Is this a test? Hmmm, school board members with blindfolds on, asked to remember middle school conflicts....

Is the budget coming up? Are staffing cuts being considered?

Here's my test question: Are we going to get serious about the bloated school budget?

The Cornwall School Board is made up of 9 members elected by those living within the Cornwall School District. The Board meetings are extremely professional as are the board members. This is NOT the COH Village meetings. These elected BoE members have our school children foremost in mind. They do an excellent job. At last years final meeting when they were going over the 2010 budget they went over it line by line cutting where they could. They did this in an extremely professional way and I was certainly impressed.

Our children are the most important asset in the community. The great school system we have isn't an accident but created through the dedication of the BoE, Superintendent, & each and every teacher, and parent. To allow the School system to deteriorate will also lower the value of your home. I stand behind our Schools as I know most do as our budget passed overwhelmingly last year.

Pat, everybody knows how school boards are run: by parents of students. And the budget votes are no different.

The blindfolds in this story are a metaphor. They need to come off so a really searching look at the budgets can be had -- not just at the operating budget but particularly at this gigantic capital proposal that's been made. On that, if there's no viable business plan to pay for it, save the taxpayers the money and use the ample facilities we already have.

To use the word "deteriorate" about this school district, when so many districts are truly in need -- and not of artificial turf, Pat -- is to grotesquely distort the term.

The plans for the upgrades to our school district seem prudent. perhaps they were shooting a bit high, but if you believe that world is doomed the it is. I think it needs a bit of size reduction but it will help retain the values of our homes as we attract people here because of the schools, the River and proximity to NYC. I do feel guilty saying that knowing that some, especially seniors are taxed out. What we need is to hire a grant writer for the town and help the chamber of commerce develop a business plan and hire an executive director. Cornwall needs business revenue to offset the tax base.

Jon,

>>>Pat, everybody knows how school boards are run: by parents of students. And the budget votes are no different.<<<

School Boards are elected by ALL the voters. The Board works very hard at keeping the Schools top notch.

The metaphor of the blindfolds was quite a good one IMO. When you can't see, things take on a different perspective. I understand exactly what they intended and commend them for it.

As far as your understanding of the metaphor I can only say you truly do not understand. This is a community full of children, our greatest asset. Our Board of Education was elected because they do understand what is most important to society. Once you give up on the children you have capitulated the future.

>>>gigantic capital proposal that's been made. <<<
All I can say is the need is there and the time is right. The Empire State Building was built during the great depression of the 30's. We can have what needs to be built at low bids now or higher bids in the future. A little foresight would tell you now is the correct time to build. Why wait for the economy to correct when it will all cost much more.

>>>On that, if there's no viable business plan to pay for it, save the taxpayers the money and use the ample facilities we already have.<<<

Jon, that statement indicates to me you have no clue as to enrollments and what the future enrollments will be. The School enrollment doesn't remain static. This is why we have a BoE. We prepare for the future when we can get the most bang for the buck. That time is now.

As for other school districts Jon that is up to their elected officials. Cornwall's School District has a great BoE and Superintendent who do a top notch job.

Another apt metaphor, Pat.

The Empire State Bldg is still a landmark -- because it's one of the worst-sited buildings in history. It stands alone because nobody else was dumb enough to build there.

Planning for future school enrollment is one thing. Boondoggles for unnecessary athletic facilities on speculation that they can generate revenue is quite another.

Mr. Chase, may I ask what you mean by "school boards are run...by parents of students"? Are you simply referring to parents voting for particular board members (and the budget)? Or are you implying that there is some backdoor route to the school board that is accessible only to parents? Care to elaborate?

Happy to, Ms. Shearson.

Being on a school board is an arguably thankless task; as a result, those who run tend to have a particular interest in schools, either due to their children being in them or due to their professional background. And there's no doubt that, because of the isolation of the school board and budget elections, the population with kids in the schools is MUCH more motivated to vote and therefore much more heavily represented in those votes.

As a result, school boards and budgets are disproportionately influenced by those who are either in the business or have kids in the system. It's perfectly natural; that's why I said "everybody knows" it.

So here's my blindfold test: the school board and all the parents and hangers-on of the school district should put those blindfolds back on and ask themselves whether they'd think all this proposed spending -- in a severe down economy -- would make as much sense to them if they had no connection to the schools at all.

So, Mr. Chase, are you suggesting that the make-up of the school board and the fate of the budget should instead by determined by people who can't be bothered to vote?

Who does "hangers-on of the school" refer to? People who no longer have children in the district but nevertheless remain interested in school issues?

Providing children with a good education is one of the most important tasks of a country, in any economy. I don't need to blindfold myself to answer that question. I will continue to support the schools even after my last child graduates. The proper functioning of a democracy depends on an educated population.

I perfectly agree that education is vital. And I've never said anything to the contrary. Ever.

The question becomes what's needed to educate and what's not needed to educate. That's a debate on which reasonable people can differ greatly.

And, on that score, how many would argue that we're doing a better job educating our children now than we were a generation ago, before artificial turf and "sports complexes?"

The children of this district already have massive, amply-equipped facilities. And, even if enrollment projections point to growth, the questions are not only whether those projections are reliable but whether that growth will be sustained or is merely a temporary bubble. If it's a temporary surge, the accommodation should be temporary.

Ms. Shearson, I agree with you, to an extent. I have voted in favor of every single school budget since 1971, when I moved here and was still a bachelor and would be one for seven more years. From the early '80s until she graduated in 1997, I had a daughter in the school system, and then from 1998 until now of course haven't, but I continued to vote in favor of the school budgets (as has my wife). So I can't be accused of being someone "who can't be bothered to vote," since neither my wife nor I have ever missed an election of any kind, though we've sometimes had to use absentee ballots.

So I've been on the school board's side when I had absolutely no idea that I'd have a child in the system, when I -did- have a child in the system, and for 13 years after that child graduated and I could well have selfishly renounced any interest in the school system.

But this budget, with its unconscionable emphasis on sports and non-academic extras, will be my first-ever nay vote.

I think the Cornwall school system is outstanding, by the way.

Mr. Chase, I was not questioning whether or not you value education. I was simply trying to clarify your comment about who runs the school board.

I'm sorry, Ms. Shearson, to have misinterpreted your comment.

I thought I had adequately explained that school boards tend to be run by people interested in schools for whatever reason, whether it's their kids or their business or professional interests.

I come from a family of educators (mother and brother), so I'm pretty well familiar with all the typical sides of the story.

To "bottom line" it, my gripe is that, as with so many things today, we've allowed "things" to get in the way of the substance and hard work of education.

A boondoggle capital proposal won't make our children one iota smarter or better educated. The only facilities needed are those necessary for good teachers to do the hard classroom work which is what really prepares our young people for their futures.

I hate to harp on the school board issue, but I still don't understand what's wrong with the school board being run by people who are interested in the schools. You seem to be implying that the board should be run by people whose priorities lie elsewhere. If that's what the town wants, why have we not elected that type of school board member and voted down our budget every year? I guess there is the problem of the "tyranny of the majority," but what is the alternative?

You also seem to be implying that board members serve purely for selfish reasons (their own kids, their own professional interests). Is it not possible that members serve because they are interested in the future of our town and our country?

Whether or not that future is well served by the proposed facilities upgrade is a separate question.

I agree: there are two issues here. But they are intertwined.

First is the "tyranny of those who benefit" over the majority of voters, around whose schedules school elections are held. That's my problem with the school board composition and election cycle. Those who dedicate their time (and I honor that aspect of it) usually are motivated foremost to buy into whatever's being sold as a "path toward excellence," cost be damned. Of course, the rest of us get to pay for it.

Which leads to the second issue, the one Mr. Wilkinson points up. Equating "excellence" with spending money on facilities is the fundamental error in the reasoning.

Excellence comes from good teaching and kids doing their homework.

No artificial turf is necessary.

What do you mean by "the rest of us get to pay for it"? People who vote "yes" also have to pay taxes. School board members have to pay taxes too. Do you really think they don't care about the cost? What benefit would school board members get from adopting a "cost be damned" attitude? How do you know what they are motivated by?

What's the problem with the scheduling of school elections? The polls are open long enough that there is no excuse for not voting. What are you proposing as an alternative to the tyranny of majority vote? Dictatorship by senior citizens?

Of course I know we all get to pay -- for what a few decide to spend on our overindulged school system.

The elections would be fairer if they weren't isolated from the other elections we have.

Charter and magnet schools all across the country show us that we don't need the "feel good" spending for extravagant sports facilities to maintain excellence. What we need is to stay focused on the real brass tacks of education: teaching and academic performance.

The school taxes here are outrageous already. To add $40 million of fluff at this time is just unconscionable.

Off with the blindfolds!

>>>The school taxes here are outrageous already. To add $40 million of fluff at this time is just unconscionable.

Off with the blindfolds!<<<

Jon,

Since you are relatively new to Cornwall did your have a blindfold on when you moved here? You were not aware that this is a community that supports our children getting a well rounded education? Your >>> $40 million of fluff<<< many consider important to the full development of our children.

>>>Of course I know we all get to pay -- for what a few decide to spend on our overindulged school system.<<<

Every voter gets to decide NOT a few. Your vote counts the same as any other. If you decide you cannot go along with the Democratic process there are always other option for you Jon.

I I I I I I have always voted in favour of the school budget even when I I I I I I I I had no children. I I I I I I I will continue to vote aye.

As Mr. Wilkinson has pointed out, the school board has gone WAY too far this time.

If they don't get their blindfolds off and start making their plans based on VALUE, all the taxpayers -- not just those they muster out to vote -- will be paying attention when the next election happens.

For the last time, excellence in education already exists here. It does NOT require another $40 million of gadgets.

>>>If they don't get their blindfolds off and start making their plans based on VALUE, all the taxpayers -- not just those they muster out to vote -- will be paying attention when the next election happens.<<<

Nobody musters anybody out to vote. That is a nutty allegation. You are concerned or your not. There is no arm twisting in voting but there is choice. You seem to be twisting the democratic process here to suit your own feelings. My advice, do it in the election booth and if you don't like the outcome it's a free country to live anywhere you want.

"Nutty?" Just watch.

If there's some debt to retire, the school board better consider LOWERING school taxes instead of manufacturing a new capital boondoggle to keep them high.

If they don't, the days when the taxpayers have given them a long leash will come crashing to an end. Because we'll have a REAL election next time around.

Oh, the other elections weren't real?
LMAO!!!!!!!
You're a pip Jon, ;)
Good Luck convincing the blindfolded masses out there.

What was not "real" about previous elections? Please elaborate and provide evidence. Please also provide evidence of vote mustering.

For that matter, please explain what you mean by "vote mustering." Encouraging people to vote? What's wrong with that? "Because we'll have a REAL election next time around" seems to imply that there's going to be some vote mustering against the budget. Will that kind of vote mustering be problematic too?

Tired of answering all your questions while you answer none of mine, Ms. Shearson.

Suffice it to say that the era of big dollar spending is over at all levels of gov't.

Woe be to those holding public office who don't heed that message and tighten their belts.

Mr. Chase, you haven't asked me a single question that I'm in a position to answer. The only question you've asked since I joined the conversation is how many would argue that we're doing a better job educating our children now than in the past. I'm afraid I have no idea how many people would make that argument. For the most part you have simply been making pronouncements without providing any supporting evidence. I'm willing to be convinced that parents control the school board, that the school board controls the elections, and that its members have a "cost be damned" attitude, if you provide some hard evidence. So far you haven't.

I've made and supported my points, Ms. Shearson.

1. Our children already get an excellent education with the existing district facilities.

2. The days of big gov't spending are over, at all levels.

3. The school board will be wise to recognize the foregoing as it develops its budget and capital plans.

'vote mustering', phone calls by parent volunteers to remind folks with kids to vote,(countered by the seniors who offer free rides to the polls to the elderly who can't travel) fliers sent home in home work packets, large ads in the Local; that is what vote mustering is. It seems pretty simple, it is not a 'covert action', it happens prior to every vote. I tend to agree with Mr. Chase on this matter. Even when I attended school here we were reading out of musty old anthologies while the football team got new equipment. The sports facilities serve a >portion< of the student body, while teachers have to scramble for classroom and technology supplies. Why not focus on the academic education and technology support for ALL the students? Only two sections of a computer application class were offered when my kids were at cchs and guess how fast those filled up? One of the computer lab aides did not even know how to trouble shoot. Maybe that money can be used to entice some of the teachers to actually stay for after school help? In most districts this is a requirement, but not here. We can pay extra stipends for coaches, what about tutors? Please. Let's make sure that our kids DO learn to succeed, by knowing how to write and read and cipher.

I'm an alumni interviewer of admission candidates for an Ivy League college, and a couple of weeks ago, I interviewed an excellent young man from another well-known (and nearby) school system in Orange County.

Two things interested me: one was that though he was obviously fit and strong and had played all the usual stick-and-ball sports as a younger kid, he had zero high-school sports on his resume. "No, I decided high school was the time to buckle down and work, not play games," he said. (He's number three in his class of 400, with SAT scores in the high 600s and low 700s, and he's by no means a nerd.)

The other was that when I asked him what sports his school excelled at, he laughed and said, "None. We had a pretty good tennis team a few years ago, but other than that, I can't think of any."

Not only does he have the right focus, so does his school.

The relevance of a few anecdotes about this or that excellent student who quit sports to buckle down or whose school didn't focus on sports escapes me. I can come up with at any number of examples of high-achieving students who DID participate heavily in sports (look no farther than two of last year's Harvard-bound seniors).

Our school district DOES focus on academics. Interscholastic athletics made up only 1% of last year's budget ($676,000 out of $57.4 million, as opposed to $26.7 million for teaching).

A friend of mine who is an M.D. received her undergraduate degree from Princeton. She was quite the athlete during her days with the Tigers. She knows my daughters are fine serious students. She sits on Princeton's alumni Board and interviews prospective students.

She advised me that the girls could have perfect marks and top S.A.T. scores but would need something else to show a well rounded student. My daughters now have played piano since the age of six but it's quite expensive and most families cannot afford it. Cornwall is lucky to have a fine music program as it has other fine programs like athletics, drama, etc. This is important in the total makeup of an individual. My daughters now enjoy 5k runs and look forward to running track in High School. Skills, determination, tenacity, courage on the field are lessons well learned and help many students emerge and become quality academic students.

The college for which I interview instructs us to look for what they informally call "the well-lopsided student" rather than the classic "Well-rounded student."

Ted Kaczynski comes to mind. Yes quite lopsided.

My daughter played sports in high school my son did not. My son is by far more athletic but he was not interested in the team sports, he prefers the individual sports. But the school has no skate-boarding team and no snow boarding team. Too many kids are left out; those who are not interested in ball sports, track, etc. or those who can't afford the price of ski or hockey equipment. My daughter was taking multiple dance classes each week, that was her chosen outlet. CCHS didn't have a dance team. Either make it equitable for all the students or find some new options. As Pat says, music lessons, or dance, or riding, or hockey, are expensive, and then as taxpayers we have to foot the bill for a few students' non-academic opportunities? I don't care for that. I would much rather the students were taught to think critically, evaluate information, plan and carry out plans, and apply knowledge. To me, that is more important than whether or not you 'play a sport'.

Ted Kaczynski was Class of 1962, almost 50 years ago, back in the days when Harvard was looking for the classic "well-rounded" student. Guess he was one of them.