School merger: Too much, too fast, to...

School merger: Too much, too fast, too soon

Posted in the Herkimer Forum

First Prev
of 7
Next Last
concerned parent

New York, NY

#1 Jan 4, 2012
One of the things most troublesome about proposed school merger study is its complete lack of risk assessment.

The study ignores the possibility that a merger does not go quite as planned. It fails to account for the possibility (probability) and that things could go wrong -- state aid is one-third that expected, transportation costs were grossly underestimated, educational quality actually declines e.g. NYS standard test scores fall from today.

The study's purpose statement betrays its pro-merger bias:

“To Determine if the reorganization (through centralization) of the four districts will provide enhanced educational opportunities and, at the same time, increase efficiencies and lower cost for the overall
operations by forming a reorganized school district. The Study will identify potential savings, educational opportunities, management improvements, and benefits to the community.”

Great -- now how about identifying the impact if things don't go as planned?

According to the Boston Globe, school mergers virtually never deliver the benefits that advocates claims. This Boston Globe article is a must-read for anyone interested in the merger.

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/artic...
Merge Supporter

New York, NY

#2 Jan 5, 2012
That isn't quite true. If you take a look at the study document what you can find are lists of challenges - namely the things that might be at issue with a merge. So certainly the committee involved appears to have reviewed the potential hurdles.

If what you want is a guaranteed risk free school system - YOU DON'T HAVE THAT NOW. That is not realistic nor possible.

And it certainly DID account for the decline (or at best stabilization) of state aid. THAT IS ONE OF THE PRIMARY REASONS OUR PRESENT DISTRICTS ARE FAILING ! They are too small and have too limited resources to provide the needed educational opportunities that our kids deserve.

As for transportation costs all i can say is the study has numbers provided by the transportation people within the district. Who else would know better or have a better estimate? Do YOU ? If so please share what you estimate the costs at and explain your method for determining these costs.

According to Syracuse University, mergers in upstate NY, and especially in small rural districts like ours provide outright savings to as much as 25%, and increases in property values. This isn't a study of China, or MA, or FL...it is a study on NYS !

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/propertytaxsessi...

The bottom line that anyone who has suggested that the merge should be defeated has failed to answer is this - exactly what is your plan to improve our situation (meaning the educational systems we have in place now) if the merge doesn't happen ?

I think we all agree that :
1) our districts are in dire financial straits
2) this is largely due to changes in state and federal revenue
3) Our children's education has suffered with staffing cuts and programing cuts
4) We lack anything approximating college preparatory classes in almost every district.

So what exactly will you do to change this ? because if you don't, we will see MORE CUTS TO STAFF, MORE PROGRAM LOSS, the LOSS OF SPORTS PROGRAMMING, and MORE OF OUR YOUNG PEOPLE LEAVING THE AREA.

So ? What's your HONEST alternative?
MValley69

United States

#3 Jan 5, 2012
keep things the way they are, voate NO
concerned parent

New York, NY

#4 Jan 5, 2012
Merge Supporter wrote:
That isn't quite true. If you take a look at the study document what you can find are lists of challenges - namely the things that might be at issue with a merge. So certainly the committee involved appears to have reviewed the potential hurdles.
If what you want is a guaranteed risk free school system - YOU DON'T HAVE THAT NOW. That is not realistic nor possible.
And it certainly DID account for the decline (or at best stabilization) of state aid. THAT IS ONE OF THE PRIMARY REASONS OUR PRESENT DISTRICTS ARE FAILING ! They are too small and have too limited resources to provide the needed educational opportunities that our kids deserve.
As for transportation costs all i can say is the study has numbers provided by the transportation people within the district. Who else would know better or have a better estimate? Do YOU ? If so please share what you estimate the costs at and explain your method for determining these costs.

& etc.
Dale, the “challenges” listed in the report pay little more than lip service to specific issues, many of which are facts, not scenarios – e.g., it is accepted that the number of kids who would be able to participate in varsity or JV sports will be cut substantially.

The report does not consider worst-case scenarios. What would the worst case scenario be? Well hmmm, cash-strapped NYS ends its school merger incentive aid program, depriving the new MILFH (Mohawk Ilion Frankfort Herkimer) School District of $70 million it’s banking on through 2025. NO, I don’t expect a “guaranteed risk-free school system” as you put – I expect an ASSESSMENT of risk so as to make an informed decision.

NYS cuts education aid all the time. In fact, dwindling NYS education is a prime reason why the merger is being considered! Yet this report cheerily assumes that a new MILFH District will cash in with a $7.7 million a year (to start) annual increase in state aid with higher aid extending for 13 years. LOL.

Yet as the report indicates on page 70, a merger DOES NOT REDUCE OPERATING EXPENDITURES! The annual cost for all four districts is $80 million whether they are separate or a single entity.

I find disturbing the overly optimistic picture in this report. Don Reile made the same blithe promises to the village of Herkimer before he sold the village out to Niagara Mohawk, to its grave and continuing detriment.

Dale, your report is riddled with unanswered questions, unchallenged assumptions and contradictions. It should be considered nothing more than a first draft. Comparative analysis is weak or non-existent. Wording is ambiguous and open to interpretation. Several examples:

EXAMPLE #1: STAFF LAYOFFS
Pg 70 indicates that staff budget costs would be reduced by $2.1 million in the first year of a merger. WOW! Pretty important figure – with no supporting detail. How many staff layoffs would that be? What’s the basis for assumption?

I’ll assume a $50,000 cost per FTE including salary and benefits, that would mean 42 full-time people laid off as a result of the merger. In which districts? Which positions?

Laying off 42 people is easier said than done. I doubt that post-merger, the new district would surgically slice $2.1 million in payroll. It’s an easy assumption to make, but one that experience shows is unlikely to go as planned. It is safe to assume that any payroll savings achieved would be substantially LESS than $2.1 million.

And what’s this about $715,000 in NEW “expenditures to address developing new labor contracts”?(Pg 70)
concerned parent

New York, NY

#5 Jan 5, 2012
** CONTINUED **

EXAMPLE #2: 70% INCREASE IN BUSING TIME AND TRANSPORTATION COSTS
The report states on page 61 in the transportation section:

“To transport pupils under one hour or less to the designated grade level school buildings…”

Wait a minute. We’re talking a bus ride of UP TO ONE HOUR to get to school? Obviously, up to an hour to get home – so some students will spend UP TO TWO HOURS on a bus?

What’s the average time that kids spend on a bus now? What would the average increase in bus time be under a merger? Pretty important question, wouldn’t you say? As students are NOT educated on a bus! The report fails to address this important question.

Also regarding transportation – under a merger, transportation costs would increase BY SEVENTY (70%) PERCENT – a total increase of $1.6 million. That obviously is a huge increase. From $2.3 million to $3.9 million. You can bet that Birnie Bus will be playing hardball during its next contract negotiation to cash in on increased transportation spending!

Now, the report indicates (without appropriate detail or explanation) that state aid supporting transportation would increase from $1.6 million to $2.8 million. Really, how and why?. Regardless of which entity pays, it’s all our tax dollars and an additional $1.6 million for transportation is a LOT.

EXAMPLE #3 PROPERTY TAXES
On page 74 we find this amusing statement:

“A property owner with a $100,000 home in Frankfort-Schuyler, Herkimer and Mohawk can expect a lower property school tax bill of between $315 and $322 in 2012-13 compared to 2011-2012.”

The study completely oversteps its bounds here, in effect promising a property tax reduction that it has no right or power to promise. LOL. It also contradicts this statement at the Herkimer District merger page:“And we don’t know how it will affect area taxes.” Which is truthful and acrcurate.

Dale, as someone who has several decades in public service, you should know better than most that governments and taxation will expand to available capacity and very rarely retract (only in election years). Now, I would expect that initially, the newly merged district would indeed reduce property taxes. Any reduction would be short-lived. Soon enough, taxes would increase to previous levels and continue growing beyond that.

I am sure you will say, but if you DONT approve the merger taxes will increase and education will be cut. That may be true; it certainly makes sense.

What does NOT make sense is plunging headlong into a merger of enormous magnitude with far reaching implications based on the sloppy, incomplete study that has been made available for public review.
MV59 Merge Supporter

Syracuse, NY

#6 Jan 5, 2012
I appreciate the attempt to define me by a name or person or position...but as I have maintained...i am neither confirming or denying I am anything other than someone interested in the facts...if you care to share your identity then maybe I will share mine ...

Regardless, some responses to your concerns...

My understanding of the study process is that these items - specifically state incentive aid - was in fact give considerable discussion. And the assessment was that, based on past year's INCREASES in funding to study merges that there likelihood of state aid for merging being cut is very low. So I am not sure what type of "assessment" you are looking for. As far as I know, discussions were held with state representatives about the incentive aid and there is no reason to believe it would be anything other than there for the long haul. If the state was pushing for merges, why would it be logical to think it would disappear ? Not asking about the POSSIBILITY (which I think we both understand conceptually)...just saying the risk assessment I got from the study and the committee and other discussions is that this is very low or none existent. Just curious, do you have some other information ? Would be happy to see it shared if you do !

As for the budget, you are correct - it does appear to be $80M...the same as the 4 districts CURRENTLY. Of course this is $80M with added aid AND FAR MORE PROGRAMMING. So it is not as though the budget of the proposed merged district is saying "we will do the same as we are now with the same amount of money." They are saying will add a LOT of educational programming and extracurricular programming AND still not spend any more than is presently being spent.

Add on top of that the shortages and subsequent potential cuts that may be forthcoming next year - see the article in FS and read about the number of cuts they may be facing.

As for supporting detail, it is ALL detailed rather specifically in the FULL document that is available for ANYONE to read through the school websites. So if you are so motivated to look, the information can be tracked down there.

The reduction in staffing is something that was also addressed in terms of the "natural " attrition the 4 combined districts have experienced in typical annual cycles. The need to cut a specific number of positions should be relatively minimal (of course not tot he person being cut)- rather the needed cuts may be pretty fully achieved through retirements etc.

And let's not forget the number we will be cutting if we do NOTHING...

My best understanding of the $715,000 expenditure you mention is what it is estimated to take to put all of the various union contracts on par with one another. obviously if a teacher in one district makes $40,000 for job X and a teacher in another makes $30,000 for the same job, and they are equal in all other ways, there will need to be some adjustment from a labor contract standpoint.

So i still haven't gotten an answer to my questions - do you agree with the facts listed above ? And what would be your alternative? I'm honestly willing to listen and discuss it...so share it with everyone...
concerned parent

New York, NY

#7 Jan 5, 2012
MV59 Merge Supporter wrote:
So i still haven't gotten an answer to my questions - do you agree with the facts listed above ? And what would be your alternative? I'm honestly willing to listen and discuss it...so share it with everyone...
I appreciate your feedback. As far as whether I agree with the "facts" listed above, well that would depend on which facts we are talking about. Without debating each one, I generally find the report lacking in a number of areas, some of which I highlighted.

My view is that this is an epic decision that should not be rushed. Since the report was released, members of the community have raised a number of questions and concerns.

The process should be iterative. It SHOULD take time. The committee should take into consideration those questions and concerns raised by stakeholders and revise the report accordingly.

The committee should take several months and rework the report into what you could call a "FINAL" version -- clarifying, strengthening, better outlining pros and cons (RISK), and better summarizing information while providing deeper detail to withstand critical analysis.

As it is, I cannot support the merger. The report simply leaves too many questions unaddressed, such as the increase in bus time for some students.

To me, spending as much as two hours a day on a bus is unacceptable. It's bad for students, it's bad for education. Then again, the report doesn't tell me how much time (on average, and at the most) that students currently spend on a bus.

According to you, NYS has assured the committee that merger incentive aid will be available into perpetuity. In view of that, I see little to no downside to taking whatever time is required to ensure that all contigencies are thoroughly examined.

The idea that a merger would go into effect for the 2012-13 school year, under a new MILFH District, is ridiculous and rash as far as I'm concerned.

Now I would be interested in your perspective on this Boston Globe article, which finds that school mergers typically fall far short of expectations and are often counterproductive:

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/artic...
MV59 Merge Supporter

Syracuse, NY

#8 Jan 5, 2012
As for raised questions and concerns, of course those are important. Some of them are (IMO) a matter of sharing insight or information that maybe people aren't aware of. that's what this forum SHOULD be about...but obviously often isn't.

I think it is interactive...the data has been available for the better part of a year in various forms...the final report will have been available for more than 3 months by the time any final vote is taken. I believe there have been more at least 10 meetings about the study. And my understanding is that ANY GROUP CAN REQUEST members f the study teams of BOE to come speak about the contents of the study. So if there are groups wanting this they should speak up.

Bus time is always a concern. The proposal ensures NO student would spend longer than the time current spent by students on buses. So that issue really is no different than the current system in place - we now have children who spend 45 mins on buses each way. No one would spend more than that in the merged district transportation plan.

No, according to the study committee and the study team, the state of NY has stated that they are in favor of school mergers. they have also taken actions to increase the budget line for merge studies (I think by as much as 10X the past years amount, but I am not clear on that). The state has stated to the study team based on what they shared at he meetings that their is no reason to think that the money wouldn't be there. As you pointed out, this is no guarantee but that's not what we would get regardless of the state of the economy. rather, IMO, I think it speaks strongly that the incentive money will be the least of the issues facing the merge district. Is that somehow unreasonable based on those facts ?

Rash and ridiculous ? Well, when the Ilion school burned to the ground in the 60s, and the Mohawk School did the same more recently, the communities responded. there was a lot of concern about how it would work to push the students into a single building and split sessions etc. But you know what? It did work, and by all accounts worked VERY well. So I don't think the issue is truly about timing. YES, I will say I would be in favor of seeing it voted on now, and taking a year to implement, but that is my opinion. Regardless, this comes down to political will, not time. We "merged" districts int he face of catastrophe in a matter of a week at most. We can do the same in a matter of 6 months if the WILL is there to do it. I', not sure how anyone can argue differently given the past history of cooperation.

I have answered most everything you have asked, maybe not to your satisfaction, but that's ok. yet you really haven't answered any of my questions...

So to be honest, I'm unwilling to let this become simply a one sided question and answer session...it's your turn to convince me ther eis a better option here...let's go back and start with the basics...

I listed 4...not that hard to respond to the four I think...adn I attempted to respond to yours point by point so i am curious as to whether you have a view on these basic facts...

I think we all agree that :
1) our districts are in dire financial straits
2) this is largely due to changes in state and federal revenue
3) Our children's education has suffered with staffing cuts and programing cuts
4) We lack anything approximating college preparatory classes in almost every district.

Are these correct in your opinion or do you take exception to any ? If so, what and why ? And offer me your alternative solution that would fix this system as it now stands. I'd like to see what you propose as the alternative - without all the hyperbole, I honestly think if we don't come up with a true answer, we are doing a great disservice to our children.
concerned parent

New York, NY

#9 Jan 5, 2012
MV59 Merge Supporter wrote:
So to be honest, I'm unwilling to let this become simply a one sided question and answer session...it's your turn to convince me ther eis a better option here...let's go back and start with the basics...
I listed 4...not that hard to respond to the four I think...adn I attempted to respond to yours point by point so i am curious as to whether you have a view on these basic facts...
I think we all agree that :
1) our districts are in dire financial straits
2) this is largely due to changes in state and federal revenue
3) Our children's education has suffered with staffing cuts and programing cuts
4) We lack anything approximating college preparatory classes in almost every district.
Are these correct in your opinion or do you take exception to any ? If so, what and why ? And offer me your alternative solution that would fix this system as it now stands. I'd like to see what you propose as the alternative - without all the hyperbole, I honestly think if we don't come up with a true answer, we are doing a great disservice to our children.
You're asking questions I'm not capable of answering because I don't have all the facts. You have to recognize that unlike you, most people haven't been immersed in this topic for months on end...

To your statements:

1. I suppose our districts are in dire straits, so are banks in Ireland and Greece.

2. Problems because of "changes" in state and federal aid. Dunno! It would be nice if the report informed me of how state and federal aid has "changed" (declined) over the past 10 years or so,by each district, as a % of operating expenditures, as a % of total revenue, but it does not. This is why I feel the study needs continued iteration -- critical data points like this are unaddressed.

Similarly, what's the prorated school tax burden for property owners over the last 10 years? I have no idea.

3. If my children's education has suffered, it's not necessarily due to staffing and programming cuts. any number of factors can influence educational quality, including macro-level phenomena such as video games, social media and mobile phones. short answer, yes, i suspect you are correct to an extent but I also believe that cuts are not the only devil here.

4. Did we EVER have college preparatory classes? Don't know. The study makes no mentioin of college preparattory classes.

My "better option" is this -- put the study back in the oven, let it simmer and marinate and cook thoroughly. There is no urgency for a merger to take effect in the immediate future.

More time is required to separate the facts from the hyperbole and to enable the most people possible to make a fully informed decision.
outsider

New York, NY

#10 Jan 5, 2012
keep citing the boston globe article and you'll keep getting laughed at.
outsider

New York, NY

#12 Jan 5, 2012
bronx bum wrote:
http://www.boston.com/bostongl obe/ideas/articles/2009/03/08/ together_we_wont/?page=full
great article, vote No
Yeah you'll keep getting laughed at. Article has nothing to do with NY nor studied any mergers of school districts in NY for it's basis.

Useless and irrelevant. Just like you, eh Frenchie?
MV59 Merge Supporter

Syracuse, NY

#13 Jan 5, 2012
I appreciate your attempt at least to respond to the points brought forward.

I guess one of the issues ultimately is how do you know what YOU know, or what anyone else knows...without getting particularly esoteric, ANYONE could have come to ANY of the meetings or read ANY of the documents that haev been made available at ANY time.

Soit just seems to me that there are two problems with your admitted lack of exposure to the issues you feel are important.

1) How much of this is the individual's responsibility to educate themselves ? So for example, it wouldn't be hard to go find the amount of State Aid to the districts. Bet you could do it in 10 minutes...you obviously have skills and some common sense. So you're are right in one regard. People DO need to educate themselves about the pluses and minuses. But this has been under consideration for now more than a year. Why wouldn't you think to look at some of these issues (a simple one like how much aid we get) prior to this ? I mean the charge of the committee was to examine what a merged district might look like. People DO need to educate themselves. Not saying you haven't, just saying some of the questions you are asking you could probably easily find.

2) At what point is the effort to inform enough? When every last question has been asked (repeatedly undoubtedly?)? When ONLY every question has been answered in every conceivable way ? obviously we both know that's not possible and would amount to analysis paralysis. So there has to be some reasonable cut off of the discussion and a vote held.

There in lies the rub, as it were I am sure. So it IS a balancing act between enough discussion and time, and too much. In as much as maybe more may be helpful. I think to characterize it as being crammed through is also disingenuous.

Also remember that the process is weighted heavily AGAINST merging.

1) If ONE of the school boards says no...it is done.
2) If ONE of the districts says no during the straw poll...it is done.
3) If ONE of the districts votes no during the final ballot...it is done.

And at each stage those opposed to the merge have an advantage - the opportunity to organize and rally. So for those opposed to the merge, it is three strikes and you lose. For those that support it, one strike and the ball game is over.
Not so fast

New York, NY

#14 Jan 5, 2012
MV59 Merge Supporter wrote:
As for raised questions and concerns, of course those are important. Some of them are (IMO) a matter of sharing insight or information that maybe people aren't aware of. that's what this forum SHOULD be about...but obviously often isn't.
I think it is interactive...the data has been available for the better part of a year in various forms...the final report will have been available for more than 3 months by the time any final vote is taken. I believe there have been more at least 10 meetings about the study. And my understanding is that ANY GROUP CAN REQUEST members f the study teams of BOE to come speak about the contents of the study. So if there are groups wanting this they should speak up.
Bus time is always a concern. The proposal ensures NO student would spend longer than the time current spent by students on buses. So that issue really is no different than the current system in place - we now have children who spend 45 mins on buses each way. No one would spend more than that in the merged district transportation plan.
No, according to the study committee and the study team, the state of NY has stated that they are in favor of school mergers. they have also taken actions to increase the budget line for merge studies (I think by as much as 10X the past years amount, but I am not clear on that). The state has stated to the study team based on what they shared at he meetings that their is no reason to think that the money wouldn't be there. As you pointed out, this is no guarantee but that's not what we would get regardless of the state of the economy. rather, IMO, I think it speaks strongly that the incentive money will be the least of the issues facing the merge district. Is that somehow unreasonable based on those facts ?
Rash and ridiculous ? Well, when the Ilion school burned to the ground in the 60s, and the Mohawk School did the same more recently, the communities responded. there was a lot of concern about how it would work to push the students into a single building and split sessions etc. But you know what? It did work, and by all accounts worked VERY well. So I don't think the issue is truly about timing. YES, I will say I would be in favor of seeing it voted on now, and taking a year to implement, but that is my opinion. Regardless, this comes down to political will, not time. We "merged" districts int he face of catastrophe in a matter of a week at most. We can do the same in a matter of 6 months if the WILL is there to do it. I', not sure how anyone can argue differently given the past history of cooperation.
I have answered most everything you have asked, maybe not to your satisfaction, but that's ok. yet you really haven't answered any of my questions...
So to be honest, I'm unwilling to let this become simply a one sided question and answer session...it's your turn to convince me ther eis a better option here...let's go back and start with the basics...
And lets not forget that IF transportation does in fact become no more than 45 minutes, children who are in sports will need to tack on an additional 2+ hours for their trips to and from Syracuse and Watertown. Lots of time left for those advance placement studies. Especially when you have current sports such as soccer and basketball that don't begin until 7 or 8 for the varsity levels on school nights. A merger isn't going to change what time we participate in sporting events. I know, I know sports aren't the issue, I shouldn't bring this up, sorry. I believe many parents of elementary children may not realize these bits of information.
yeah

New York, NY

#15 Jan 5, 2012
Done as it stands...remember any three or two schools can revisit the question and merge.
MV59 Merge Supporter

Syracuse, NY

#16 Jan 6, 2012
Actually no, Not so fast...no they actually won't.

Right now some of the districts travel in excess of 50 miles to go to contests.

WITHIN 50 miles are at least 7 schools that all would be wither class AA or class A in terms of size. So the possibility of finding reasonable competition with even LESS travel is very real.

In the worst case scenario, they would only travel as much as they are now.
Keep Pushing

Waltham, MA

#18 Jan 6, 2012
MV59 Merge Supporter wrote:
Actually no, Not so fast...no they actually won't.
Right now some of the districts travel in excess of 50 miles to go to contests.
WITHIN 50 miles are at least 7 schools that all would be wither class AA or class A in terms of size. So the possibility of finding reasonable competition with even LESS travel is very real.
In the worst case scenario, they would only travel as much as they are now.
For 1 or 2 non league or championship games!!! NOT LEAGUE CONTESTS!! Wake up, enough with the cover ups.
What

New York, NY

#19 Jan 6, 2012
MV59 Merge Supporter wrote:
I appreciate your attempt at least to respond to the points brought forward.
I guess one of the issues ultimately is how do you know what YOU know, or what anyone else knows...without getting particularly esoteric, ANYONE could have come to ANY of the meetings or read ANY of the documents that haev been made available at ANY time.
Soit just seems to me that there are two problems with your admitted lack of exposure to the issues you feel are important.
1) How much of this is the individual's responsibility to educate themselves ? So for example, it wouldn't be hard to go find the amount of State Aid to the districts. Bet you could do it in 10 minutes...you obviously have skills and some common sense. So you're are right in one regard. People DO need to educate themselves about the pluses and minuses. But this has been under consideration for now more than a year. Why wouldn't you think to look at some of these issues (a simple one like how much aid we get) prior to this ? I mean the charge of the committee was to examine what a merged district might look like. People DO need to educate themselves. Not saying you haven't, just saying some of the questions you are asking you could probably easily find.
2) At what point is the effort to inform enough? When every last question has been asked (repeatedly undoubtedly?)? When ONLY every question has been answered in every conceivable way ? obviously we both know that's not possible and would amount to analysis paralysis. So there has to be some reasonable cut off of the discussion and a vote held.
There in lies the rub, as it were I am sure. So it IS a balancing act between enough discussion and time, and too much. In as much as maybe more may be helpful. I think to characterize it as being crammed through is also disingenuous.
Also remember that the process is weighted heavily AGAINST merging.
1) If ONE of the school boards says no...it is done.
2) If ONE of the districts says no during the straw poll...it is done.
3) If ONE of the districts votes no during the final ballot...it is done.
And at each stage those opposed to the merge have an advantage - the opportunity to organize and rally. So for those opposed to the merge, it is three strikes and you lose. For those that support it, one strike and the ball game is over.
Done? not quite. Done as a four school merger (maybe) but not done.
MV59 Merge Supporter

Syracuse, NY

#20 Jan 6, 2012
Keep Pushing - there is nothing that prohibits the schools from forming a league or from playing as independents. So it is a very realistic prospect.
Keep Pushing

New York, NY

#21 Jan 6, 2012
MV59 Merge Supporter wrote:
Keep Pushing - there is nothing that prohibits the schools from forming a league or from playing as independents. So it is a very realistic prospect.
Playing as independents? What does that mean? Not seeing this proposal in the merger study is this a secret? Interesting how you have answers/proposals the public doesn't.
Paytoplay

New York, NY

#23 Jan 6, 2012
High time sports became privately funded. We can't afford a no frills basic education in the valley anymore. Tax dollars should not be spent on sports. They should be either intramural or like ayso. If your kid wants to play YOU foot the bill. Do you realize what Section 3 fees cost? Insurance? Bussing? Coaching? If we can't afford the basics we have no business even talking about sports.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 7
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Herkimer Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
2 big sluts in herkimer 9 hr Here ya go 2
Herkimer Football 11 hr Herkfoot 7
herkimer county treasurer 19 hr Resident 14
Mohawk Valley Veterinary Services East Herkimer (Jul '16) Fri Peter 28
Scumbag susan schrader Fri PSS 8
LET'S get OUT OF HERE! Fri the OLD MAN 1
Poll Herkimer Needs a Gay Bar Because (Nov '08) Fri upurs dale miller 15

Herkimer Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Herkimer Mortgages