Here is my biggest concern with the proposed all day kindergarten. Although conceptually there are pluses, I question whether we can afford it. And I think one of the biggest reasons we won’t be able to afford it has to do with the hundreds of apartments that are being built downtown. These apartments will be marketed to those with two income earners and young families. Our schools are going to be one of the largest drivers of families to those units. I question whether we will be able to afford the influx of new elementary age students as it is, and that problem will be compounded if we have to double the number of kindergarten seats both for existing children and new children. I worry that we are going to need to construct new classrooms at our elementary schools – – and I am not sure that cost has been factored into the equation. I simply haven’t seen enough to convince me that the $110 tax increase is going to cover the costs of new residents from the multifamily housing units. Particularly if we have to build new classrooms to accommodate these new students, then the $110 number may be multiplied very quickly.
We keep proposing to add more and more to our town without thinking through how each addition takes away from the whole. Those pushing for all day kindergarten need to also get involved in other aspects of our town as well so they can view and work towards making sure things remain in balance. It may be a great idea, but does it fit with the needs and budget of the town as a whole? If we are going to keep adding hundreds of new residents, will we be able to afford ideas such as all day kindergarten and are we going to need to cut back on other Village and school services in order to balance our budget?
The classes used to not be filled out until the children reached 4th or 5th grade. These days it’s 2nd to 3rd grade. If we go full-day K this trend will probably continue due to the district increasing it’s attractiveness to people with very young children. Will we have room for all of the additional children at the six elementary schools we currently run or will we need to bring the Glen School back on line? Current revenue from the Glen School will go away. Plus Glen School neighborhood residents frankly like the convenience of the bus service that brings their grade schoolers to Hawes. Restarting Glen as a grade school will force them to deal with the crumbcrunchers for an extra half hour in the AM, destroying domestic tranquility! This is a big change, that’s for sure. There is no question that it is beneficial overall for young families. Households with no school age children will be burdened financially with no direct gain but they may find the indirect benefits outweigh the additional tax levy.
Oh above writer, didn’t you attend the planning board meetings over the past few years. Our illustrious town planner, Blais Branshaw , or whatever his name is, Blazing Liar is it? assured us that the new apartments will NOT be populated by families with school children.
How do we get the planning board to START OVER and reconsider the number of units allowed per acre in the CBD. It should be no more than 12 to 20. According to original master plan. Is Blais willing to stand by his statement. Or is the devil in Blais, I mean the details.
Would’ve could’ve should ‘ve. A legal document stating that only a certain number of children should be allowed in the CBD apartments SHOULD’ve been demanded.
Legally you can’t tell people how many children to have, or that they can’t have them after moving in. The perfect storm of a full-day K referendum precisely when the high-density housing issue is about to explode could be a killer in property taxes not to mention hundreds more kids swarming the town. Are the developers helping to fund the push for the referendum next month? Because they’re the ones, and the only ones, who would truly benefit. VOTE NO on this and let’s get our ducks in a row or the Ridgewood we love will be but a memory. Parents of young children, please think beyond this one issue.
9:29 You are so right in everything you say and I’m quite certain that the town’s planner was influenced by the developers and their attorneys.
Vote NO!
Blais “devil is in the details but let’s ignore the details” is a BALL AND CHAIN to Ridgewood. We would be better off with NO planner. Between him and the former PB attorney we were paying big to lose big. Please, council, replace him or just pension him off.
You can’t tell people how many children to have once in an apt. but you can have a quota on how many to let in at the beginning. There are apt. renters who say no pets, no kids. But anyway we would have to ask planning board to make a ruling about how many kids can move into an apt. building. You can have buildings for seniors only, for example.
While I share the concerns about high-density housing. I don’t believe we can let our education program be the “last in the county” to adopt the latest best practice. While any services and shared resource of the train will be further strained by additional residents, we can’t just stop improving services and resources for those of us already living here. Sp Vote Yes for the best in education for our children and then continue the good fight against the high-density housing.
Whether full day kindergarten passes or not, if we have a lot of apartments built, the schools will be more crowded at all grade levels. I don’t think this is reason enough to vote down full day kindergarten. However we should make sure there are not too many apartments crowded in for many reasons (traffic, parking, school capacity, etc)
333 and 354 – – are you taking steps in that direction? There are only a handful of people showing up at the planning board meetings, writing the board, writing the council and otherwise making their views known. I am sure they would appreciate your help.
” I don’t believe we can let our education program be the “last in the county” to adopt the latest best practice. “
.
Yes… let’s make sure we follow the pack and blindly adopt the latest trend (oops – I mean best practice).
Am still not sure how anyone thinks we can afford this,particularly with the point made in the original post. Where are we fitting all the new people???
And when the taxes of empty nesters increase to further sibsidize the new residents, look for an acceleration of the trend of us selling our homes to new families with children. That means YOU Will get a tax increase to pay for the increased enrollment.
It’s called the rule of unintended consequences.
The only way to keep taxes from shooting through the stratosphere is to vote no. And you might try to convince those without children to stay put since they are subsidizing your kids…and your taxes
Let it be a tuition only option program. Offer it for those who want it based on need. No reason for everyone to subsidize the “wants” of a few. Any news on the teachers’ contract ratification? Did they get their way? Did we “do it fer da kids?” I hope the BOE helds its ground.
Does this all fall within the 2 percent cap on tax increases? Meaning, does it cut into funds that our current teachers expected the district to use to fund their pay raises?
” I don’t believe we can let our education program be the “last in the county” to adopt the latest best practice. “
Completely agree, and for an average of $111 per year increase in taxes… totally worth it.