46°
SOMERS, N.Y. -- Over 400 people packed the auditorium at Kennedy Catholic High School (JFK) on Thursday evening when Sen. Greg Ball held a discussion on the threat to repeal the state law requiring private school students to be bused at taxpayers’ expense.
Because of the current budgetary constraints, the Lower Hudson Council of School Superintendents issued a position paper in December recommending that school districts be relieved of the requirement to bus private school students to schools out of the district. Alternatively, the paper requested that the mandated radius be reduced from 15 to 5 miles.
“We have 18 school districts that bus students here every single day. All of our parents who have exercised their right of choice have also done their civic duty and paid their taxes and paid for this service,” said Rev. Mark Vaillancourt, principal of JFK.
Ball told the crowd that he stands behind them 110 percent.
“This proposal is absolutely, patently and simply unacceptable,” Ball said.
Ball added that he is currently working on legislation to increase the compulsory busing limit from a 10-mile radius to a 25-mile radius.
“This is one of the very few tangible benefits to families who pay taxes and are trying to provide their children with a better way of life,” Ball said. “I simply will not vote for a budget which rips away this mandate.”
Several Kennedy alumni, including North Salem Supervisor Warren Lucas and Ossining Council member Peter Tripodi, were on hand to offer words of support to the senator’s position. Yorktown Council member Terrence Murphy said that he would love to increase the mileage to 25, 30 or even 35 miles.
Many members of the audience queued up to make statements.
“I saved the school district thousands of dollars by my choice to send my kids to Catholic schools,” said Mike Nicolosi, a retired New York City police officer. “The least I can expect is for my government to provide bus transportation for my children.”
Ball urged parents to move quickly to present their case, saying that they need to organize as a community.
“Call district offices. Handwritten letters are effective. Meet one-on-one with your legislators,” Ball said.
Ball is also planning to organize a rally bus trip to Albany.
On Wednesday, March 21 at 5 p.m. Ball will host a conference call, open to all constituents concerned with this issue. The number to call is 1-605-475-4000, ext. 591038.
Comments (12)
I cannot believe how narrow minded so many of you are being. I pay taxes to the district but then choose to send my child to private school because the school district cannot properly give him the services he deserves or needs. My only expese to the district is now bussing. My ONLY expense. So I am saving the district money, all I ask is that he is provided transportation in return for me paying taxes. Is it a lot of money yes, but still less then the overall expense if he were in public school. Think of it this way, the expense of educating these students would be greater if we all decide to come back to the public schools because we cant afford the transportation. Then will the district be. Transportation is a small price to a taxpaper who is paying for their child's education.
Speaking as parent (who just happens to be a school board trustee) I was surprised how much money we spend to bus our kids out of district to private schools. In fact, up until a few years ago I didn't even know that we were required to provide this transportation and I am convinced that many taxpayers are still unaware of this State mandate.
In researching the origins of this bazaar mandate I was surprised to learn how this legislation emanated out of the late 1940s (7 decades ago!) when Cardinal Spellman and Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt were among the public combatants on opposite sides of this debate.
The stakes were very different then. In fact the Catholic’s outrage was against federal funding to public schools – they argued “why should the federal government give public schools money for health services (e.g. vaccinations), transportation, and school lunch programs at the exclusion of Catholic schools?” Rather than argue the unwinnable point against separation of church and state, Spellman and others tried to make their argument about the children -- that providing public funds to public school children alone would mean discriminating against Catholic and parochial school children (Protestants took a decidedly different point of view and believed the separation of church and state should remain concrete).
These arguments were flawed then and they are flawed now -- only gathering support by politicians who wish to pander to the sensitivities (and political donations) of various religious groups. By requiring districts taxpayers to be forced to pay for out-of-district transportation -- whether to a Catholic or non-secular private school -- amounts to subsidizing a non-public institution with tax dollars that should be allocated within the district. There is absolutely no infringement or limitation being placed upon the individuals who want to exercise their right to educate their children wherever they see fit -- there is simply a limitation of how payment for that right is extracted.
When proponents of this transportation subsidy/welfare are not persuaded by logical, principled arguments they will counter with the premise that educating their children outside of the district saves the district money. This flawed argument assumes (1) there is an absolute incremental cost for each student when in reality the dynamic of adding an additional student to a class may be relatively negligible and less than the out-of-district transportation costs. (2) The calculus of providing common public benefits does not entitle you to a 'rebate'. I do not petition my town for a proportion of my taxes back because I have not used their police, fire or ambulance services this year. When I make the choice to drive to work I do not seek a percentage of public transportation dollars back either.
It is ironic that this meeting took place at a Catholic HS named after JFK. For it was Kennedy, a Catholic, who lost the support of Cardinal Spellman when he backed Nixon in the 1960 election because of Kennedy's opposition to providing federal aid to parochial schools -- aid that was to include transportation. JFK: 'I believe in an America where the Separation of Church and State is absolute'. Regardless of how much that may make certain people want to throw up on their sweater vests it is an enduring principle of our Democracy that cannot and should not be compromised by opportunistic politicians in search of a few votes and a few dollars.
Couldn't agree more with jlombard. Thank you for doing the research on this. Public money should go for the common public good; period. Not to enrich special interests and the elite, which is what is happening here.
This is just one more example of public money from working families being funneled to the wealthy elite. Do these people who back this have no shame? I send my daughter to private school and I provide for her transportation. I would be ashamed to ask for public assistance to send her to private school. Then they have the audacity to counter with the false threat of "well, if you don't continue to subsidize us we will cost you more by putting our kids in public school." Talk about a sense of entitlement. And on top of that, people of this same ilk claim that the Social Security retirement benefits (that which working people have PAID INTO their entire lives with the promise that they would be provided a retirement and medical care in their old age) are an entitlement.
I have voted Republican my entire life. Come November, I will be voting Democrat. The Republican party has abandoned the middle class. I get the sense from talking to others that this is a growing sentiment not just in this community, but across the country.
Well put!
In our District the cost for transporting private and parochial students is $8200/student. This is nothing to sneeze at. It costs us more to transport a few dozen private/parochial school students to their various locations than it does totransport over 600 kids to the elementary school. It accounts for 2% of the budget.
At that amount of money are they being transported in stretch limousines? If I was a resident in your district I would not throw the baby out with the bath water but find out why the cost is so high. It is still less than the $27,000-$32,000 cost of educating these kids.
No limousines. They are going in the same buses that transport the in-district kids to school. The problem is they are going to several different locations and there is a limit to the time a child is allowed to sit on a bus. And yes we already share services with neighboring towns to keep the costs as low as possible.
And adding these kids to the District would not cost $27-32,000. If you have 90 kids spread pretty evenly over the 12 grades that's 7-8 kids per grade which probably can be absorbed without adding staff. But it would end up bringing the cost per pupil down because now you are educating an additional 90 kids within the same budget.
We live in a District where there are no school buses except for those children who have a disability.
The idea that it is the government's responsibility to take able bodied children to school is misguided and selfish. We made sure that both of our children arrived at school and were borught home. We are a family with two working parents but like everyone else in Pleasantville we figured out how to make it work. Those parents who are protesting this change should not be flaunting their limitations. Its about time that all paresnt in NY took responsibilty for the trasnportation of their own.
Fair enough. We'll pay directly for our children's transportation just as soon as everyone else pays directly for their own children's education like we do. User pays is fair. If you can't afford to educate your children, don't have them. Stop cranking out kids you can't afford.
Grandmachris should taxpayer dollars be wasted on the many? Do you realize that transportation is far cheaper than educating the private school kids (the district still collects school taxes). Wake up and think before you open your mouth. Stop with the class warfare.
What class warfare? I was aware of the added cost. However, I do support transportation as long as it is within the school district. I also believe that going to Kennedy is not necessarily "a better life".
Why should taxpayer dollars go to support "a better way of life" for a few?