RSS 2.0 FeedOctober 6, 2011
New - Parents pan Princeton Plan at NB meeting
Crowd also hears call to study bureaucracy in district.
An overflowing crowd at last week’s North Bellmore School District Committee to Explore Educational Options (CEEO) meeting at Saw Mill Road School proved the adage “Change comes uninvited” when it soundly debunked the Princeton Plan as a way the school district could close a projected $1.8-2.3 million gap it needs to close for fiscal year 2011-12.
In response, Arnold Goldstein, superintendent of schools, instructed the committee’s 22 members to consider changing the mileage of busing for children from 1-1/2 miles to 2 miles – if not eliminate it altogether – to gain additional savings over the roughly $1 million that could be obtained by closing Gunther.
The Princeton Plan, which pairs different grades with different schools, could have saved the district up to $1.5 million.
Meanwhile, Dr. Charles Fowler, an educational consultant paid $9,600 by the district, explained the increased workload assistant superintendents were performing to earn their pay. But one attendee called on the committee to consider looking at the bureaucracy within the district rather than close a school, after Mr. Goldstein publicly disclosed his salary at $220,000.
Another attendee, a former dean at Hofstra University who lives in North Bellmore, told the crowd that the four component districts within the Bellmores and Merricks are considered an anomaly in the state today.
“Only four other regions in the state have similar component districts,” he said.
They included the Sewanhaka and Valley Stream districts in western Nassau. But a quick presentation on consolidating the local districts found the results would be too costly.
Committee members who explored the issue of consolidation found it would first require state approval before getting approval from residents in each of the school districts to be consolidated.
And if the financial impact on just one district was negative, such as increased taxes, it would stop the whole process.
The committee also found that the highest cost labor agreement would apply to the consolidated district, debt service of one school would become the district’s responsibility and state aid would likely decrease because the state would view the consolidated district as more wealthy.
Benefits of the Princeton Plan were paired with drawbacks and shown to the audience by Faith Skelos, a committee member and the principal of Dinkelmeyer School.
She told the audience that no scientific research had been gathered in a university setting to advocate for or against the plan. “Getting information from Google is not scientific research,” she said.
She said a 1999 study looked at a loss of student concentration when there was an increase in transitions using several schools. But the concentration issue resolved itself when students became familiar with the new routine.
She added that a 1997 study focusing on middle school girls suggested grade transitions could fuel animosity toward high school. But the study also found no observable evidence of such a social impact.
She said benefits of the Princeton Plan first-graders – in a pre-K to building – being looked up to, to build his or her self-esteem.
Transportation cost factors for busing 1,600 students under the Princeton Plan – in contrast to 347 students now bused – to assigned schools were perhaps the most prohibitive factor in determining the plan’s viability.
At a cost of $1,447,000 to bus the students, committee member Pete Mayo said any cost savings in the Princeton Plan would be offset by the million-dollar transportation cost. He was cheered for his comment.
Martin Blum, a retired Hofstra dean living in North Bellmore, told the committee, “With 1,600 kids running around, it would have been an embarrassment to this district. I’m glad you’ve decided to think about it.”
In response, committee member Ann Marie Antener said that until the committee can find viable alternative choices to the Princeton Plan she hoped the plan would remain, at least, on the shelf and not discarded completely. She was booed for the comment.
Supporting Ms. Antener’s suggestion for alternate choices, committee member Cara Kabak added, “Don’t can the Princeton Plan until or unless we can agree to other alternatives.”
Debra Hannaberry, another committee member – along with Lorraine Doyle – who worked on the Princeton presentation, added that “If we say no to the Princeton Plan now, I don’t want to have to say yes to it next year."
Ms. Skelos then said the district could consider closing one school and expanding bus mileage to close the financial gap.
Mr. Goldstein, who told the audience it would take a vote at the polling booth to change the mileage, asked for a show of hands from the audience if it would be interested in changing the mileage. Calling it an unscientific polling, less than half the audience raised its hands.
One resident, who wished to remain anonymous, told this newspaper what he thought about the progress made. “The district spent almost $10,000 on a consultant and we didn’t like any of his suggestions. They have to come up with an alternative that doesn’t close the schools.”
Said North Bellmore resident Stu Weinstein: “I’m not opposed to them closing one school, but I’d like to see them come up with more options instead.”
The next meeting is Thursday, October 27, at 7 p.m. at the Saw Mill Road School.
