| Author |
Message |
    
newjerz
Citizen
Username: Newjerz
Post Number: 95
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 11:12 am: |     |
You know you are correct about the schools being good. I went K-12 in the M/SO school system and think I got a great education. I have nothing but good things to say about all but maybe 4 of my teachers throughout my entire career in the school system. I guess my point is that in the last 5-10 years an outsider could not objectively look at the performance of our school and decide "yes the schools are so good here that this would be a good place to move to." |
tjohn
Citizen
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 1634
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 11:19 am: | |
Hello,
Were they inhaling? Statistically speaking, there is an alarming correlation between people who don't inhale and also exhibit generally poor morals. Of course, there is only one person in recorded history who ever had the chutzpah to say that they smoked but didn't inhale, so this is not a statistically valid population sample. |
hello
Citizen
Username: Hello
Post Number: 37
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 11:40 am: | |
newjerz:
i believe my essex county taxes will be about $300/month. i understand how these taxes are difficult for those on fixed incomes. but, the huge majority of the taxes we pay here are chosen democratically and purely locally. because of midtown direct, maplewood is desirable to those working in NYC with good incomes. these folks typically have a different perspective on many issues than do empty-nesters. so there will be displacement- at the margin, empty-nesters are inclined to leave and young families with high incomes inclined to move in. it's all positive and efficient- the empty-nesters are made very wealthy by the rising property values. they can move as close as springfield and enjoy much lower taxes and home prices due to the lack of a train station within walking distance.
of course, this same form of displacement has been occurring for about 20 years in many inner-cities, as often blacks were forced out of their housing to make way for often white yuppies. this displacement was never criticized on foxnews or rush limbaugh, of course. |
amandacat
Citizen
Username: Amandacat
Post Number: 191
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 11:40 am: | |
To the original question posed in this thread (if it's not too late for such a thing), we bought our house in 2001 from a growing family who were upgrading to a bigger home in the neighborhood. We hope to do be able to do the same one day. |
Dave Ross
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 4994
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 11:48 am: | |
hello,
The increase in home values has nothing to do with the increase in taxes. If all of a sudden property values dropped by 50 percent, the town would still require the same amount of operating expenses. Springfield does not have lower taxes because it does not have train service, but rather because it has a larger base of commercial properties to offset residential taxes. |
bklyntonj
Citizen
Username: Bklyntonj
Post Number: 69
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 11:49 am: | |
Well, call me crazy but I moved my family here mainly based on what I heard about the school system. I spent time talking to people who went through both the Montclair and Maplewood school systems and when I weighed the arguments, M/SO won in my opinion. To anyone who thinks the lack of motivation of the students makes the school system bad is wrong.
I also will say what many won't, many (not all) suburban black kids admire inner city black kids and what they perceive as their way of life. So yes, they try to act "cool" and embrace "the streets" instead of the books. The problem is they don't know that most kids from the streets would trade places with them in a heartbeat.
I also know many older whites who speak on the motivation of the youth declining when it comes to striving for a better life than what they currently have.
So yes newjerz, I believe you're right and I also believe that anyone who's willing to speak on the problem should be willing to work on correcting the problem.
So if anyone has anything negative to say, offer a solution or a desire to find one or shut up! |
tjohn
Citizen
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 1635
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 11:38 am: | |
Hello,
It is in nobody's interest to drive empty-nesters from Maplewood. We lose the balance that comes from having long-time residents. More specifically, the empty-nesters are replaced by families with children that in turn put more of a load on our schools that in turn puts upward pressure on our property taxes.
This is a different phenomenon from the one you describe where a poor neighborhood becomes hot and the original residents can no longer afford to live there.
You seemed determined to inject issues of race into every thread to which you contribute. While there are certainly very real and very serious issues of race in the U.S., this doesn't mean that every issue is racial at its root. |
hello
Citizen
Username: Hello
Post Number: 38
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 11:54 am: | |
dave-
respectfully, i think it does. the variable in taxes is the schools, not street repair, etc, and the average number of kids per house has everything to do with the amount of money the schools need. you put in midtown direct and you suddenly make maplewood (and millburn and summit and ...) more attractive to people who work in the city and have kids (those without kids probably prefer to be closer). they bid up house prices here.
tjohn-
no "body" is driving empty-nesters away. it's the free market at work, in a system where property taxes finance the schools. if, instead, income taxes were to finance the schools, then the balance you seek would probably be sustainable.
but you make no such proposal, so your claim my analogy is poor is feeble. |
crazyguggenheim
Citizen
Username: Crazyguggenheim
Post Number: 423
Registered: 2-2002
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 12:03 pm: | |
Call me crazy, but you say hello, i say goodbye!
Call me crazy |
Dave Ross
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 4995
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 12:16 pm: | |
hello,
As the recent re-evaluation has shown, the town's properties didn't increase proportionally in value. Homes closest to the train increased in value faster. So unless you're saying that people with more income have more children, I'm not sure your premise holds up w/r/t the midtown direct creating a booming school population. |
newjerz
Citizen
Username: Newjerz
Post Number: 96
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 12:22 pm: | |
I'm curious, does anyone know how the amount we spend per student compares to the amount spent by millburn or livingston or other towns with higher rated schools? |
bobk
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 3285
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 12:36 pm: | |
Some may find the enrollment figures in SOM schools of some interest in the context of this thread. In 1981 there were 5,585 kids in the schools. By 1993 the enrollment decreased to 4,962. In 2002 that number increased to 6,396.
Something like 2/3rdss of our taxes now go to the schools because of the enrollment growth. While there can be a big debate about where the money is spent (administration vs. instruction), we spend less per pupil than most of the surrounding towns. |
jfburch
Citizen
Username: Jfburch
Post Number: 694
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 12:54 pm: | |
newjerz:
You can find per pupil spending and a whole lot of other data at the NJ DOE School Report card site:
http://nj.evalsoft.com/ |
lumpyhead
Citizen
Username: Lumpyhead
Post Number: 366
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 1:11 pm: | |
A better question is where is everybody coming from and why ?? Of one of the answers is space for your money and the kiddies but the others are crime, schools and taxes as well. Compared to where they are coming from, Maplewood is much better because it is all relative. Not a good thing though because over time they will have to run somewhere else again instead of staying and trying to fix the problems. There are no easy answers but lets not lower expectations because it was worse somewhere else. |
Nohero
Citizen
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 1940
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 1:16 pm: | |
More "fun with numbers", from the data gathered by Fringe:
The low point in enrollment seems to have been 1988-1989, when enrollment was 4577. The numbers started trending up the next year. Enrollment in each year was greater than the last, until the the "peak" in the 2001-2002 school year (6396). The most recent figure, for 2002-2003, was 6364.
Oh, and while there are more students in total today, than in 1981, there were more students at Columbia in '81 (2123) than this past year (1888).
What does this mean? Who knows? The steady increase in the school population over the last 14 years show that the increasing enrollments are not just due to relatively recent events. But, as for finding more specific cause-and-effect relationships, more information may be needed than just school enrollment figures. |
ffof
Citizen
Username: Ffof
Post Number: 1360
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 1:23 pm: | |
THere is something called the baby boom (anyone ever heard of that ) and it's after effect called the echo. Enrollment drop off in the early 80's and then the steady increase in public schools is not just a Maplewood phenomenon. |
Arnomation
Citizen
Username: Arnomation
Post Number: 41
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 2:10 pm: | |
Here are a few more statistics for the debate :-)
MAPLEWOOD
http://www.greatschools.net/modperl/browse_school/nj/1863/
MILLBURN
http://www.greatschools.net/modperl/browse_school/nj/1181/
LIVINGSTON
http://www.greatschools.net/modperl/browse_school/nj/997/ |
HS
Citizen
Username: Pseudoah2
Post Number: 37
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 2:27 pm: | |
hello,
I agree wholeheartedly with tjohn...you seem to always bring a racial tilt to your comments...I think the statistics that others have given are are important..and as a person of color who works in education I will reiterate that there are many reasons for the disparity between blacks and whites..the history of the country stands for itself but NOT EVERYTHING has do with race...it more has to do with Socioeconomic status (SES)translation MONEY..you claim racism were there is none and yet you sound very racist yourself...take the color out and you will find that everyone wants the same thing, safety, opportunity and choice.. |
Iaowks Reingold
Citizen
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 364
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 2:32 pm: | |
Arnomation, I must be reading you wrong. Are you saying that it's not cool to be school-smart anywhere? It was definitely cool to do well in school when I was there. And I went to high school in Harlem! OK, it was at High School of Music and Art, but still, the coolest kids were good academics, athletes, artists, and friends, all at the same time.
Tom Reingold
|
hello
Citizen
Username: Hello
Post Number: 41
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 2:33 pm: | |
hs-
i believe i have said almost precisely that. but if you want to read it differently, then that is fine, i suppose. i'm completely of the mind that the issue of skin color is not substantive or explanatory in social outcomes except in the context of a history of oppressive racism by whites against blacks in this country. the threads in here about "hip-hop" and "irvington" and "urbanization" are innately racist in nature, so it's unfortunate you choose to dismiss them as somehow but. |
mem
Citizen
Username: Mem
Post Number: 1860
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 2:41 pm: | |
hello,
Then does this mean we can't discuss any of these issues and ignore "Irvington", "hip-hop", and "urbanization" because someone might think we are being "innately racist"? Or are there "PC" rules to follow when discussing these issues?
Sheesh. |
newjerz
Citizen
Username: Newjerz
Post Number: 97
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 2:52 pm: | |
I simply don't understand how those topics are innately racist? One can make value judgements about any sort of cultural phenomenon whether it be music, crime, aesthetics without those judgements being based on race.
While some people's aversion to rap music or Irvington might be purely or partially due to racist views, it does not mean that others cannot judge these topics on their merits. I think they are legitimate and important topics for conversation.
Could you please explain how they are "innately racist"? |
HS
Citizen
Username: Pseudoah2
Post Number: 38
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 3:11 pm: | |
hello....
Please give me a break..I am simply saying you are no better than those who thinly veil their racism...I agree that the "hip-hop" discussion left a great deal to be desired but if that is what people want to talk about than let them talk..as far as urbanization noone wants to leave next store to homeless people or crack addicts..but as I said all people want choice whether they have the income to make that choice happen is another matter totally...I think you need thicker skin...I am sure if you polled Blacks living in wealthier sections of ANY town they would agree with most comments made maybe not to your face but certainly behind closed doors...I repeat IT IS NOT A MATTER OF RACE. |
JGTierney
Citizen
Username: Jtg7448
Post Number: 6
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 3:36 pm: | |
Hello all,
I've been doing so much reading on this website for the past few weeks, and thought it time to write.
My husband and I are moving to town in 1 week.
Why are people leaving? Well, I may not be able to answer that, but I can answer why most are coming to town. We are like so many others.
Though we are both architects working in Manhattan, we have been living in Brooklyn Heights. We are not the investment banker type who can afford $800,000 for a 2 bedroom apartment - nor can we afford $18,000 per year for preschool. We don't have a car, and could never afford to have one in the city.
We craved a suburb of the true sort. A place without cookie cutter homes, a place with sidewalks where people actually used them, a place where, with good and bad, people might deal with their issues.
I'm reading that all the NEW people who have purchased here feel the same way. Many posters ask for people to be more postive about the future. Well I AM positive.
Columbia high school may have slipped over the years, but it can recover. Why can't it be one of the top schools again in 10 years? It can be.
Neighborhoods DO change for the better. Who would have believed 10 years ago that developers would be looking around Red Hook in Brooklyn - but they are.
My brother lives in Fairfield Connecticut - one on the richest counties on the whole country. Their neighbor: Bridgeport. For those of you who don't know, Bridgeport doesn't bring with it the best reputation.
Why do we have to let Irvington or Springfield Ave, stop us? Only our attitudes will stop progress.
If the town has been in the midst of a turnover, couldn't this in itself be positive sign of change? |
amandacat
Citizen
Username: Amandacat
Post Number: 193
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 5:23 pm: | |
You nailed it JG, great post! I totally agree 100% with everything you said. Welcome to town -- for what it's worth, I definitely think you and your husband made a very wise choice. |
ajc
Citizen
Username: Ajc
Post Number: 1729
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 7:29 pm: | |
Thank you Jgt, and a very warm welcome to you and your family. With more new residents moving in with this kind of outlook, our future as one of the best places to live in America is assured... |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page