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.
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
Advertisements
/\
With the ingrained mindset nothing will ever change. Consolidating Nassau into a few larger districts rather than what 60+ that exist now would eliminate so many layers of redundancy. Then eliminate the school districts ability to tax, have them submit their budget to the town for approval. That's how our schools do it and they have to learn to live within their means.
I know I'm dreaming because nothing will ever change, the unions run everything and as always "its for the children"
With the ingrained mindset nothing will ever change. Consolidating Nassau into a few larger districts rather than what 60+ that exist now would eliminate so many layers of redundancy. Then eliminate the school districts ability to tax, have them submit their budget to the town for approval. That's how our schools do it and they have to learn to live within their means.
I know I'm dreaming because nothing will ever change, the unions run everything and as always "its for the children"
I'm no fan of public sector unions, but I don't think this is a union perpetuated situation.
Granted the system on LI is flawed. However, in the many years since the system has been in place many things have grown around it and are dependent on it. Particularly the LI housing market.
I have seen first hand proposals to change the system. They always met with almost unanimous and vehement community opposition. If the unions had any position, they were among the least vocal groups. Any politician who makes a serious overture to consolidate on a large scale would be committing political suicide. It is the homeowners (voters) who bought into their school district that do not want a change.
While the system doesn't always work the way we expect, it is also supposed to be these same local residents who elect a local school board to represent their interests and create a budget. Moving the local school board power up to the town or county level would give people less control of what happens in their local schools.
Part of the issue in NYS is that school districts have always been very localized, going back to the 1800s. Unlike many states to the west and south, New York tended to have stronger town governments, probably a legacy from all the "Yankees" from New England who originally settled Upstate.
Local, decentralized 1st-8th grade school houses with separate grades in villages and with all grades combined out in the rural areas were common. Only cities had "districts" with multiple schools. In the early part of the 20th century, public high schools were established in the cities and many of the villages, with the towns paying for any of "their" children attending the village HS. The idea of all schools in an entire county being under one rural was just an alien concept, and until relatively recently, most NY communities had more than enough population and industry to support their very localized schools.
After WW II, schools started to consolidate as "central schools" with a structure of a high school and then k-8 or k-6 elementary schools out in the hamlets. As time went on, the older satellite schools were closed in favor of a centralized elementary school or elementary/middle/high school complex for the entire district.
You also had two other phenomena going on: the massive growth of suburban areas on the one hand and the significant depopulation of rural areas. The reason that there are so many school districts in suburban towns -- and then in suburban counties like Nassau and Suffolk -- is because these central schools began as schools serving villages and their surrounding farmlands. In the 1950s and 1960s, these places turned into massive suburbs, sometimes having 2 HS and a dozen or more elementary schools. During this same period, even the rural school districts grew.
Since the 1970s, some suburban areas have continued to grow (like Saratoga County), but many first ring suburbs have stagnated, population wise, and many times even declined in the number of students in the class rooms. In the rural areas and in small cities, the school age populations have plummeted. When I graduated from HS, my class had nearly 140 students. It's under 100 today.
The sensible thing for many, if not most, NYS high schools to do is at least consolidate their administrations. In many cases it's not possible to combine facilities because of the distances involved. Whatever savings there are from consolidation may be lost in transportation costs. However, the going rate for a school superintendent, even in rural NY, is $100,000+ (more in bigger and wealthier districts) plus benies, which is a major expense for a school district with fewer than 1000 students, and a regional administration and school board could result in major administrative savings (combining 6 small districts under 1 superintendent paid $200k would result in a $400k+ savings!).
The problem is the very decentralized nature of NYS' "central" school districts. I agree with Joe461 that the opposition to consolidation comes primarily from residents, not from unions or administrators or politicians. People who have moved to a particular area to send their children to X schools, don't want anybody messing with X schools, even if their children are already gone.
And for Suffolk and Nassau Counties no reason why you need a combined 124 school districts....sigh.
Can you just imagine how much lower our taxes would be if we had one administration for each county and the teachers made the same salaries across the board on LI??? The south got it right!
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
You can sit and discuss historic precedence, strong town governments, massive suburbs developing literally overnight all you want none of it is unique to just NY. Like the industrial base that spurned growth in so many cities along the thruway or the rise of the commuter in the grey flannel suit around NYC. Times have changed the industries are gone and the man in the grey flannel suit may be wearing heels unless they are telecommuting to a job in Chicago.
The current system is bloated & archaic and looks like a pyramid scheme that is approaching the end of it feasible life. Think about it the district is a taxing authority so there is no motivation to curb costs they just raise their share every year and if the people vote it down then the existing budget amount gets increased by x% which may be higher than the proposed increase. If building improvements are needed well who plans/budgets for that just pass a special assessment to cover that expense. After all it is for the children...
If I ran a business the way these districts are managed I would be sharing a cell with Bernie Madoff
The current system is bloated & archaic and looks like a pyramid scheme that is approaching the end of it feasible life. Think about it the district is a taxing authority so there is no motivation to curb costs they just raise their share every year and if the people vote it down then the existing budget amount gets increased by x% which may be higher than the proposed increase. If building improvements are needed well who plans/budgets for that just pass a special assessment to cover that expense. After all it is for the children...
If I ran a business the way these districts are managed I would be sharing a cell with Bernie Madoff
Two corrections...
1. The people vote it down, yes. However, then they take basically the same budget and put it up for re-vote. They plan the second vote to when the "snowbirds" are down in Florida, while threatening "austerity" as the only alternative. It is effectively an end-run to pass the original budget. I've seen this happen far too many times.
2. It isn't "for the children." It is for the parents... as Linda_d pointed out, no one wants their schools messed with, even after their children graduate. It is about property values (and for some, prestige).
Can you just imagine how much lower our taxes would be if we had one administration for each county and the teachers made the same salaries across the board on LI??? The south got it right!
When have taxes ever gone down? When has a government bureaucracy ever been significantly reduced in size?
Through my work, I was recently exposed to some studies regarding takeovers and mergers in large corporations. Prior to the mergers, there are always grand predictions of cost savings through elimination of redundancies. The studies overwhelmingly showed that the savings are almost never achieved. The numbers get even worse when you count the initial cost of integrating systems. Consolidation = Savings is not as guaranteed as people would like to belive.
How many government claims have we seen? "This measure will save $xx billions of dollars" - and the savings are all smoke and mirrors.
You may have 100 superintendent today for 100 districts. After consolidation, you will have one administrator, 25 regional administrators, and a support staff of and additional 100 people to handle things at the local district level.
I'm not saying the system is perfect. I'm not saying there isn't a better way to do it. But change is not as simple as "it works well over there." There are many _legitimate_ stakeholders on this issue. How can one guarantee that consolidation will improve anything? The downsides - loss of local control, decrease in property values - are more likely than a decrease in taxes. How, exactly, would consolidation improve the quality of education?
When have taxes ever gone down? When has a government bureaucracy ever been significantly reduced in size?
Through my work, I was recently exposed to some studies regarding takeovers and mergers in large corporations. Prior to the mergers, there are always grand predictions of cost savings through elimination of redundancies. The studies overwhelmingly showed that the savings are almost never achieved. The numbers get even worse when you count the initial cost of integrating systems. Consolidation = Savings is not as guaranteed as people would like to belive.
How many government claims have we seen? "This measure will save $xx billions of dollars" - and the savings are all smoke and mirrors.
You may have 100 superintendent today for 100 districts. After consolidation, you will have one administrator, 25 regional administrators, and a support staff of and additional 100 people to handle things at the local district level.
I'm not saying the system is perfect. I'm not saying there isn't a better way to do it. But change is not as simple as "it works well over there." There are many _legitimate_ stakeholders on this issue. How can one guarantee that consolidation will improve anything? The downsides - loss of local control, decrease in property values - are more likely than a decrease in taxes. How, exactly, would consolidation improve the quality of education?
On the other hand, with a reduction in property taxes, you can attract industries with lower rates. With a better job market, you create demand, which will keep property values up or even increase them. If you notice, popular Southern areas have lower tax rates, but higher home prices due to demand.
Another aspect that hasn't been mentioned and is more of an aspect to consider mainly in highly populated counties is integration(really think opportunity/choice). A lot of this due to NYC, but NYS public schools are viewed as being relatively segregated and this is another, if not the main reason many Southern counties went to county SD's. Wake County NC did it due to business leaders wanting to slow down "White Flight" and in turn, eliminate a level of government. You could open things up by having Open Enrollment similar to states like MN and WI, which allows the money to follow the student, entry into a school as long as there is room and the student can find a way to that school. This can allow students in a lower performing school an opportunity to attend a better performing school, but it could also keep families that are middle class and up within cities. That in turn could help that city's tax base due to keeping such families within its boundaries. That last point could be something to think about, as urban/city/walkable living is becoming or is more popular now.
Last edited by ckhthankgod; 05-29-2015 at 10:41 AM..
On the other hand, with a reduction in property taxes, you can attract industries with lower rates. With a better job market, you create demand, which will keep property values up or even increase them. If you notice, popular Southern areas have lower tax rates, but higher home prices due to demand.
I am 100% for anything that reduces taxes. You are completely correct in that a reduction in taxes can attract business and help the local economy.
I also have been around long enough to know how things actually work. The most likely scenario is that taxes will continue to rise in any consolidation scenario that would be implemented.
A legitimate plan that reduced waste and ACTUALLY lowered taxes is something I would be in favor of. It would need accountability... the people who propose it would need to be held accountable to deliver the savings they promise. Unfortunately, that will never happen. Politicians are like weathermen... they tell you whatever they think you want to hear and suffer no consequences when they are completely wrong.
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 Joe461
Two corrections...
2. It isn't "for the children." It is for the parents... as Linda_d pointed out, no one wants their schools messed with, even after their children graduate. It is about property values (and for some, prestige).
It's called sarcasm, the "for the children" mantra is a common battle cry according to the posters on the LI board.
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.
