BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics

Subject: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 29 Oct 06 - 09:07 PM

The East Ramapo Central School District in Rockland County,NY is a public school district that is very unique. Over 70 per cent of the school children in the district attend private & parochial schools. The area that the district encompasses is Monsey, Wesley Hills, Spring Valley, Pomona, and parts of Haverstraw. It has one of the highest concentration of Orthodox & Hasidic Jews in the nation. These families tend to have many children, with 10 to 15 children per family being the norm rather than the exception. All these numerous children attend Yeshivas rather that public school.

The public schools are financed by a property tax. The average homeowner, such as myself, with a one family high-ranch house pays about $6,000 a year in property taxes, with about $3,500 of that going towards the public schools. Everyone is required to pay the school tax regardless of whether their children attend the public schools or the private yeshivas. Therefore, the parents who send their children to yeshiva have to pay this, in addition to the tuition charged by the yeshivas which ranges from $15,000 to $20,000 per child, per year.

Because of "separation of Church & State" mandated by the U.S. constitution none of the tax dollars can be used towards deferring the costs of private school. Yes, certains costs such as school bus transportation, remedial tutors for special children, and certain text books can be paid for out of tax dollars but bye and large, the separation of Church & State disallows anything else.

The School Board, which governs the district is made up of 9 trustees who are elected by the residents. The terms of these trustees vary from one to two to three years and are overlapping, so that only 3 positions are up for election each year. In previous years the board was made up entirely of members who's children attended the public schools. Even though the amount of children attending public schools has declined markedly with a corresponding rise in yeshiva attendance the public school taxes continued to rise disproportinally, with the private school parents paying the lion's share. What you had here was a clear case of "taxation without representation".

All this changed a few years ago when a Hasidic man by the name of Kalman Webber formed the Southeast Taxpayers Association. For the past 7 years Mr.Webber ran Orthodox Jewish candidates for every vacant position on the school board through very well orchestrated and organized grass root campaigns. Now, there are 6 members of the board who send their children to yeshivas and only 3 remaining members who's kids attend public school. Those 3 remain only because Mr. Webber, who now has a clear majority, has chosen not to run candidates against them.

Contrary to the fears of the public school population, the new school board has re-affirmed their commitment to provide a quality education to ALL school children in the district. In the short time since they have taken over they have carried through on that commitment by improving and increasing services to the public schools while at the same time, reducing the rate of tax increases. This year alone, while the all the other school districts in the county have to deal with whopping 50% increases in their tax rates, East Ramapo's increase will be less than 1%. How have they done that ? By eliminating waste and increasing efficiency; not by diminishing educational services.

And yet, despite all this positive accomplishment, you have small minded people here in East Ramapo crying foul. They would like to change the law to say that only people who send their children to public school should be allowed to govern on the school board and that those who send their children to parochial schools should be excluded. Yes, because the members of this school board look different and dress differently than previous ones, they hae been subjected to verbal abuse and religious slurs & invectives during school board meetings that are attended by the public. Even the Rockland Journal News has editorialized against this board as being elected by a bloc vote and not being representative of the general public school population.

Two recent issues have brought the situation to a boiling point. The first was the hiring of Israel Bier, a Hasidic man and former school board member, as treasurer of the district with a salary of $25,000 a year. The duties of treasurer were formerly handled by the district's business manager as part of his job. Mr. Bier happens to be an expert on education law with expertise in obtaining governmental grants. The board felt that this was a good investment and pointed out that in almost all other school districts in the state, the positions of Business Manager and Treasurer are held by separate individuals.

The second and much more volatile issue involves the sale of real estate. The school board owns a rather large parcel of vacant land in Wesley Hills adjacent to the Lime Kiln School. This land was acquired many years ago with the intention of building another school when it was thought that the public school enrollment would increase.
However, the changing demographics of the area has now brought about a
decrease rather than an increase in public school attendance. The board wants to sell off this surplus land and a developer from Brooklyn has offerd a bid of $7.5 Million dollars for it. Not only can the school board use this money for extra services as well as tax relief, but the developer plans to erect 40 houses on this land which would increase the tax base therby generating additional revenue. The opponents of this school board suddenly became enviromentalists and are campaining to keep this land as open "green space". The Town of Ramapo and Village of Wesley Hills have offered to buy it as park land but can only pay $3.5 million. Those who voted this school board into office have said that the East Ramapo School Board should not be in the business of preserving open space and have threatened to take legal action if the board does not accept the developer's offer of $7.5 million.

Every day there are letters in the Journal News about this issue, both pro and con and the rehtoric is being ratcheheted up to the point where they contain anti-semitic diatribe. It is a very unhealthy situation in the making.

I have rambled on long enough. It is now time to hear what you all have to say about this.

                                                 SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Big Mick
Date: 29 Oct 06 - 09:26 PM

This one, based on the information you have given, seems fairly clear cut. If one is forced to pay the taxes to support the institution, then they have the right to run for the board. If the school district were limited to only people with children in the school, that would seem to be a violation of the taxation piece. Also, it would preclude older taxpayers, no matter the community, from running for school board. Also young folks with no children.

This one is easy.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 29 Oct 06 - 10:54 PM

Hi Mick,
          Unfortunately the editor of the Journal News plus many public school parents do not see it this way. They single out this board for public scrutiny under a microscope and do not do so with any of the other 5 boards in the county.

                                                 SOL

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Oct 06 - 11:01 PM

Even the Rockland Journal News has editorialized against this board as being elected by a bloc vote and not being representative of the general public school population.

And this may very well be the case. I'd like to hear what the other side has to say before coming to any conclusion.

I'd also like to see assertions & opinions above backed up & documented with facts.

If the school district shouldn't be in the business of preserving open space why should it be in the business of promoting housing developments and enriching real estate developers?

I've willingly paid school taxes my entire life without having kids in school. That's called supporting public education, & its every citizen's duty.

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Oct 06 - 11:10 PM

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 29 Oct 06 - 11:22 PM

Greg,
       If you Google East Ramapo School Bord you will get "Journal News" articles giving the other side of the story in great detail.

If the mandate given by the electorate to the school board is to run the school system in the most efficient and cost effective way possible then it would be incumbent upon them to accept the higher bid of $7.5 million from the developer and they should not be in the business of preserving open space.

                                                 SOL

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: GUEST,CrazyEddie
Date: 30 Oct 06 - 08:28 AM

"If one is forced to pay the taxes to support the institution, then they have the right to run for the board."

Wasn't there some unpleasantness about this sort of thing in the past?

I seem to remember the slogan "No taxation without representation"

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Greg F.
Date: 30 Oct 06 - 08:33 AM

Since newspaper coverage is often incomplete, I'd like to hear from some other parties on this- the Teachers Union, for instance, or the PTA or the parents of some of the public school children.

To my admittedly uninformed way of thinking, there's a great deal more operating here than simple "anti-semitism". Think of the examples of Rajneeshis taking over Antelope and "christian"[sic] fundamentalists taking over school boards elsewhere to purge science from the curriculum.

Here, a group, the "Southeast Taxpayers Association" formed purely for economic self-interest ( "they aren't calling themselves the Southeast Education Association" now are they? )with no direct interest in the schools they are operating, since their children do not attend them- has taken over the board in an orchestrated coup & is taking the board in directions that the locals don't agree with.

A blind man could see this is guarenteed to piss people off.

Some of the assertions I'd like to see documented include: that taxes were cut By eliminating waste and increasing efficiency, not by diminishing educational services;, that The opponents of this school board suddenly became enviromentalists; just what all this positive accomplishment is- in terms of education, not economics; and the implication that the parents sending their children to Yeshivas are being victimized by having to support public education. Among others.

The primary mandate to the Public School Board should be to provide the best possible education to the students in the schools.

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Big Mick
Date: 30 Oct 06 - 08:36 AM

Exactly right. I don't give a hoot what the local newsrag says. If you don't want folks that don't send their kids to the school on the board, find a way to refund the taxes they pay to support it. I am sure they would be happy to go away then. Otherwise, you don't get to call the shots.

The law is set up to make sure the education system remains funded and all kids get the chance to go to a school which meets certain standards. In order to accomplish this, all citizens, whether they send their children to private schools or not,are required to pay some form of taxes to support the school. The consequence of this is that they enjoy the same rights with regard to how that money is spent as anyone else. That includes the right to run for the offices. I would tell the windbags to forget the rhetoric and put their money where there mouth is. Test it in court, but they will lose, and waste the money they spent on the suit.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Big Mick
Date: 30 Oct 06 - 08:44 AM

Greg, we cross posted.

Other than some weak minded bozo's, I haven't heard anyone make the case this is about anti semitism. That might exist, but the case is about a basic principle. Does the right exist to deny someone representation, or the right to run for office, and still charge them the taxes? The answer is very simple. No. No taxation without representation was the cornerstone of the American Revolution. The option these folks have is to try and carry their case to the electorate. All to often in our democratic republic, we want the judiciary to do the hard work. It won't work. The answer is if one is not happy with the board, they must organize politically. If they are unsuccessful, then they don't represent a viewpoint that they community supports. Just because they are the loudest, or have the support of the local editorial board, does not mean they can abrogate certain basic rights in our society.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: wysiwyg
Date: 30 Oct 06 - 09:04 AM

School politics and school finance can be an unmitigated mess of upset and umbrage. One of the exacerbating factors can be that school finance is usually a complicated and illogical structure, with income sources' timetables not running parallel to the chool budgeting year-- in the district in which I was most heavily involved, ninety percent of the income for each coming budget cycle was unknown until the school year was well underway, due to the state budgeting timetable. It was not unusual to have to lay off-- for legal purposes fulfilling contractual obligations-- a hefty percentage of the teachers each year because at the time of the layoff deadline, the state allocation had not yet been determined and promised which would fund that portion of the staff for the coming year. So each year the most of newer teachers would be RIFfed (Reduction in Force) and most of these promptly rehired as soon as ther stae figures were released. But then the "primised" bucks seldom lived up to the amount promised, so the rehiring was always a nervous time for the schools-- had they rehired enough, but not too many? (Tenure doesn't protect you from getting RIFfed, you see.)

A lot of fear gets generated by taxing situations like schools operate within, and that fear is largely unarticulated and unexamined. People get, to put it simply, nuts!

And when people get scared, prejudices rise to the top so fast that good-hearted people miss their own most obvious illogicalities. Anti-Semitism (Let's "Blame the Jews," not the real power base) is one of the easiest ingrained prejudices to stir up, and the situation you describe has all the classic signs.

Alliance with folks who do understand and can explain school finance is the shortest route to defusing the upsets you describe. Allowing people to be defensively occupied on the presently apparent "issues" will only fuel the fire. If you want to put the fire out, seek allies who are trusted by the voters, and encourage them to speak to the "issues" while also helping folks understand the financial patchwork quilt that keeps their schools open. Such allies can be found in the most unexpected places, if that's done quietly behind the scenes, one on one.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Greg F.
Date: 30 Oct 06 - 09:19 AM

I don't think you meant to call the Rabbi a weak-minded bozo, did you Mick?

...because the members of this school board look different and dress differently than previous ones, they hae been subjected to verbal abuse and religious slurs... they contain anti-semitic diatribe

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Big Mick
Date: 30 Oct 06 - 09:26 AM

Greg, I think it is obvious that I was speaking of those that spawned the anti semitic diatribe. Sol just reported on it.

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 30 Oct 06 - 12:14 PM

There are 2 other school boards in the nation that are controlled by Orthodox Jews who do not send their kids to public school. One is in the 5 towns of Nassau County (Lawrence, Long Island, to be exact). The other is in Lakewood, New Jersey.

                                                SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: pdq
Date: 30 Oct 06 - 12:34 PM

California has been trying to deal with the voucher issue for almost 35 years. Here is the best article I could find. Yep, race religion and politics.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Summary~
California offers intradistrict open enrollment, allowing students to enroll in a public school of choice within their district. With permission from the school board and principal, a high school student may enroll in college courses for high school and postsecondary credit. Low-income children can attend a school of choice with the help of tuition scholarships provided by several private scholarship foundations.

Background~
In the early 1970s, the U.S. Office of Economic Opportunity implemented a voucher program in Alum Rock, California. Designed by Harvard University professor Christopher Jencks, the program would have given students in Alum Rock's predominately low-income, minority schools a voucher to attend any participating public or private school. To participate, schools would have had to take the voucher as full funding and provide parents with information about the school's academic performance and programs. Because of fierce opposition by the teachers unions, the program was reduced to a program of limited public school choice and eventually abandoned.

In 1992, then-Governor Pete Wilson, a Republican, signed Senate Bill 1448, the Charter School Act. The law was amended in 1998, 1999, 2002, and 2003. As it stands, the act permits the establishment of 650 charter schools and raises the cap by 100 schools for each subsequent academic year. Local school boards, county boards of education and the California State Board of Education may authorize a charter. Charter schools receive 100 percent of the public schools' per-pupil funding. Teachers in charter schools must be certified.

Under a pair of bills passed in 1993--Assembly Bill 1114 and A.B. 19--parents have the right to transfer their children to other public schools within the district and outside of the district, subject to limitations of space or racial balance policies. Interdistrict transfers are limited to districts that elect to participate.

Publicly funded private school choice became a major political issue in 1993 when Proposition 174 was placed on the ballot. This proposition would have amended the state constitution to provide vouchers for families to enroll their children in public, private, or parochial schools. The initiative faced stiff opposition from the California Teachers Association, which spent $12.4 million in a successful effort to defeat it.

During the 1999 legislative session, S.B. 882 was introduced to provide vouchers to students in poorly performing schools. Another bill, Assembly Constitutional Amendment 20, would have allowed students to receive vouchers for private school tuition. Both bills died in committee.

In 2000, San Juan Capistrano District Administrator Margaret LaRoe sought the authority to turn the entire district into a charter school district. LaRoe argued that independence from state regulations would enable districts to use their funds in the way that
best meets their needs and would allow superintendents and school boards to focus on monitoring and supporting charter schools. The Capistrano proposal received support from an unusual alliance that included Republican State Senator Bill Morrow and the California Teachers Association, which supported the effort because it guaranteed that the district would remain unionized. Nevertheless, legislation to implement the proposal died in committee.

In 2000, Silicon Valley venture capitalist Tim Draper sponsored Proposition 38, a voter initiative to provide parents, regardless of income, with universal vouchers worth $4,000 per child for use at any public or private school. As many as 6.6 million children would have been eligible for these vouchers. Draper spent $23 million to gain support for the measure. The California State Board of Education contributed $26.3 million in opposition. A June poll found public opinion to be split, with 39 percent of respondents in favor of the initiative and 39 percent against it. On election day, the proposition was defeated.

Private scholarships continue to attract parents. In 1998, the Children's Scholarship Fund (CSF), a $100 million foundation, selected Los Angeles and San Francisco as two of 40 "partner cities" that would receive matching donations for private scholarships to help low-income students attend a school of choice.

In 1999, the Independent Institute began offering need-based and merit-based tuition scholarships to students in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties in amounts of up to 75 percent of tuition or a maximum of $1,500. The institute awarded 238 scholarships for the 2002-2003 school year.

In 2000, the Catholic Education Foundation announced that it would award $4.5 million in scholarships to nearly 4,700 children from disadvantaged families enrolled in Roman Catholic schools in the fall of 2001.

S.B. 740, signed by the governor on October 14, 2001, reduced funding for charter schools offering home-based instruction. The law created the Charter School Facility Grant Program, providing funds for rent and lease costs for charter schools in low-income areas.

Then-Senator Ray Haynes (R) sponsored S.B. 715, which would have required teachers in public schools to send their children to public schools. A poll conducted by the teachers association found that a third of teachers who have school-age children send their children to private schools. Nevertheless, the bill was strongly criticized by the state's largest teachers union. "In their campaign to defeat school vouchers for all California families," noted Haynes, "the teachers' union argued that vouchers would destroy the public school system." Haynes's bill failed to move out of committee.
During the 2001 session, a tax credit bill, A.B.1625, was introduced to allow individuals to receive a dollar-for-dollar credit for donations to a nonprofit scholarship organization that supports low-income children. The bill died in committee.

In May 2001, the Pacific Legal Foundation filed a lawsuit against the California Department of Education for instituting regulations on charter schools that were not in the law and that violate the intent of the Charter Schools Act. The suit contended that the department forced charter schools to discard their own accounting systems and use the more costly and inefficient reporting systems used by the public schools. On April 11, 2002, a Sacramento County Superior Court struck down the regulations instituted by the Department of Education.

The Charter School Facility Grant Program was amended in 2002 by S.B. 2039. The state now provides funds for facilities, rent, and lease costs to charter schools where 70 percent or more of the students are eligible for the free lunch program.

A.B. 1625, a tax credit bill from 2001, was modified and reintroduced. The amended bill would have given taxpayers a credit worth 50 percent of their donations to a tuition scholarship organization. The bill died in committee.

According to a 2002 California State University study, California Charter Schools Serving Low SES Students: An Analysis of the Academic Performance Index, the state's charter schools were more effective than traditional public schools in increasing academic achievement for low-income and at-risk students. Charter schools with at least half of their students participating in the federal free and reduced-price lunch program improved at a rate of 22 percent, while traditional public schools improved at a 19 percent rate. Charter schools with 75 percent participation improved at a rate of 28 percent, compared with 24 percent in the other public schools.

Parents of home-schoolers in Sonoma County were notified in April 2002 that their children would be deemed truant if they were not enrolled in a public or private school and that the Sonoma County Office of Education would stop providing the form that parents must file to homeschool their children. Several months later, the California Department of Education told parents that they could not homeschool their children unless they had a professional teaching credential and that they would have to enroll their children in a school or risk having them considered truant. Delaine Eastin, then-state Superintendent of Public Instruction, declared that home-schooling was illegal and has called for the state legislature to clarify the status of home schools. The law requires only that home-schooling parents submit a form designating their home school as a private school. (72) In 2003, under the new leadership of Superintendent of Public Instruction, Jack O'Connell, the Department affirmed the legality of home-schooling and removed negative comments about the option from its Web site.

In 2003, researchers published several groundbreaking studies revealing the effectiveness of California?s charter schools. A study by the RAND Corporation, Charter School Operations and Performance: Evidence from California, found California charter school students perform at least as well academically as their traditional public school peers. This is notable, since charter schools receive less funding than public schools, typically enroll more academically challenged students, and tend to have less experienced teachers. The study also found that students in new charter schools (as opposed to converted public schools) perform slightly better than those in traditional public schools.

?The Performance of California Charter Schools? by Margaret Raymond, Ph.D., of the Center for Research on Education Outcomes, found students at California?s elementary charter schools experienced slightly higher academic growth than their traditionally schooled peers between the years 1999-2001. Middle school charter school students showed annual improvement between 1999 and 2002 but average growth each year was significantly lower than for traditional public schools. Charter high school students, however, experienced almost twice as much academic growth between 1999 and 2002 as their counterparts.

The Charter Schools Development Center (CSDC) released a report showing that students at five-year-old state charter schools were doing better on average than other public school students on state tests. The average Academic Performance Index base score for charter schools was almost 20 points higher than the public schools' average score.

A.B.1464, introduced in the 2003-2004 session, would allow more individuals and organizations to establish charter schools and would permit both universities and nonprofit organizations to approve charter applications. The bill was referred to the Assembly Education Committee, but received no further action.

A.B. 349, a voucher bill introduced in 2003 by Assemblyman Ray Haynes (R-Murrieta), would create the Cal Grant for Kids Pilot Program in the Compton Unified School District (a similar program exists for college students).Vouchers would be made available for students to attend any school, public or private, in the Compton district. The bill died in the Assembly Education Committee.

The governor signed into law A.B. 1137, which specifies the oversight responsibilities of chartering entities, mandates performance standards for charter renewal, and provides for the inclusion of charter schools in categorical block grants. He also signed into law S.B. 15, which made changes to charter school facilities funding.

In January 2004, The Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO), which conducts nonpartisan policy analysis for the California legislature, issued recommendations in ?Assessing California's Charter Schools.? These include removing the cap on the number of charter schools, restructuring fee policies and funding streams, allowing school districts to opt out of authorizing while permitting other authorizers to charter, and by promoting stronger accountability measures.
In May 2005, researchers found that "classroom-based" California charter schools (as opposed to virtual schools) were 33 percent more likely to meet targets for improvement set in the state's Academic Performance Index (API) than traditional public schools. In addition, charter schools outperformed noncharters at all grade levels. In his budget submitted in January, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger eliminated funds for charter school facility grants, but in his May revision, he inserted $9 million in one-time grants. An additional $9 million was included in the revision for the matching federal charter school facilities incentive grants program.

Developments in 2006
In March 2006, the Los Angeles Unified School District approved its 100th charter school, becoming the first district in the nation to reach the century mark. Since 2001, the number of charter schools in L.A. has increased four-fold.
Also that month, the Alliance for School Choice and the Coalition on Urban Renewal and Education filed a complaint against LAUSD for failing ?to provide meaningful notice or transfer options? under the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) for many of the district's students (Title I students in schools that have not made Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for two consecutive years must be offered the option to transfer to a higher performing district school; other requirements are imposed if the schools continue to not make AYP). The complaints prompted a letter from U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings directly to state education officials asking them to become involved.]

Position of the Governor/Composition of the State Legislature
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, supports public school choice and limited school vouchers. Democrats control both houses of the legislature.

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 30 Oct 06 - 02:44 PM

"All this changed a few years ago when a Hasidic man by the name of Kalman Webber formed the Southeast Taxpayers Association. For the past 7 years Mr.Webber ran Orthodox Jewish candidates for every vacant position on the school board through very well orchestrated and organized grass root campaigns. Now, there are 6 members of the board who send their children to yeshivas and only 3 remaining members who's kids attend public school. Those 3 remain only because Mr. Webber, who now has a clear majority, has chosen not to run candidates against them."

The above reveals a very dangerous situation - the dictatorship of the majority, and a majority with a vested enmity to that which it controls.

It looks as if there may be some sort of analogy with the desire of the rich in America to cut welfare - their only purpose is to save themselves money by reducing payments for something they do not need.

But this particular vested interest group is doubly dangerous, in that it appears to be composed of religious fundamentalists whose own preferred education system excludes those from outside the fudamentalist group.

So there appears to be a form of partly voluntary apartheid developing, in which one of the separate groups has taken control of provision of education to the other.




Regret to say I found PDQ's article incomprehensible. I imagine some local knowledge is needed to follow it.

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 30 Oct 06 - 03:05 PM

Richard,
         The people who are serving on this board are all very well secularly educated individuals. In fact, 2 of them are physicians. All have at least a Bachelor's degree from college and some have a post-graduate degree as well. They all realize the value of a good public school education and are committed to delivering it. They are hardly what you would call fundamentalists.

                                                   SOL

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 30 Oct 06 - 05:24 PM

Rabbi, I respect your right to choose your own religion, but you said all these gentlemen were Hassidic, and elsewhere it has been asserted that the reason for Kosher food regulation is "God said so". That, I think, is fundamentalist.

Why are these people committed to delivering a good public (in American terms) education when, as you also said, none of their children go there?

Here in the UK it is usually the norm that a person is only entitled to be a parent governor of a school if his or her children attend that school. I see much merit in that.

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 30 Oct 06 - 05:26 PM

I live in another part of the same county and am president of our local library board. This is only a preface to answer a misstatement by Rabbi Sol:

    In the short time since they have taken over they have carried through on that commitment by improving and increasing services to the public schools while at the same time, reducing the rate of tax increases. This year alone, while the all the other school districts in the county have to deal with whopping 50% increases in their tax rates, East Ramapo's increase will be less than 1%. How have they done that ? By eliminating waste and increasing efficiency; not by diminishing educational services

   We are funded by the town and by the school district.   The increase in the school budget this past year was in the 3% range and the town in the 6% range. Not any 50% anywhere in sight.

   So, at least, let us keep the various tax rates honestly reported so as not to slant another issue.   I add that I have to concur w/ the writer who asked for proof of how "efficiency" has helped keep their costs down--and also maintain a wonderful level of education. I can add here that the school district where I am is ranked a lot higher by the state in grades and in any measure they use.


Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Big Mick
Date: 30 Oct 06 - 05:40 PM

That is all fine, and the correction was needed (Thanks, Bill Hahn!) but it should not obscure the real issue in the thread. Until and unless, there is a methodology whereby folks that don't send kids to the public schools don't have to pay the taxes, then they have the fundamental right to run for these posts. I don't support efforts, by the way, to weaken the public system by allowing folks to opt out. I am just saying that as long as they are paying, they have the right to run. It is purely a taxation without representation issue.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: wysiwyg
Date: 30 Oct 06 - 05:43 PM

An entire town economy is affected by schools' quality and the perceptions people have of them-- real estate, for instance. Lot of people profit from schools with good reputations, and are also affected by how school taxes impact individuals and businesses.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 30 Oct 06 - 05:52 PM

Bill,
      When I was talking about a 50% increase in taxes, I was not specific. I was not referring to Orangetown where you live, but rather to North Rockland and Ramapo Central which were affected by the Mirant bankruptcy. Mirant, a major Texas based corporation with facilities in North Rockland that were major contributors to the tax base, is now in foreclosure proceedings. As a result they have suspended all tax payments on order of the bankruptcy court and the private homeowners were given a 50% increase in the tax rate to make up for that shortfall.

Also, I was not comparing East Ramapo, which was always an underperforming district, to Orangetown which was always ranked high. I was comparing the East Ramapo under the new school board to the East Ramapo of the previous school board that was made up of a majority of public school parents. More classrom time has been added to specificly address this underperformance and there has been significant improvement. My source is the newsletter that is put out monthly by the Superintendant, Dr. Mitchell Schwartz.

                                                       SOL

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 30 Oct 06 - 06:00 PM

I would also like to add that many of the people who are yelling the loudest don't even pay any school taxes at all. They are not homeowners but rather, residents of rented apartment complexes in the poorer neighborhoods of Spring Valley, Pomona and Haverstraw. We, the homeowners, pay all the taxes and they, who pay nothing, want to control how our tax dollars are spent.
                                              SOL

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: GUEST,Marion
Date: 30 Oct 06 - 06:15 PM

Rabbi-Sol, renters are taxpayers too. The landlords have a higher property tax bill than homeowners do, and the rent they charge includes a proportion of that expense.

Marion

PS And in case you're wondering, we don't get free electricity either - we pay the landlords to pay the power bill.

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: GUEST, heric
Date: 30 Oct 06 - 06:17 PM

Interesting. Where I have most pause for thought is in the selling of District assets for tax relief. I imagine there are onerous restrictions on what can be done in the management of assets (for income), but disposing of them for tax relief is certainly voluntary and cause for attention.

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 30 Oct 06 - 06:54 PM

Bravo Mmarion---I was about to say that. Renters have the tax included as part of the rent and I am certain that landlords get multiples of the tax as part of the rent.

That said---they (renters) also have kids in school.

My sentiments are that everyone has a right to run for office--school board among them. Whether or not their kids are in school, grown and out of school, or in parochial school.   

Somehow I have a gut feeling that when a religious group becomes the majority of a board certain parochial interests have to enter into it. Consciously or not. Yet, there can be no denial of everyone's right to run for that office. The problem arises when the vast majority of a population is of one persuasion and can garner the votes. This leaves the others to hope for the best.

An analogy might even be drawn with Iraq and Sunni / Shite divide.   Luckily we live in a place where things are done by election and we abide by laws from a highere authority (I mean an earthly one---the Fed)---so here---now for the punch line---The Shite does not, hopefully, hit the fan as it does elsewhere. We all have to show tolerance and forebearance.

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 31 Oct 06 - 03:16 AM

"I would also like to add that many of the people who are yelling the loudest don't even pay any school taxes at all. They are not homeowners but rather, residents of rented apartment complexes in the poorer neighborhoods of Spring Valley, Pomona and Haverstraw. We, the homeowners, pay all the taxes and they, who pay nothing, want to control how our tax dollars are spent."

The logic of that argument leads to zero public services.

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 31 Oct 06 - 11:32 AM

They are being provided with public services in the form of a quality public school education. But if they want to have a controlling voice in how the tax dollars are spent all they have to do is elect their people to the board. To lose an election and then cry foul & want to change the rules of how the game is played to your benefit is not the way to go.

                                                 SOL

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Big Mick
Date: 31 Oct 06 - 12:04 PM

Agreed, Rabbi. Also, they need to understand that a basic tenet, as well as one of the motivating factors to its establishment, of our Constitution is that you may not tax people without allowing them representation in how the money is spent. That includes voting for and electing those to oversee the spending of these funds. They may not like the outcome of the election, but the answer lies in exercise of political power.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: GUEST,M.Ted
Date: 02 Nov 06 - 12:24 AM

I don't believe that anyone should be constrained from eligibility for public office based on whether they have children in the public schools, and, beyond that, any law with that intent would likely violate the civil rights of potential office seekers.

As far as the taxation-without-representation arguement, it is, bluntly, a load of crap. You have a right to vote for the people who levy the taxes, and, in many areas, you may vote directly on school taxes. End of story. Or not quite--you, as citizens of the republic are required to provide, and pay for, public education, whether you use it or not, whether you like it or not. If your elected representatives fail to do that, the courts will step in and do it, and make you pay for it.

As far as the sale of land intended for public schools to private developers--our county executive withdrew from the governor's race shortly after it was revealed that he was involved in a deal of that type, and the rumor is that, after his term is over, he will be prosecuted. Too many these days have forgotten that a public office is a public trust.

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 02 Nov 06 - 04:07 PM

Ted,
      The sale of the land does not financialy benefit any of the elected members of the school board. If it is allowed to proceed the proceeds of the sale go into the treasury of the East Ramapo District to be used either for educational purposes or for tax relief. It does not go into anyone's private pocket.

                                                SOL

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Big Mick
Date: 02 Nov 06 - 04:22 PM

I think you are confused, M. Ted. When I reference the taxation without representation argument, I am saying you cannot tax people on things they don't have a voice in. You cannot preclude them for running for a public office that includes in its powers the ability to tax, and still tax them. That is fundamental to our system of laws.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: KateG
Date: 02 Nov 06 - 06:17 PM

On the one hand, anyone who lives in the school district and pays taxes, directly or indirectly, has an inarguable right to run for the school board. On the other, you have a self-identified and exclusive group of people who will never send their children to public school holding six out of the nine seats on the board, and claiming that they could control all nine but "3 remain only because Mr. Webber, who now has a clear majority, has chosen not to run candidates against them." That last quote might indicate why the non-Hassidic members of the community are nervous/upset. It's an implied threat..."be good or we'll take over your school board." Quite frankly, I would be nervous if ANY group acted as a bloc to control my school district. It's not a case of being anti-this, that or t'other, but rather a firm belief in strength through diversity, and the benefit of broad community repr esentation. "We know how to run your _____ better than you do" is not an attitude that tends to win hearts and minds...even when it's true.

As to the land issue, I look at it from the perspective and ethics of a former museum director: Capital assets should not be liquidated to generate operating funds. They are held in trust for future generations. They must be managed but may not be disbursed. While current demographic trends may not require a school in that area in the near future, who's to say how things may change? The property was donated or purchased to build a school, and should only be sold to build a school...even if not in that precise location. If the funds are to go into a trust for future school buildings, why not do a deal with the town for $35 million, let the land be used as a park but retain the rights (valued at the other $35 million) to build a school there later should be needed or to sell a portion for that purpose should a new school be needed in another part of town.

In addition, you did not provide much information about the Brooklyn developer. But given the Us vs Them attitude that prevails in the community, I could see how selling the land to a Hassidic developer who would build houses for Hassidic buyers might be perceived as a conflict of interest by the non-Hassidic members of the community. Even if the Hassidic board members do not profit directly from the sale, it's still their community is seen to benefit. How did the developer learn of the land and approach the school board? Was the property put on the open market in a public sale to the highest bidder? My ethical background says that every step of the transaction must be totally transparent and fully publicized.

Finally, adding 40 new houses will probably not generate revenue and lower taxes. After all the residents of those houses will require town services such as water, police, fire, hospitals, snow plows and salt, schools, libraries, waste haulage etc. It's been pretty well documented in planning literature for nearly twenty years that adding houses doesn't save a town money it costs money...the only group who doesn't believe this are developers, contractors and building departments funded by building permits and fees(for obvious reasons). If a town wants to generate revenue, renovating existing housing stock is far more lucrative; it generates at least as many fees and construction jobs, raises the rateability of the renovated property, and doesn't place any additional burden on existing town services.

With all due respect to Rabbi Sol, it seems to me that we have been seeing a lot of these posts/threads about conflicts between the Hassidic and non-Hassidic populations of Rockland Co., NY over a host of issues. The overall picture painted is one of a deeply disfunctional relationship, and one that has deteriorated to the point where neither side can claim the moral high ground. Unless and until ways are found to bridge the gaps and find compromises, the polarization between the two communities will only increase.

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: GUEST,M.Ted
Date: 02 Nov 06 - 06:34 PM

Actually, Mick--"No taxation without representation" is a rhetorical point, rather than a legal one. It is not fundamental to our system of laws. Half a million or so Washingtonians have no vote in either house of Congress, and yet the are subject to Federal taxation. Look it up, if you don't believe me.

As to the sale of public land, Rabbi Sol--who is this developer? Did he contribute campaign funds? Is he connected in any other way to any of the board members? Were bids on the property solicited, by public notice? What is the actual value of the land, based on the prevailing rates? In our situation here, the property, a school building, was to be sold for several hundred thousand dollars, when it was actually worth several million.

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 02 Nov 06 - 07:38 PM

The land was put up for public bid on the open market according to all legal requrements, with the proviso that the district would not accept any bid lower than $6 Million. This developer was the only bidder at $7.5 million. By the way, the 6 majority members of the board are all modern Orthodox but NOT Hasidic. The developer is Hasidic but does not have any connection whatsoever to any of the board members or to Mr. Webber.
                                             SOL

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: GUEST,M.Ted
Date: 03 Nov 06 - 01:27 AM

I just popped open a newpaper article that seems to say that his bid has not been accepted. You must excuse my curiousity, Sol, in the last couple years, I've become completely sceptical of all developers and all politicians who cooperate with them.

Green space, once it is gone, never comes back. Developments can cost taxpayers more than they generate,and developers and politicians often go to great lengths to conceal their true connections. Way of the world.

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 03 Nov 06 - 12:44 PM

The bid was not accepted because the board wanted to schedule public hearings and get the input of the entire community before deciding what to do. However, there was a public meeting called for last night and it had a disappointing low turnout of only 40 people. The board has now scheduled a meeting for November 15th at which they will make a final determination on this land sale deal. I will keep you all informed as to what happens. And KateG is correct when she says that this issue together with the other 2 that I raised in other threads is causing a polarization between the Orthodox Jewish community and the secular community here in Rockland. It is a situation that we are not happy with and needs to be addressed by our elected officials before it gets worse.
                                                      SOL

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: GUEST,thurg
Date: 03 Nov 06 - 01:48 PM

Apart from the specific issues under discussion here, it sounds like this community needs some "community-building" - maybe starting with the clergy forming an ecumenical committee so that they can get to know one another, start communicating directly and informally, and perhaps temper some of the mistrust and ill-feeling in their respective sub-communities, if I may call them that. Maybe this is already being done ... ?

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Dave'sWife
Date: 04 Nov 06 - 06:15 AM

My family owned a home in that school district for 2 generations and only sold it the 1980s when the Hassidic community was rapidly expanding. I still have family in the area and nearby. They bought homes there after WWII to get out of the Irish Bronx. Rabbi Sol has done a fairly good job of explaining the current situation although it's clear which side he is on. There IS an issue of Anti-Semitism in all this and it's evident if you actually GO there and listen to some of the locals voice their opinion about their Hassidic neighbors.

In the USA, you do not have to have a child in the school district to run for and e elected to the School board. You merely have to be a resident of that district. As a resident, you pay taxes either as a homeowner or through your rent which funds the school. Therefore, as a person who pays for the school, you have a right to have a voice in how it's spent. You can run for the School board or simply address the School board when it meets.

It's a complex issue but at it's heart is the issue of Anti-Semitism and discomfort with the changing demographic. This was an area that was once exclusively White and Protestant. When my family had home there (my grandmother inherited her parents home) there was even subtle anti-Catholic anti-Irish sentiment. Only thing that has changed is who the outsider group is considered to be

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 04 Nov 06 - 01:26 PM

Daves Wife:   They bought homes there after WWII to get out of the Irish Bronx.

             That sounds a little like the bigotry you mention later on. Am I correct in that assumption?

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Dave'sWife
Date: 04 Nov 06 - 08:07 PM

No, you are not correct Bill Hahn. They were Irish - are Irish ( I am Irish) and viewed getting OUT of the Irish Bronx as a step up much the way other Irish emigrants chose to move out of certain sections of Boston and into the suburbs as soon as they could afford it.

The Bronx was in decline for a number of reasons at that time - senseless development, highway construction/improvement, the demolishing of residential neighorhoods etc etc. Many groups that had lived there side by side for 2 or more generations chose to leave and a goodly number wound up side by side again in the same suburban areas, some in Rockland County.

I must admit, I'm a little amazed at the suggestion of anti-Irish bigotry when I've never hidden my Irish-Catholic background and in that I have never heard anyone who WASN'T Irish refer to that part of the Bronx as the "Irish Bronx". I'm sure there are some people in my parent's generation who aren't Irish who might call that section of the city by that name, but since the 1970s, there's very little left to suggest the area was once predominently Irish (and Jewish).

I'm not offended, mind you, just suprised.

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 04 Nov 06 - 11:03 PM

My mistake then. I did not know your background and from the wording it sounded that way. Which is why asked it as a question. Many times writing comes across not as the way it was intended.

I grew up in the Bronx as well and I have to admit that I never heard that expression. I heard things like---the Italian neighborhood, the Irish neighborhood, the Jewish neighborhood, etc;   

By the way, since you are an old Bronxite---check out this web-site
theparadisetheater.com .

THe theater has been fully restored to its original splendor. I had the good fortune to interview a person involved in it for my Tabletalk program and he took me to every nook and cranny in it. Amazing. They offer tours---you may be interested. I am assuming (not knowing your age) that you might have been there in its heyday--not after the "fall from grace" in the area.

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 02:57 PM

Surely the taxes are not set by the school board nor collected by the school board, are they?

What is the exact tax in question, who sets it, and who collects it?

Surely if it is a local property tax, it is set by the local authority (whatever the uS equivalent is) - isn't it?

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 03:19 PM

The local property tax is made up of 2 components, the Town tax and the school tax. In my case I pay $6,000 a year of which approximately $3,500 is the school tax.

Yes, the school tax IS set by the school board but is collected by the Town which appoints a special Receiver of Taxes for that purpose.
Since the East Ramapo Central School District overlaps 2 towns (Ramapo & Haverstraw), each town collects from the residents that are within their borders and remits to the school board.

                                              SOL

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: fair maiden of nottingham
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 06:42 AM

Ah Richard, they had/have a wonderful tax system out there. It took me 10 yrs to understand it...then i left and came back to our simplified system. You still cannot beat it on either side, unless you are the idle rich.

fisheye

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Dave'sWife
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 04:10 PM

Bill Hahn//\\ - Actually, I was born in 1964 - so some might say the Bronx was waaaaay past it's heyday y the time my little feet hit the cement, but of course, I remember differently. My father joined the NYS Troopers and as a result, we lived wherever he was stationed for a time ut the family was still in the Irish Bronx, the formerly Irish sections of Queens(Elmhurst, Jackson Heights, Hell's Kitchen, Staten Island and a few other Irish neighorhoods. Everyone began in the Bronx with my Grandfather's generation and fanned out from there.

The area Rabbi Sol is referring to used to be a haven for Irish Cops who moved their wives and kids there ut kept official residences within city limits, usually their parent's homes. As a result, there are still some smaller towns in Rockland County that are "Coplands" kinda like the film Copland. By the mid 1970s, the city rought that to a screeching halt and so other enterprising ethnic groups looking for a etter place to raise the kids started uying up properties that in the decades prior would have likley een bought by irish families.

All this is covered very well in an excellent book called My Father's Gun: One Family, Three Badges, One Hundred Years in the NYPD by Brian MacDonald. You would probaly enjoy the ook very much since there's a great deal of Bronx history in it. His Grandafther was one of the cops trying to save passengers on The Wreck of the General Slocum! (a Dayliner that caught fire and ran agound, killing hundreds)

For those of you who don't know about The Wreck of The General Slocum - man, what a story.. click here:


Wreck of The General Slocum

I could go on about this kind of thing forever Bill Hahn - perhaps we should start a Irish Bronx Folklore thread

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Dave'sWife
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 05:20 PM

It seems I am the master of understatement these days - let me correct myself and say that oer a thousand people died as a result of the Wreck of The General Slocum which was a side-wheel riverboat. Most Bronxites know the story so I won't repeat it here. it's linked to above.

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 09 Nov 06 - 10:51 AM

Dave's Wife: Not a bad idea about that thread. Though I am not Irish the Bronx history would be fascinating---you would enjoy that magazine Back In Bronx---check out the address on Google.

             As for me I grew up in a one block area that was predominantly Jewish---Italian being the larger area around it and down on Webster Ave. predominantly Irish.


               You would have loved the Paradise theater---only theater without an overhanging marquee---I found out why when I interviewed one of the restorers.   Great bit of trivia there.


Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: East Ramapo Central School Politics
From: GUEST,memyself
Date: 09 Nov 06 - 12:22 PM

"the city rought that to a screeching halt and so other enterprising ethnic groups looking for a etter place to raise the kids started uying up properties that in the decades prior would have likley een ... "


Dave's wife - Is that some brand of Bronx accent, or is it some strange speech impediment that keeps you from pronouncing your lower case "b"'s? Don't mean to be insensitive; just curious!