics, ect, as well as special ed services). They also do the same thing with special ed through contracts where districts educate students from other districts who need services only provided by the receiving district.
You have yet to explain how consolidating districts, or creating "zones" within a county will significantly lower property taxes. The reason for this is that it won't.
There is no "economic discrimination" in NY public schools. At least in the suburban areas, the so-called bad school districts are properly funded. They are bad, instead, because they are populated by families that have a high incidence of single family households, young/immature/uneducated parent(s), parents with criminal records, crime prevalent in their neighborhoods, and a general culture that does not prioritize education and school attendance. Money has nothing to do with it.
Public schools in suburban areas already collaborate to provide non-traditional programing through the BOCES system (things like carpentry, auto mechanics, ect, as well as special ed services). They also do the same thing with special ed through contracts where districts educate students from other districts who need services only provided by the receiving district.
You have yet to explain how consolidating districts, or creating "zones" within a county will significantly lower property taxes. The reason for this is that it won't.
There is no "economic discrimination" in NY public schools. At least in the suburban areas, the so-called bad school districts are properly funded. They are bad, instead, because they are populated by families that have a high incidence of single family households, young/immature/uneducated parent(s), parents with criminal records, crime prevalent in their neighborhoods, and a general culture that does not prioritize education and school attendance. Money has nothing to do with it.
So, again, I will ask you the questions I asked before. What do you suggest in regards to lowering property taxes?
Yes, I know about the programs BOCES offers, but some schools actually offer them within their own district. The example of using East Syracuse-Minoa is actually a real example. Same for Nottingham, which is actually the Syracuse City HS with more of an Arts based focus. So, I'm not just pulling those out of thin air.
We also have to be careful, as many times people state that a school or district is "bad", but really isn't as bad as stated, if at all.
My point is about where there could be more collaboration/consolidation in order to lower property taxes.
Ironically, if money has nothing to do with it, then why can't we lower the burden on residents then through more consolidation or collaboration then?
Last edited by ckhthankgod; 06-06-2019 at 11:42 AM..
So, again, I will ask you the questions I asked before. What do you suggest in regards to lowering property taxes?
Yes, I know about the programs BOCES offers, but some schools actually offer them within their own district. The example of using East Syracuse-Minoa is actually a real example. Same for Nottingham, which is actually the Syracuse City HS with more of an Arts based focus. So, I'm not just pulling those out of thin air.
We also have to be careful, as many times people state that a school or district is "bad", but really isn't as bad as stated, if at all.
My point is about where there could be more collaboration/consolidation in order to lower property taxes.
Ironically, if money has nothing to do with it, then why can't we lower the burden on residents then through more consolidation or collaboration then?
I know I am probably being trolled at this point, but I will keep playing alone. For the millionth time, consolidation, in and of itself, will not lead to meaningful tax savings (at least as far as suburban districts are concerned - I am less informed about rural district, so I won't speak to those).
I don't care to answer your question "[w]hat do you suggest in regards to lowering property taxes?" because I don't need then to be lowered. This is your quest, not mine. My singular point is that consolidating districts won't accomplish it. If you want to significantly lower school property taxes where you live, than you and other like minded people need to grow a back bone and elect people to the school board who will tell the teachers to go screw, and commit your district to non-tenured, low-credentialed, high-turnover, low pay teachers. Make a commitment to significantly lower funded schools. The only way to spend less money on schools is to spend less money on schools. You don't need to consolidate to do this.
Your lack of reading comprehension is appalling. Stop being so quick to pile up your post count and take some time to read what you are responding to. The so-called "bad" districts are not bad because of a lack of money. That was my statement. This is not the same thing as saying that "money has nothing to do with it", or that money is irrelevant. Substantial money is necessary to having a strong school district. But a district will not be strong with money alone. Tons of money plus bad families = bad districts.
I don't see how "identity" would be lost when individuals associate with the school they attended not the school district. You are right attempting to merge dissimilar districts whether economics or tests score would be an uphill battle, resistance would be an understatement.
There is a mental perspective that consolidation will require "their child" to be dragged from one end of the county to the other and having to go to school with "those" kids.....
Well to overcome all the logistics and political hurdles the mergers would have to promise significant cost savings. I think those would only happen if some of the smaller schools were to be merged and buildings were closed. There is only so much money to be made via reducing superintendents.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
