Propaganda
A group of parents handed out flyers at Sunday’s Williston Park fair instructing people to vote no for the bond. The “facts” listed in the flyer are misleading and clearly state an opinion of a group of people. It prompted me to look up the definition of propaganda. Wikipedia defines
“Propaganda is a form of communication that is aimed at influencing the attitude of a community toward some cause or position. As opposed to impartially providing information, propaganda, in its most basic sense, presents information primarily to influence an audience. Propaganda often presents facts selectively (thus possibly lying by omission) to encourage a particular synthesis, or uses loaded messages to produce an emotional rather than rational response to the information presented. The desired result is a change of the attitude toward the subject in the target audience to further a political agenda.”
To answer some of the “facts” listed:
“No guaranteed tax decrease” No one ever guaranteed a tax decrease. The goal is to maintain a tax levy at or near 2.5% over a five year period. Closing schools will allow this to be achieved.
“Your house value will decrease due to the closing of three neighborhood schools” What evidence supports this claim? Mineola consistently has one of the lowest tax rates on Long Island. By controlling the tax levy it will remain that way. Aren’t low taxes attractive to perspective buyers? Moreover, this plan insures that we keep programs for children- wouldn’t that be attractive to perspective buyers?
“Your children will be out of school and you will still be paying off the bond”
The savings generated from closing three schools will clearly offset the debt. An independent finance committee projects the savings of 42 million AFTER the initial outlay of 6.7 million. In addition the revenue generated from rent will offset the debt of the bond. Currently we have interest in Meadow Drive that will generate at least half of the bond costs.
“Academic performance decreases in a larger school with larger class size.”
What evidence supports this claim? The converse isn’t necessarily true either. Have we witnessed higher academic performance with 3 schools less than 200 students? The amount of money we spend trying to service these buildings hinders our ability to provide services. If all of the students were in the same place we could increase services and still decrease cost.
“Cost per pupil will increase due to loss of enrollment”
I am not sure what this means? It implies that people will leave if the bond is passed. I don’t know what evidence supports that claim
This flyer reminds me of the old Syms slogan “An educated consumer is our best customer” There is plenty of information about this bond. Know the facts and vote accordingly.
Yes that’s a possibility but I did think of that. The benefit to Herricks may be in offsetting their tax while the benefit to Mineola would be in enhancing its academic reputation. Even if the money is a straight offset with the tax increase eating up the administrative cost reduction savings, and I’m not saying that’s the case, both school districts have something to gain in such a merger. Either way the taxpayers gain but reducing duplicative administrative functions that are pricing all of us and our children out of Long Island. The current plan before the voters puts the focus on the wrong costs. Instead of reducing instructional staff with direct contact with students I think it’s much more cost effective in reducing unnecessary administrative functions which, when possible, may be consolidated in such a merger.
At this point I can’t say it would be a good fit for either school district. Indeed, I don’t even know if Herricks would entertain it. But if both school district’s agreed to investigate the feasibility there would be state aid provided for that purpose. A feasibility study would answer those questions and then the respective boards of education could then decide whether to place a merger before the voters.
There may also be additional state incentives in the event that the school districts decide to go forward with a merger.
Besides the administrative cost reductions there might be additional value added in the form of non administrative staff excessing when the secondary school operations were merged. Moreover, in time additional savings could be obtained if elementary school buildings were found to be underutilized in the merged school district.
As I said in an earlier post the merger would also eliminate the artificial divisions in many of our communities such as Williston Park which would wholly contained in a merged Herricks-Mineola School District.
Engaging Herricks in the conversation costs us (or them) nothing. If they’re interested we should pursue it and see what benefits, if any, would result from such a merger.
When districts consolidate they get to share all of the commercial tax base, debt and average assessed home values. Since Herricks has sustainably less commercial property and the homes values are assessed greater, it would be to their benefit to merge with Mineola. I don’t think the advantage to Mineola is as great. Any gains in staff reduction would surely be lost by the increase in the tax rate.
School district consolidations will eventually happen due to the high cost of administering small school districts. It will happen through legislative fiat or by economic necessity. At some point there won’t be any more schools to close or teachers to fire.
Mr. McGrath,
Now that’s a truly revolutionary idea! Merging Mineola with our neighboring Herricks school district would save a lot of money by eliminating unnecessary redundancy at the administrative level. Consider this: When Dr. Licopoli was the superintendant, his total compensation including benefits and bonuses was $313,145 according to Newsday. Mineola had the 12th highest paid superintendant among the 124 districts on Long Island according to Newsday. If the two school districts had merged, we could have saved $3.13 Million over 10 years just by eliminating one position, all without closing a single school or firing a single teacher. No rooftop playground and no $6.7 Million bond necessary. That’s a plan worth pursuing! Can someone get the Finance Committee to investigate it? I know it’ll never happen, but we can dream!
Mr. Barnett,
As the mother of FOUR mixed race children, I certainly wasn’t intimating that at all.
Artie Barnett rendered speechless. Kudos to Mr. McGrath.
I stated in an email to the board one month ago that I believed the ugliness needed to end as it accomplishes nothing and simply casts a childish pall over the district for all to read. Constructive ideas have always been welcomed but the only way this issue will be resolved is either with one vote on October 26th or a second vote at a date to be determined.
It is with these facts in mind, that I respectfully request the absentee ballot form be prominently added to the home page with a printable format. If you go to the Herrick’s website and click on Community, the first drop down under that tab is the absentee ballot. It is easy to find and print and I believe the addition of this ballot to our home page will allow those unavailable to vote on October 26th (and, if necessary in the future) the ability to have their voice heard.
To quote John McGrath:
“This discussion begs the question of whether merging with Herricks would be a better alternative to any of the plans currently under consideration…
…The benefits of such a merge far outweigh any of the current plans being considered by our district in terms of cost reductions as well as the potential adverse academic and other impacts those plans may have overall on our district.”
Congratulations John, I AM NOW RENDERED SPEECHLESS
Eileen,
Sorry this is late but you gave me a lot of homework here.
Your first article concludes:
“Location within 800 feet, about 0.15 miles, of elementary schools is estimated to produce housing values from about 8% to 13% higher than houses located 800 feet to about two miles away, while houses located more than two miles from an elementary school have values about 10% less.”
The Willis Ave School is within 2 miles of every street in the district with the exception of the Roslyn Heights neighborhood (The furthest house on Peachtree Ln. being 2.8 miles, according to Google Maps).
So, excluding the approx. 71 houses within 800 feet of Meadow Dr. and 42 houses within 800 feet of Cross St. The impact is limited to a small section of Roslyn Heights, according to your reference.
————-
The second article you reference deals with the effects of small vs. large schools on the impoverished. While there may be some validity, it is really a socio-economic study of areas of extreme poverty.
———–
Your third article’s conclusion states:
“There is value in the middle school concept, but school transitions contribute to a loss
of academic achievement. Furthermore, children, many of whom have lives full of change and unpredictability, need more continuity. ”
The proposed configuration would do the following:
Child #1entering Pre-K and Child #2 is in 1st grade at the same school.
When child #1 enters 2nd grade he/she is in the same group of students including Child #2.
When child #1 enters 5th grade, child #2 is in 7th, again, the same group of children in the three grades at each school.
That my friend is the continuity that our children recognize. Their peers remain fairly constant. As opposed to entering a new school with many new faces from a split district.
———-
Your fourth article concludes:
“Duncombe’s (2002) study also cited evidence that small to moderately size elementary schools may optimally balance economies of size with the potential negative effects of large schools. Economy of size refers to the most efficient use of capital. Howley (2000) and Duncombe (2002) agree a small school size would be found between 200 and 500 students depending on grade span configuration.”
This concludes a small school is 200-500 students, about the same as the proposed configuration in Mineola….right?
—————
I find your fifth article a bit troubling. It seems to be focused on the effects of mixing race or ethnic boundaries. Is that the real issue here? I hope not.
Mr. Barnett, I was using Herricks as a comparator. I think it fits better than EW. However, it isn’t exact. It’s Hispanic population is much lower than ours and its Asian population is much higher. The students eligible for free lunch is also much lower in Herricks than in Mineola.
While it’s true that the student population of their high school is twice that of Mineola the student teacher ratio is approximately the same so I’m not sure why the total population matters. Once again the differences in academic performance is related to wealth and to the differences in the ethinc/wealth combinations of both school districts. I wouldn’t want to generalize too much as to the wealth of the various ethnic groups of both districts but I think it’s safe to say that the ethnic groups in Herricks are wealthier in Herricks than in Mineola. In my opinion this difference in wealth, as in school districts like Roslyn, East Williston and Jericho explain the differences in student performance when compared to Mineola better than any difference in the schools systems themselves.
The wealth comparison also, in my opinion, explains real estate choices in part as does the academic performance of students within a particular community. People choose homes based on size, convenience to transportation, racial and ethnic composition of the community and schools, etc…. I doubt that there is any question that if the schools stink the other factors won’t matter, people will choose to live elsewhere if they can afford it. Likewise, if the school district’s nearby offer neighborhood schools vs cluster schools that could also influence real estate choices, especially in areas where the cost differential in the home purchase price does not limit the buyer’s choice. In Mineola’s case that could affect real estate purchase decisions in all areas of our school district as every area of the district has sections served by Herricks and Mineola. Many of the homes in both school districts are similar if not identical in terms of size and construction. However, there is a difference in price and this difference in price is not limited to the Village of Mineola but encompasses the entire school district. I trust there is no dispute between us on this. If there is I’m sure it can be easily resolved.
This discussion begs the question of whether merging with Herricks would be a better alternative to any of the plans currently under consideration. Although there are differences in wealth, ethnicity, academic performance and taxes there are favorable comparisons as well. This is especially so in the area of reducing costs and providing real relief to taxpayers and enhancing the academic reputation of the Mineola School District. A cursory review of the potential cost reductions would include one school district’s entire central office staff which arguable could be absorbed by the other school district’s central office. Next assuming that the middle and high schools could be absorbed into one building each another 15 administrative positions could be eliminated. Of course the support staff would also be largely eliminated as the functions formerly performed by one central office, middle and high school is absorbed into the other. I estimate the cost savings of this type of change over the ten year period covered by the current plan to be over 60 million dollars (using Mineola administrators and support staff as the source of the funding savings) without closing an elementary school or excessing a teacher. Of course there may be additional savings in that regard as well assuming that some teachers from the Middle and High schools of the absorbed school district would need to be absorbed into the newly reconfigured middle and high schools thereby increasing the 60 million dollar figure over the ten year period.
Such a consolidation would resolve many of the community splits that currently plague our district. For instance Williston Park and a large part of Albertson would be united into one school district. Parts of Mineola served by Herricks would also be united. In addition to that benefit add the tax benefit to Herricks who would now obtain tax relief in the form of having the benefits of the Mineola commercial tax base as well as the overall tax relief from the significant reduction in administrative costs through the merge of both districts. That benefit would be applied to all residents of the new school district. Mineola’s academic reputation would be enhanced by such a merge as well resulting in a positive benefit with respect to real estate sales.
I’m also told that Herricks’ elementary schools are over crowded. This issue could be resolved by absorbing their excess into our own elementary schools. Also with the elimination of a middle school the opportunity to create a pre-k through 6 or 8 elementary school into the now empty middle school might help both districts reduce transitions and close excess capacity in the form of underutilized elementary schools.
The benefits of such a merge far outweigh any of the current plans being considered by our district in terms of cost reductions as well as the potential adverse academic and other impacts those plans may have overall on our district.
As for my voice I use it when I want and not because someone else would like me to.
1. [i] ” Third it is a much more affluent neighborhood…. They also have a much higher percentage of people with bachelors and graduates degrees …. The homes tend to be bigger, better maintained and have larger lots than the neighborhoods in our district.”[/i]
What do any of these points have to do with student performance?
I find East Williston a great comparison. You choose to attribute their success to population, parents degrees, home size and maintenance and claim it is outside of our district. In fact, it borders our district to the east the same as Herricks does to the west and the homes in those bordering areas are similar if not the same.
The fact it’s a cluster model with a configuration similar to the one Mineola has proposed trumps most of your arguments and your reasoning for discounting it makes no sense what so ever
Artie,
Most educational studies suggest that the more advanced a parents education the better their children tend to perform in school. Also parental wealth tends to be a factor in increased student performance. Although a small portion of Mineola and an even smaller portion of Albertson are part of EWSD. A much greater percentage of similar homes can be found east and west of Willis Ave.
Remember Artie this discussion is why homes in the same neighborhood have more value in one school district than another. When I made the statement about homes in EWSD having large lots, better maintenance and you could add more square footage it relates directly to home values.
I hope that clarified it for you.
That’s great John. You failed to point out that Herrick’s student enrollment is over 4,000 students. (more than twice our High School) Are you suggesting that’s a better comparator? You think 671 is a significant number? It’s only 50 kids per grade.
Thank you for pointing out:
“Using Albertson as a comparator the homes in the EW side of Albertson consistently sell for more money than do those on the Mineola side. Likewise for the homes in Roslyn Heights that are on the Roslyn side vs those on the Mineola side.”
This was the point I was making. Your suggestion that the better performance is due to wealth may have some merit, but certainly you cannot deny the fact that the cluster of K-4, 5-7 and 8-12 is also a factor. It is a program in our backyard. Children from all over the district travel to the same schools. In East Williston the longest distance is 5.1 miles to North Side School from the furthest street in the district. In Mineola it’s 3.1 miles from the furthest house to Jackson or Willis Ave. Schools.
There’s another factor for you. If you want to rely on wealth as the determining factor in educational success and ignore the schools configuration, be my guest. We all know it’s more than that.
Glad to see you got your voice back John, bring it to the next meeting.
I haven’t checked our internal numbers but as of 2009 Mineola’s enrollment was listed by State Ed as 2587 and East Williston’s was listed as 1799. Difference is 786. That’s equal to the number of students in our high school. Seems like a significant difference to me. Even the numbers quoted on this blog indicate a difference of 671 students. Also a significant number of students.
Also while home sales may not directly have anything to do with student performance wealth is certainly an indicator of actual better student performance as opposed to potential performance which, of course, everyone has. Clearly, East Williston is wealthier than Mineola. Using Albertson as a comparator the homes in the EW side of Albertson consistently sell for more money than do those on the Mineola side. Likewise for the homes in Roslyn Heights that are on the Roslyn side vs those on the Mineola side.
A comparison between the East Williston and Mineola School District, in the context of student performance, using EW’s cluster system vs. Mineola’s neighborhood elementary school system is flawed because it fails to account for other factors. Wealth is one of those factors. Notwithstanding the small piece of Mineola and Albertson in the EWSD the vast number of students attending school there are from wealthy families (including the ones from Albertson) so a direct comparison such as the one Mr. Barnett makes is unsupported without adjusting the results for these other factors.
Jim,
[i]“First it is a much smaller district(student population).” [/i]
East Williston Enrollment: 1,813
Mineola: 2,484
I wouldn’t call it[b] MUCH[/b] smaller.
[i]” Second the SD does not incorporate neighborhoods that are in our school district.”[/i]
The Village of Mineola north of Jericho and east of Roslyn Rd. is in the East Williston School District as are the homes in Albertson and east of the LIRR.”
[i] ” Third it is a much more affluent neighborhood…. They also have a much higher percentage of people with bachelors and graduates degrees …. The homes tend to be bigger, better maintained and have larger lots than the neighborhoods in our district.”[/i]
What do any of these points have to do with student performance?
I find East Williston a great comparison. You choose to attribute their success to population, parents degrees, home size and maintenance and claim it is outside of our district. In fact, it borders our district to the east the same as Herricks does to the west and the homes in those bordering areas are similar if not the same.
The fact it’s a cluster model with a configuration similar to the one Mineola has proposed trumps most of your arguments and your reasoning for discounting it makes no sense what so ever.
Artie- Comparing East Williston SD and Mineola is like comparing apples and oranges. First it is a much smaller district(student population). Second the SD does not incorporate neighborhoods that are in our school district. Third it is a much more affluent neighborhood. The median income in East Williston is 30-50 thousand dollars more than any of the neighborhoods in our school district .They also have a much higher percentage of people with bachelors and graduates degrees . The homes tend to be bigger, better maintained and have larger lots than the neighborhoods in our district.
Again I compared us to Herricks becuase it shares 3 of the 4 neighbrhoods in our school district. Why is it that home prices in the SAME neighborhood can vary so much? Answer school performance. If this experiment fails we will all lose much more in home values than we gain in tax savings.
The full cluster model is not being propsed for educactional purposes it is for purely financial reasons. Not to decrease taxes but to keep the tax levy at 2.5%.
To keep the levy at say 5% would cost the average tax payer about $15-20 a month. If your home loses 10% of it’s value it, on a $400,000 home it would take you 166 years for your tax savings to meet that $40,000 loss.
I’m sorry Jim, I missed this:
“Artie- I am not sure what school district you are referring to but Herricks actually serves 3 of the 4 neighborhoods in our district. It is not a full cluster district.”
I was referring to East Williston School District (The only one seperated from Mineola by Jericho Tpke.)
Why is it houses sell so much higher in EWSD?
Are the children smarter?
Are the teachers better?
Certainly the EWSD can show it out performs most districts in the state and that becomes a great selling point for a home seller. But why?
It’s a cluster school district, K-4, 5-7, 8-12 much like our proposal.
The PSAT, SAT and State exam figures are far better than ours.
But again….WHY?
I will not say the children are superior or the teachers.
Certainly the grade configuration has not hurt them.
Is a student from Sheridan Blvd, Mineola south of Jericho Tpke. less capable than one from north of Jericho Tpke.?
How about Devon Rd. Albertson compared to Argyle Rd. Albertson?
Your call Jim. Is it the children are superior, the teachers are superior or the configuration is superior?
Pat, I agree once again. However, the people who will vote yes or no are not only parents. In fact the majority have no children in the school district. While I truly believe the education and well being of the community’s children is the top priority, I also need to consider the fiscal factors. To date, nobody has shown any evidence of negative impact on our children. They’ve certainly tried to allege it, they just can’t prove it. That’s because it doesn’t exist.
Since I cannot find a educational reason to not support this, I next look to the fiscal reasons. I believe the 5th grade 8th grade concern is baseless, thus not worth nearly $20 million in lost savings. Likewise the default plan, while cheapest, is doomed to be redesigned in the future, much like the Cross St closing years ago. The result will be construction bonds at higher interest rates and principle due to inflation of construction costs.
I may have been the first person up at the microphone denouncing the idea of a bond. After that I did a lot of research, asked a lot of questions and did my due diligence in order to reach my current position. Had I found one viable negative impact on our kids, I would be fighting this plan. If I found it was fiscally dangerous, I would be fighting it.
The CCC did a great job in gathering the community feelings and likely put forth a plan most likely to pass. That doesn’t necessarily make it the best plan, just the safest. Rest assured, every plan will raise concerns, that’s natural. The easiest thing to do when faced with the dilemmas of change, is to just say no. The hard part is looking past some of your concerns and taking in the entire situation. Only then can you make an objective decision instead of an emotional one.
What we don’t need is misinformation being spread to cloud the judgment of the people who will ultimately decide how this district ends up. Concerns are not facts, they’re emotions. But since the facts do not support those who would defeat this plan, they have resorted to an emotion based campaign. If successful, they will have only themselves to blame when the majority of the voting community begins failing budgets they can no longer afford on their fixed incomes. But, they will point the blame somewhere else, likely at the very people who are trying to preserve our school’s programs.
But, welcome to the choir Pat….. and sorry for the preaching.
Artie , you are preaching to the choir. Notice , I never mentioned meeting standards in education , or anything of that nature. However , I do not believe a bond that does not have people feeling good about where and when their children go to school will pass. Like we have been told it’s no sweat , the voters will bring the answer home. I think the CCC tried their best to address all the issues involving school reconfiguration so that we can move forward already. Our schools have been underutilized long enough. We know change is coming with or without a bond , and the bottom line is not going to sit well with everyone. But , I have to think a bond which includes the concerns of the community may have a better shot of passing. Then again , one never knows.
Pat, You said: “Being fiscally responsible is the force driving us to do so , but it is too difficult for most of us to only consider monetary value.”
I couldn’t agree with you more. The problem is, all the perceived negatives of different grade configurations (5th grade middle, 8th grade High School) have no clinical backing. It’s a dilemma going on all over the country for years. To date, there is nothing that shows one is better than the other.
An excerpt from The Clearinghouse on Early Education and Parenting (CEEP)
“Many educators and communities are searching for evidence on the best way to provide a high-quality education for their children and to make the best use of their education funds. One area that is of perennial interest is how to best configure the grades in local schools. Public education in the United States provides for kindergarten through grade 12 in a variety of grade arrangements, from the K-12 school to separate schools for single grades. Unfortunately, as Paglin and Fager (1997) point out: “Research has not provided definitive answers to the myriad possible questions about grade span, but the questions have never gone away. They are questions which arise whenever school reform, increasing or declining enrollment, or financial considerations bring about a reorganization of existing schools, the building of new schools, or consolidation of districts”. Much of the research available has been done on rural or middle schools. The research on the “best” grade configuration is inconclusive. At best, it indicates factors to be considered in deciding on a school’s grade span or a community’s configuration of grades within its elementary and secondary school system.”
Dear Mr. Barnett,
I am referencing an article that might shed some light about the correlation between house values and neighborhood schools. I believe neighborhood schools is essential to house values. This is why I bought in the District. Additionally, appraisers factor in distance to schools in deciding how much your home is worh. Article: Does Close Count? School Proximity, School Quality, and Residential Property Values
Article from:
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics
Article date:
April 1, 2007
Please also read for your enjoyment the following studies which support small schools and the direct effects on student performance:
” The interaction of School Size and Socio-Economic Statue in student Performance by trevor Cobbold, October 2006:
The J. McDonald Williams Insitute research Briefs”Grade -Span Configurations: What should we do with the Children? by Angela Saleh, January 2006
Elementary School Grade Span Configuration: New Evidence on Student Achievement, Achievement Equity and Cost Efficiency by Kathy Gregg
I found most interesting the study done on a neighborhood in Shaker Heights by two economists, William T. Bogart and Brian A. Cromwell “How much is a Neigborhood Worth?” They concluded after a very involved study, that disrupting neighborhood schools reduces house values by 9.9%.
I think from a purely economic standpoint that having a neighborhood school is essential , for if no other purpose, to maintain property values.
The CCC considered the many facets of the communities concerns. The outcome addressed both practical and emotional interests of our residents. While this is not an all business approach neither is parenting or quality of life issues. I believe this is why the CCC took the approach they did. Closing schools in Mineola to be fiscally responsible is something most of us agree on. Being fiscally responsible is the force driving us to do so , but it is too difficult for most of us to only consider monetary value.
“Your children will be out of school and you will still be paying off the bond”
Having not seen the flyer passed around at the Williston Street Fair I am assuming this quote was part of it. I’m curious how this point was received by the thousands of retired, fixed income residents who continue to support our district’s budgets and bonds.
To say that having to pay for a bond is wrong, once your children have graduated is a slap in the face of all our seniors who have done just that.
“Academic performance decreases in a larger school with larger class size.”
Another meaningless point. The options all took into account a maximum class size of, I believe 22 or 24. This flyer makes it sound like classes will be 30 or 40 to 1.
“Your house value will decrease due to the closing of three neighborhood schools”
“Cost per pupil will increase due to loss of enrollment”
Please show me anything to prove these points …ANYTHING!
To top it off we have people unhappy with the use of the word propaganda. Would you all prefer “Fearmongering” or is it time to cut to the chase and just call it what it is: LIES.
“The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is.” W. Churchill
Dr. Nagler I was at the board meeting before the board voted on which bond to present where you said you would campaign for whatever decision the board made. But you also recommended to the board to put the cluster bond 1st. I disagreed with you at the time and I still do.
However I have listened/read many of the facts you provided. Unfortunely the presentation Mrs. Goffman gave to the board/community on clustering was that there was no real information on it. That is why I can’t unerstand why this was the 1st bond proposed. By passing this bond I feel we as a community are taking a big chance with the educational future of our children for purely financial reasons.
I feel that if this educational “experiment” doesn’t work out the 34 year cycle of closing will become a 36 or 40 year cycle. By presenting a bond vote that is what CCC recommended and surveys have supported I feel that we would have a much better chance of creating a fiscially responsible school system that we could live with in the future. I know the surveys have been downplayed because of small percentage of responses, but I doubt they are much lower than the voter turnout for board of education election or even a budget vote. Again they are the only concrete evidence of the community sentiment, why were they ignored?
I believe that a vote for the North/South option with improvements on Hampton Ave school would give us the closest thing to a satisfactory outcome as we can expect when we are closing schools. While it doesn’t save as much money as the full cluster I feel it balances educational needs, community sentiment and financial savings. At first I felt that closing Willis would be foolish and I was for the North/South option with Willis Ave as the South school. I made this decision based purley on the facilities report that showed that Willis is a more modern/larger facility for classroom purposes. But after reading the opinions of many parents in the community and remembering what Dr. Nagler said about needing compromise, I now feel Hampton would be a better choice. The rooftop playground, lack of green space, lack of parking and general community desire were just some of the reasons I came to this decision. I think this bond would have received the most support as it more closely reflected the community sentiment.
Artie- I am not sure what school district you are referring to but Herricks actually serves 3 of the 4 neighborhoods in our district. It is not a full cluster district.
Edwin, 13-14 year olds are in 8th grade. As for preparing them to deal with MHS students. Are you suggesting our schools are filled with thugs and criminals? I think you need to go to more High School events and see the character of our students…you’d be proud, not scared.
Jim, two houses, same construction, same block. One lists for $415K, the other, $590K. The difference is about 150 yards across Jericho Tpke. The $590K home is in a school district with a fifth grade Middle School and eighth grade High School.
Please note:
- A majority of the Board of Education passed a vote to put forth a bond and instructed me to educate and inform the public about the bond
- When something is published that misquotes me and has incorrect information I have every right to correct it
- I do not know who published the flyer; they omitted their names
- I put my name to everything I say and back it up with facts
- I publish all those facts on this website for people to see how decisions and recommendations are made
- I have consistently stated that I expect many people to vote against this bond because it is not the configuration they favor. That is why is up for a vote.
- While voters do not need to give reasons; it would be a lot simpler just to say “I don’t want my school to close” rather than fabricate or embellish things
Dr. Nagler, as parents and residents of the Mineola school district, we are curious to know if the slogan you mentioned on this Mineola website(which is paid by taxpayers) is a paid advertisement. Did the district get any revenue for it?
The community used the method they chose to express their opposition against the reconfiguration. The point is more should have been done to present a better plan with the students in mind first, not financial savings. Many agree that they would have been willing to support a bond that kept the least change.
I do agree that our children will be psychologically and socially affected. We would now have to prepare our 12-13 year olds to deal with 17-18 year olds in the same building.
Was this the best that could have been done? Or were the deadlines too much to deal with?
With all due respect to all parties, propaganda is a strong word. The Oxford English Dictionary definition: “The systematic dissemination of information, esp. in a biased or misleading way, in order to promote a political cause or point of view. Also: information disseminated in this way; the means or media by which such ideas are disseminated.”
This was not a systematic dissemination of information. There was no media. Our neighbors distributed flyers at a street fair. They behaved within their civil rights, whether or not one agrees with their analysis. If we can’t disagree, we are in big trouble.
The CCC recommendation continues to seem the soundest compromise.
Thank you so much for finally giving credit to Wikipedia, the infamous and unreliable free encyclopedia that anyone with a slight knowledge of the internet can edit. This would definitely bring much relief to students who are academically encouraged by their teachers not to use its useless site. Also the use of the word “PROPAGANDA” would bring a smile to the directors of the History Channel as it evokes Soviet era Politburo brainwashing, well oiled lie spreading machines that glorified their hollow agendas to the masses. I hardly feel that a group of parents voicing their concern in a democratic society would qualify as propaganda, but rather your belittling of the opinions of a rightfully concerned community might actually qualify as one.
I must say though, that I do agree with you on one thing: know the facts and vote accordingly.
As a parent who is opposed to the current configuration option I do agree with some of the points on the flyer as you reported them (I did not see the actual flyer).
I do believe that home values will suffer if the full cluster model is adopted. Why move from the city to our area when your child will be as anonymous in our schools as they are in city schools and your property taxes will increase 5-6 times what they are in the city?
Also if this educational “experiment” fails and our test scores do decline it will certainly have a negative effect on home values. Why do similiar houses in Herricks school district which are just blocks away sell for 10-30% more? It’s because of their district scores.
I know for myself if the district had the proposed cluster model in place when I bought my home I would have looked elsewhere.
Larger class sizes will cause a decrease in educational performance. I became very familiar with this topic when the my youngest child was entering 1st grade. At that time there were 27 children that the district planned on having in 1 class. Although the district does have “guildlines” that call for a no more than 22 children per class in grade 1 the guidline was not going to be followed. This was during a previous administration. In my research at that time I found several studies (Tennesse’s Project Star, Wisconsin’s SAGE and the US Dept of Education to name a few) which showed that small class sizes increased student performance. It follows that conversely larger classes would decrease performance. I also believe it will be much easier for the district to increase class sizes in the cluster model as they will have all students per grade in one school.
No Gaurenteed tax decrease- I agree that I have never heard anyone in the administration or from the board make these statements. But what would the tax levy be if we chose a different option? What would that difference mean to the average taxpayer? I think these may be more important facts to release since people may be surprised to find that we could keep more schools open for the price of a cup of coffee or two from Starbucks a week(per taxpayer).
There have been two district wide surveys which said that the majority of respondents were against a full cluster model and having 5th grade and 8th grade move up. This option also ignores the recommendation of the CCC which was a group of community representatives formed to help us come up with a reconfiguration model. Why was this the 1st bond model proposed when it clearly ignores the only tangible evidence of the community sentiment?
Why was this the option you (Dr. Nagler) recommended to the board be the first presented for a bond vote? You said that whatever option the board decided on you would campain for (it just so happens it was the option you came up with).
I looked up propaganda on dictionary.com and this was the definition:
“information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation, etc.”
So according to that definition the administration is spreading propaganda to support it’s own proposal.