Dear Editor,
A Spencer-Van Etten school bureaucrat who is for the merger with Candor, was reported in a recent newspaper article to have said: ”The Candor Central School District BOE has already stated its desire merge with another district as soon as possible and has indicated to Spencer-Van Etten that it would prefer to merge with S-VE above all other schools.”
It seems that they want to merge the sports programs first. The bureaucrat claimed, “It’s what’s right for our students.”
If we assume that the kids are going to school to get a top-notch education, then we are not doing what is right for the students. According to www.schooldigger.com, the S-VE district rates 540th of 752 New York school districts. Thus we are in bottom 29 percent of a state that is 27th from the top in the country and is dominated by urban students. Where is the accountability? There is none as long as the school board does not set any performance standards for school employees.
Instead, the bureaucrats want to change the system and have S-VE taxpayers spend money on paying for extra coaches, more travel and new gear for an unpopular sport with few takers. In business if there is no demand, there is no point of providing the product, because it would lead to bankruptcy. The law of supply and demand has no meaning for the school bureaucracy, as there seems to be an unending source of tax money through confiscatory taxation.
Assuming that the Candor students are as good in sports as the S-VE, the merger would deny a lot of S-VE students a spot on the teams. Top colleges do ask if an applicant has participated in sports. Our administration is now planning to deny S-VE students a spot on sports teams. Thus after the above-mentioned meager education, now further depriving our kids of a successful future. So we have half as many S-VE students on the team or as bench sitters and the taxpayers are burdened with a higher cost, more travel to practices and games and to pay for as many coaches as before.
The main sales point seems to be that 70 percent of coaches support the merger. It would be interesting to know where that number came from? Names, please. Coaches are very well paid and as there would now be a coach from both districts, the costs would double. I was on the school board one year when the voters choose a contingency budget. The sports were to be cut, and as the cost for coaches is the largest expense, I suggested that we would keep the sports going by giving volunteer coaches a chance. The teacher’s union members have first dibs on the jobs. The teachers did not seem to care if the kids had sports, because my proposal went nowhere. That should tell you where the school establishment has their priorities. It’s not with the students.
Sincerely,
Rainer Langstedt
Spencer, N.Y.
