| Author |
Message |
    
harpo
Citizen
Username: Harpo
Post Number: 1218
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 5:58 pm: |     |
TomR,
You missed my post earlier in this thread to Tjohn about ultimately the voters are to blame. First of all, we can afford high quality education all across this state, so why not fund it across the state? Secondly, I think the political deck is quite stacked against the voters and they are being quite cleverly lied to. But be that as it may, it does seem to me that ordinary voters have an excellent opportunity to change this situation by expressing support for a constitutional convention and threatening to make it happen despite Trenton's resistance unless elected officials face up to their responsibility. I think our voices are amplified by telling our own local elected officials that this is part of their responsibility as well in looking out for the interests of ALL the residents of this town. And if they don't live up that responsibility or don't understand it, and only want to represent the narrow interests of some of the residents, vote for somebody else.
I consider all education spending in this town or any New Jersey town an unfunded state mandate. The state's insistence on funding the mandate through local property taxes builds inequity in education into the system -- and it's past the point of poliiticans or any adult claiming to be innocent of knowing this.
Thanks for the offer of St. James Gate. I seldom hang out there (their beer is cold!) but I'm sure I'll be discussing the BOE candidates with others. I never fail to vote, and I vote for candidates who support dismantling the current tax system for funding education and replacing it with something better.
|
kathy
Citizen
Username: Kathy
Post Number: 748
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 5:02 pm: | |
Lumpyhead: Re "Since we have a pretty easy system to beat compared to other towns...." Why do you say that? Other towns in the area have used our system as a model. |
Tom Reingold
Citizen
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 2131
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 5:03 pm: | |
He was talking about how it's easy to come in illegally, and you're talking about how our academic programs (or whatever) are role models.
Tom Reingold the prissy-pants
There is nothing
|
kathy
Citizen
Username: Kathy
Post Number: 750
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 5:12 pm: | |
No, I'm not. I'm talking about how our registration system has been used as a model by other nearby districts. |
Tom Reingold
Citizen
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 2132
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 5:14 pm: | |
Oh, sorry.
Tom Reingold the prissy-pants
There is nothing
|
xavier67
Citizen
Username: Xavier67
Post Number: 350
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 5:43 pm: | |
Maybe the school district, in conjunction with the two police departments, should install surveillance cameras at critical border points (for instance, where Parker turns into Clinton at Maplewood/Irvington border) and see which students are walking from and into neighboring towns. We could also install a camera at each of the schools and cross-reference the license plates of cars dropping off kids with footage from these critical border points to see where the cars are coming from/going into. (Naturally we won't need cameras at Maplewood/Millburn border points...unless we want to know which Maplewood kids are illegally attending Millburn schools.)
The District (along with concerned MOL volunteers) can then review the footage and take appropriate action. We can even broadcast the footage, using multiple picture-in-picture technique, on local public access channels, right after BOE meeting airtime.
Maybe Fringe can compile data on different cars and license plates, and crunch some numbers and post them on his site?
Would this work?
|
lumpynose
Citizen
Username: Lumpyhead
Post Number: 688
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 6:02 pm: | |
Kathy- I know for a fact that Millburn, Glen Ridge and Bloomfield all have much stricter policies than we do. Feel free to call the offices in those towns, I did. Many of these policies are illegal but have not been challenged yet by lawyers. The residents of these towns don't seem to mind the strict rules. |
Nohero
Citizen
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 2868
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 9:56 pm: | |
Each town follows the same rules, since they are set by the state. The residency standards, and how to determine residency, are found in State regulations that apply to every school district.
Other towns may have had fewer challenges to their non-residency determinations. That doesn't mean that they're stricter, it just means that they've been more fortunate. |
lumpynose
Citizen
Username: Lumpyhead
Post Number: 691
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 10:03 pm: | |
Can you define fewer challenges to non-residency determinations? |
Nohero
Citizen
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 2869
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 10:07 pm: | |
I have no idea what your question means. My only point was that every district is subject to the same residency standards. |
kathy
Citizen
Username: Kathy
Post Number: 752
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 10:51 pm: | |
Lumpyhead, Re: "Many of these policies are illegal but have not been challenged yet by lawyers." So are you suggesting that we adopt policies that we know to be illegal? In this district, some of our attempts to be stricter were challenged, and we lost and had to give them up. If Millburn is doing similar things but hasn't been challenged, that doesn't exactly help us or give us any guidance in improving our procedures. |
TomR
Citizen
Username: Tomr
Post Number: 124
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 11:43 pm: | |
Nohero,
Can you tell us what the regulations are; or give us the jist of the regs?
TomR. |
Nohero
Citizen
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 2871
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Friday, February 13, 2004 - 6:56 am: | |
There's a lot more on this in the Attic, but here's the pertinent provision in State law:
quote:Public schools shall be free to the following persons over five and under 20 years of age:
a. Any person who is domiciled within the school district;
b. (1) Any person who is kept in the home of another person domiciled within the school district and is supported by such other person gratis as if he were such other person's own child, upon filing by such other person with the secretary of the board of education of the district, if so required by the board, a sworn statement that he is domiciled within the district and is supporting the child gratis and will assume all personal obligations for the child relative to school requirements and that he intends so to keep and support the child gratuitously for a longer time than merely through the school term, and a copy of his lease if a tenant, or a sworn statement by his landlord acknowledging his tenancy if residing as a tenant without a written lease, and upon filing by the child's parent or guardian with the secretary of the board of education a sworn statement that he is not capable of supporting or providing care for the child due to a family or economic hardship and that the child is not residing with the resident of the district solely for the purpose of receiving a free public education within the district.
...
(Emphasis Added) Source: N.J.S.A. 18A:38-1 |
ffof
Citizen
Username: Ffof
Post Number: 1945
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, February 13, 2004 - 8:38 am: | |
"a sworn statement that he is domiciled within the district and is supporting the child gratis and will assume all personal obligations for the child relative to school requirements and that he intends so to keep and support the child gratuitously for a longer time than merely through the school term"
and then
"a sworn statement that he is not capable of supporting or providing care for the child due to a family or economic hardship and that the child is not residing with the resident of the district solely for the purpose of receiving a free public education within the district."
Sworn statements - oh sure, that's proof.
Anyway, this is state law but Maplewood has their own wording that basically says that if someone comes a knockin, they don't have to "show" the child.
|
ashear
Citizen
Username: Ashear
Post Number: 963
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, February 13, 2004 - 9:47 am: | |
Lumpy - since you went to the trouble of calling can you tell us what those districts do differently. I think it could really be helpful to this discussion. I just did the Kindergarten reg and had to show Birth Certificate, PSEG bill and mortgage bill. |
lumpynose
Citizen
Username: Lumpyhead
Post Number: 692
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Friday, February 13, 2004 - 10:27 am: | |
Nohero- My question was directly about what you wrote that I didn't understand. You wrote:
"Other towns may have had fewer challenges to their non-residency determinations." ???
Ahsear- Call Millburn BOE. If you do not own an home and you rent an apartment, the apartment lease has to be in the parents name, not some friend or relative. If the children live in your house and aren't yours, you need to have custody of them to go to the district. There is no living or pretending to live with your aunt or grandmother. This is probably illegal but has not been challenged since apparently not many aunts and grandmothers tend to live in Millburn. |
bobk
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 4654
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, February 13, 2004 - 10:40 am: | |
This is more complicated here since a majority the rental units that contain students are rented without a lease. Personally I find this mind boogling but everytime I bring this up I get hammered. The students are allowed into the school under a landlord affidavit. |
clkelley
Citizen
Username: Clkelley
Post Number: 117
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Friday, February 13, 2004 - 10:48 am: | |
It sounds to me as if
1) State law is very clear in requiring kids with "sworn residency statements" to be allowed into district schools.
2) M/SO is compliant with state law. Millburn and others may not be.
3) We want our school district to continue to comply with state law. (and prior efforts to reduce numbers of illegal students have been successfully challenged, according to kathy.)
Q.E.D.: If you don't like the state law, the place to address it is at the state level, not the local level.
Am I right? |
ashear
Citizen
Username: Ashear
Post Number: 968
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, February 13, 2004 - 12:20 pm: | |
Lumpy, I guess i will try to find the time but since you already did why not share the info. I'm frankly not sure I care enough to take the time since all evidence seems to indicate MSO is doing just what the law says it should. If your aim is to convince people it should do more then lets hear it. |
lumpynose
Citizen
Username: Lumpyhead
Post Number: 694
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Friday, February 13, 2004 - 12:34 pm: | |
I shared the information regarding how Millburn does it, illegal or not. If we are in compliance with state law that is good. I am sure there are other things we can do OURSELVES without relying on the state of NJ to ensure that no one is cheating the system. There have been many good suggestions to address the issue ranging from reward money to resident volunteers to assist in verification. |
xavier67
Citizen
Username: Xavier67
Post Number: 356
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Friday, February 13, 2004 - 12:39 pm: | |
lumps, what about my modest proposal regarding surveillance cameras? |
lumpynose
Citizen
Username: Lumpyhead
Post Number: 695
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Friday, February 13, 2004 - 12:50 pm: | |
I don't like the idea of targeting certain areas of town whether that's where the illegals come from or not. Cameras seem intrusive, expensive and easily fooled anyway. Plus they wouldn't prove a thing. Kids can walk wherever they want after school. They could be visting friends or going to an after school job. Proving real residency (or where you sleep at night) is almost impossible. |
lumpynose
Citizen
Username: Lumpyhead
Post Number: 696
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Friday, February 13, 2004 - 12:51 pm: | |
but not quite  |
bobk
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 4657
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, February 13, 2004 - 1:15 pm: | |
Uhm me thinks Xavier was putting you on lumpyone.
One way or another the "sworn residency statement" kids make up the majority of children in the schools from rental properties. They should be subject to special attention, not just the monitor showing up and asking if Joe Smith lives there and then walking away without the kid being produced.
|
lumpynose
Citizen
Username: Lumpyhead
Post Number: 697
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Friday, February 13, 2004 - 1:24 pm: | |
Yeah I know but if I didn't respond he would think I condoned those type actions. |
Miss L Toe
Citizen
Username: Miss_l_toe
Post Number: 18
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 17, 2004 - 5:56 pm: | |
I've been following this thread with interest.
I do know of one solution but unfortunately it would never be taken on board in the American public school system. There is a lot to be said for wearing a school uniform! This is one of the few countries in the world wear students do *not* wear a uniform to school (the exception being private schools here). I did notice whilst on vacation that the schoolkids wore them in Puerto Rico, which is a US province.
You can immediately spot which school the student goes to. I actually think that the kids look much smarter in uniform - and it is a heck of a lot cheaper than being pestered to provide fashionable clothes (especially for girls!). Also most schools which have a uniform have a 'gently used' sale for outgrown uniforms.
I had to wear a uniform myself and so did my kids before we were posted to the US. It definitely invokes a pride in ones school. All you need is some basic apparel in school colors eg. a polo shirt, sweatshirt, pants, skirts (or shorts in Summer, or a cotton dress). The tops could have a school badge or logo - not unlike those on the sports teams apparel.
I may be mistaken, but didn't President Clinton encourage public schools to adopt a uniform (in some cities where there were problems with gangs who wore certain colors/items of clothing)? I understand that the results were encouraging.
Anyone trying to identify 'illegal' students could do so easily when they're wearing a school uniform on their journey to and from school.
Made In England |
kathy
Citizen
Username: Kathy
Post Number: 762
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, February 22, 2004 - 8:07 pm: | |
Miss L Toe, I don't see how uniforms would help. The children in question are officially enrolled in our schools; they aren't just sneaking in. |
lumpynose
Citizen
Username: Lumpyhead
Post Number: 716
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, February 22, 2004 - 9:51 pm: | |
Yes, when they are legally enrolled with their "Aunt" they would obtain a uniform that they would take off after school when they go to where they really live. Pretty pointless. |
Tom Reingold
Citizen
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 2183
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 23, 2004 - 12:22 pm: | |
I think Miss L Toe's point is that once the kid crosses the SO/M border, it's evident from her/his uniform that she/he is an illegal student.
But I agree it won't work. First, you have to have people sitting in Irvington or Newark or wherever, ready to spot the SO/M uniforms. Secondly, there is the claim that kids are enrolled illegally here because they live here illegally. Hmm, but in that case, it's a residence violation more than an enrollment violation, isn't it?
Time for me to reiterate my feeling that enforcing existing rules seems like a better use of our resources than witch hunts.
Tom Reingold the prissy-pants
There is nothing
|
mellie
Citizen
Username: Mellie
Post Number: 399
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Monday, February 23, 2004 - 1:09 pm: | |
do we do any checking or just handwringing ? |
Diversity Man
Citizen
Username: Deadwhitemale
Post Number: 651
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, February 23, 2004 - 1:10 pm: | |
Cure:
Provide the sworn statements to DYFS.
To do otherwise would be a shame.
These kids don't have food on their tables at home.
DWM |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page