Two parents were arrested for sending their kids to a public school in another town. They used a relative’s address to make it appear as if they were living there themselves. On the surface it doesn’t look that serious. I mean, all parents want the best education for their kids and if these parents felt that the education in another town was better than their’s, they just tried to do what was best for their kids. Right?
Well, I said “on the surface” because in reality it does matter. Students here don’t have to pay tuition to study in public schools. That means the government uses tax payers’ money to run the schools. Therefore, how good a town’s school district is decides the prices of homes in that school district. Better the schools, higher the prices. Higher the prices, higher the taxes. So, if you want to pay lower taxes but want to get the benefits that the residents of higher tax areas are getting, it doesn’t seem right. At least not to me. Because I saw firsthand last year how school districts struggle to pay for all their expenses and to provide quality education to the kids. It is a tough balancing act. Since not all residents of a town have school going kids, many of them might not be happy about their higher taxes. I saw this too in last year’s town budget planning meetings. It takes about 10,400 dollars per kid per year to provide education in that town. These parents were sending THREE kids to school there. This means the parents swindled the town out of nearly 31,000 dollars per year. It Is not known how many years they did this.
Another thing that bothered me was how some people, that the news crew interviewed for this story, believed that the parents did nothing wrong. I am an honest and upright citizen. I could never imagine doing something like this. If I wanted to send my kids to a better school, I’d see if I can afford to buy or rent a place in that school district. That is what we did when we bought our house. We were very particular about the school district that we wanted to be in, so we compromised on the house we bought. We could have bought a much newer and grander house for less money in another school district. The values that I and my husband hold dear weren’t inborn. They were given to us by our parents. We saw our parents spend their lives living those values and virtues and that is how we learned them. How will the kids of these parents, who believe it is OK to cheat tax payers out of their money, learn values of honesty? Not by example, I am sure.
Well, I said “on the surface” because in reality it does matter. Students here don’t have to pay tuition to study in public schools. That means the government uses tax payers’ money to run the schools. Therefore, how good a town’s school district is decides the prices of homes in that school district. Better the schools, higher the prices. Higher the prices, higher the taxes. So, if you want to pay lower taxes but want to get the benefits that the residents of higher tax areas are getting, it doesn’t seem right. At least not to me. Because I saw firsthand last year how school districts struggle to pay for all their expenses and to provide quality education to the kids. It is a tough balancing act. Since not all residents of a town have school going kids, many of them might not be happy about their higher taxes. I saw this too in last year’s town budget planning meetings. It takes about 10,400 dollars per kid per year to provide education in that town. These parents were sending THREE kids to school there. This means the parents swindled the town out of nearly 31,000 dollars per year. It Is not known how many years they did this.
Another thing that bothered me was how some people, that the news crew interviewed for this story, believed that the parents did nothing wrong. I am an honest and upright citizen. I could never imagine doing something like this. If I wanted to send my kids to a better school, I’d see if I can afford to buy or rent a place in that school district. That is what we did when we bought our house. We were very particular about the school district that we wanted to be in, so we compromised on the house we bought. We could have bought a much newer and grander house for less money in another school district. The values that I and my husband hold dear weren’t inborn. They were given to us by our parents. We saw our parents spend their lives living those values and virtues and that is how we learned them. How will the kids of these parents, who believe it is OK to cheat tax payers out of their money, learn values of honesty? Not by example, I am sure.
Its the same system here and it reminds me of similar thing that happened here a few months back. One particular highschool which is offcourse one of the best, expelled a few children because they found out that these kids were not living in the area. The parents rented for a month or so just to get their children into this school and then moved out into a cheaper area ! The principal was abused and what not for it. It is a little sad that the school had to take such action but these cheaters were putting a lot of strain on the resources of the school and it was getting difficult for them to give quality education.
ReplyDeleteI can understand the type of pressure the parents could be under for not being able to live in that area as the house prices do go up where a good school is situated. But then, they have to get there priorities straight and let go of some of the conveniences of living in a cheaper area if they want their children to get into a particular school. We may have to do that too as my son has been thinking of going to this school later on, but can't really think of doing what the other parents did - that will be such a wrong thing to do. I have been telling Bunty that we will try to move into that area by that time otherwise we will apply for the 'out of zone' seats in that school which are limited and depends on a test or lottery system.
2BM: Yes, exactly! Set your priorities straight, give up on some conveniences or live with what you have. Or go about it the legal way. Taking a test seems fair to me!
ReplyDeleteAnother thing I have learned over the years is that more than the standard of education at school, what matters is the atmosphere at home. you can put them in the best of schools, but if the atmosphere at your home is not conducive to studies, your kids won't get anywhere.
Similar situation exists in NJ, I think it is common especially in the NE where there is a strong sense of home rule which means each town whether it is small or large provides its own services. Frankly I think this system is crazy because here in NJ it has resulted in some 600 odd school districts all with varying levels of funding and amenities. I've lived in two other states and consolidated school districts and municipal services were the norm-a larger tax base results in a lower tax rate and a better distribution of resources. Currently, the school district Mini-me attends is in litigation with the university over the children it sends to its school district. The problem is because we live in family housing on the university campus and the uni being a state entity it pays no property tax. It's a complex issue and while people of means can afford to choose where they live, people of more limited means may not have as much a choice even if they are trying to provide the best quality education for their children. I whole heartedly agree that education begins and ends in the home, but even that can't trump some of the problems present in the poorer school districts.
ReplyDeleteI hate it when ppl are so narrow-minded, dammit.
ReplyDeleteThis is wrong.. I can understand we all want best for our kids, but swinding is not the way to do it.. which brings me back to my favorite topic.. i think the public school system is flawed in so many ways. That a particular school district shines may have NOTHING to with the teachers but more about the quality of students in that area. And a bad school district has NO incentive to improve.
ReplyDeleteI am all for the voucher system.
Lumi: I like the idea of consolidated school districts and municipal services, though I would love to hear more about it. As for the litigation between the school district and the university, maybe the school district should ask state for more funds (I know it is easier said than done) because in effect the state is using the public education provided by the school district. Also, the uni must be paying their taxes to the state so if the state is getting tax money from the uni, it is only fair that the state contribute funds to this school district. At least that is what my simple mind understands.
ReplyDeleteSuki: Yup - their view is definitely narrow so as to focus only on their personal gain and not on the bigger picture.
Dotmom: What you have said is my MAIN grouse against the No Child Left Behind law. But many times the availability of funds does impact the standard of education provided in public schools becuase with more funds schools can hire and retain better teachers by paying them more, schools can afford to have assistant teachers and I have seen what a great impact they have on the quality of education provided in a school. More funds also means better extra-curricular programs for kids which in turn means better all-round personalities of kids. Oh I could go on and on and on :D
Here in Norwalk, we don't have the voucher system. And I firmly believe that most times even bright students are only as good as what their teachers bring out in them. And it is not ONLY about the teachers. Funding affects the availability of text books also and therefore it indirectly affects what kind of curriculum a school system follows. Its all intertwined.
Although Chip is not yet in grade school, so I am going out on a limb here, but availability of additional funds is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition. I think inner-city schools have way more funding (because if NCLB) than your typical suburban school districts. But we all know who does better.
ReplyDeleteDotmom, I was not talking about additional funds. I was talking about necessary funds to impart education to kids of a school district. This includes the money that the Board of Ed needs to pay teachers, to buy text books, to provide teaching and learning material to schools etc. For additional funding our PTO helps out with fundraisers etc. And NCLB promised federal aid to school districts but they don't provide sufficient aid to enable schools to meet the stringent benchmarks that have been set up. And NCLB is such a deficient law at so many levels. It was set up with the right intention, but the logistics haven't been properly worked out. At least in Fairfield county (and Connecticut) school districts are funded by taxpayers' money and receive some state help too. But Norwalk has the misfortune to be a "poor" town in middle of affluent towns and hence it is wrongly classified as an affluent town. We pay the price for it in the form of high taxes and insufficent funds for the Board of Ed.
ReplyDeleteAnd, I never set out to argue about the efficacy of schools. My rant was about parents who cheat the town out of tax money. These parents have actually been charged with "stealing public education" ridiculous as it may sound. But I think it was the right thing to do.