(From Kathy Ayers)
I just set-up a gmail account for all community members to deposit their NA-FC school budget solution ideas. While "I don't want my school closed because..." is valid, it is not a solution.
Our School Board members need to know what all the great minds of New Albany and Floyd County can offer to turn this boat around! Please send your ideas, no matter how small or how large or how obscure to:
NAFCrecommendations@gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
With exception of extracurricular activities, cut all bus routes for the year. Taking those for granted, among other things, is what makes people think they can just live wherever and however with no repercussions. It would save the schools and create an extremely valuable learning opportunity.
As an addendum, I would add that consideration should be given to those whose income levels preclude or make difficult private vehicle ownership.
They already pay taxes for infrastructure that is of no use to them and encourages schools and jobs to move farther away from where they are already located. Ironically, some of the same officials who've advocated for less of their money to go toward public schools also advocate for more of it to go toward increased useless infrastructure.
The only equitable thing to do in return is provide them with transportation commensurate to that infrastructure investment and that reflects the loss of investment in public schools.
I understand where you coming from, but there were buses long before there was urban sprawl.
Yep, a whole heck of a lot fewer of them in terms of school buses. But in those days, city school dollars weren't subsidizing them. People in the city used to ride city buses to school as well, so that one transportation system provided access to more people.
We spend an exorbitant amount of money on school transportation as a result of people choosing to move away from preexisting schools and the school being willing to provide seemingly infinite transportation services. Those dollars could be spent on educational programming.
As a result of not more strenuously limiting transportation offerings, the school corporation has subsidized sprawl and the demise of inner city neighborhoods as much as anyone.
It's a major policy decision for the entire county whether they realize it or admit to it or not. School corporation actions have a tremendous impact on land use and I'd be willing to bet they'd deny responsibility for any of it.
I would add that we should be having a conversation about an additional tax levy to provide transportation to those who want it based on their own choices rather than as a mechanism to keep long-standing schools open.
This again is an instance in which, if the state is going to insist on intervening, they could so in a way that would create more sustainable systems. Limit school transportation funding and all that outward "palace" building they complain about becomes much less attractive.
You are correct, the city schools didn't pay for the school buses for the farmer's kids. So do we go back to that scenario? Break up all consolidations? A whole lot of smaller school districts? Each one paying their own way with funds only from their district?
Totally off the wall:
Yesterday I read that an economist estimates people would loose five pounds per year if soda costs an additional 18%. Is it within the county's authority to tax soda (and/or other junk food) to support education?
IAH,
Making districts smaller would be one possibility. The Daniels state encourages the exact opposite, of course, but I've been trying to track down numbers relevant to our particular local situation. Very early perusal, and I stress that, seems to indicate that it might help city schools in New Albany.
The other thing I think we could do, as mentioned, is to just stop actively subsidizing outward growth and therefore curb costs and increased money transfer to outlying areas.
Perhaps a school could provide transportation within a designated radius but no further. Live within the radius, get a ride. Live outside it, find your own way. I'm sure some residents would be upset at losing transportation services, but nowhere near as upset as losing an entire school. Unfortunately, the administration's budget plan does the exact opposite: closes schools and requires people to travel farther.
Another thing would be to stop increasing the size of individual schools or building new ones until all preexisting school buildings are full. We've very often closed existing schools, which costs us a lot of money both in preexisting investment and opportunity costs, only to incur the expense of expanding one somewhere else, a double whammy. Recently, we built an entirely new middle school while existing middle schools had quite a bit of room available.
As I mentioned, the school corporation has been extremely reactionary with their building and transportation policy. One of two things tend to happen as a result: either costs go way up or they shutdown services in one place to provide them in another.
If the current plan is approved, it will mean that at least five valley schools will have been closed in my lifetime even though countywide population has increased during that time. That's pretty nuts.
I believe that you know that I don't disagree with you in general--or with many of your specifics.
Somebody needs to extend the reach of any discussion. You do a good job of that. I was just pulling back the other way a bit. And you responded. Just like I did initially to your "do away with all buses..."
Gotta go.
I have actually heard two different stories of people (in walkable scool districts) that are going to have to figure out personal transportation as they either don't own a vehicle or their household only has one which dad uses for work. What happens when the school calls with a sick child?
There were buses before sprawl, but yes, there were fewer because there were so many walkable, neighborhood schools. I have figures from Fred McWhorter that it's roughly $30,000/yr. in expenses (maintenance, gas, driver salary, insurance) to run a bus. They do, however, buy their gas in bulk at a discount. Just FYI.
Dan - aren't sodas and some snack foods already taxed? If not, I know there has been talk of it.
Here is an article published last August in the New England Journal of Medicine regarding taxation of sodas.
http://www.yaleruddcenter.org/resources/upload/docs/what/industry/SodaTaxNEJMApr09.pdf
I like how the article begins by quoting none other than Adam Smith's 1776 book The Wealth of Nations, the original argument for free markets and capitalism, where it states that it's entirely appropriate for nations to tax sugar.
Post a Comment