Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Extras | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

‘Cost’ matters with sports

January 12, 2014

During a meeting to discuss the future of sports at Cassadaga Valley Central Schools last week, there was an unwelcome comment made by a school board member. William A....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(14)

Captain

Jan-13-14 1:18 PM

What amazes me most are the attitudes of people who oppose sports programs altogether, whether the reason is b/c they have no kids, they're grown, or their kids simply aren't interested. All school sports will eventually be paid for by players, but again, it's the attitudes that have really changed. It's the same attitude people have against the CCH, which is: "I don't use it, therefore, I don't want to pay to support it."

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

StanleyCup

Jan-13-14 8:44 AM

How much does merging a sport actually save? The school still needs to transport the kids to the merged school for practices (driver and fuel costs). One can assume the schools might split the cost of uniforms, officials, equipment, coaches salaries etc.. When it is all said and done, are they saving a few thousand dollars on a 10-30 million dollar budget? Is it more about saving money or having the numbers to field a team?

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

hooray99

Jan-12-14 4:38 PM

CVCS has been having to cut its budget over the past several years. One year an entire foreign language was cut. Was sports-no! Another year they laid off math and English teachers. Was the athletic department cut; no! CVCS is NOT an academic focused school. If anything subjects are dumbed down for the general population. And extracurricular sports are the holy graile!!CVCS needs to get back to academics and merge its sports programs with neighboring schools.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Captain

Jan-12-14 2:56 PM

Obviously not all kids play sports, therefore, an argument can be raised that sports should be self-funded. OK, but there are also many different school courses, activities, events, etc that have extra cost associated w/them, too, and not all kids participate in these either. Do we really want to start itemizing and charging students who wish to learn or participate in subjects that may require additional costs?

Remember, not all property owners have kids, but by law, they're still required to pay school taxes.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Dcronlg

Jan-12-14 1:00 PM

I agree with Christuufuu -- schools are about learning; sports are an extracurricular activity. If CVCS needs to cut, it needs to cut sports. And if sports parents want to fund sports, they should raise the money.

Oh and Captain -- you couldn't more wrong or misguided about your belief in low wages. In fact, the latest in economic research has found just the opposite -- low wages drive down EVERYTHING, including quality and productivity. Not to mention, when the educator talent market is basically telling any and all buyers of educators exactly what the market salaries are, one has to pay the market rates. CVCS is paying the market rates or I should say, CVCS taxpayers are only paying 25% of the salaries whereas a state and federal taxes are paying the 75% remaining. And, no, you're not paying it -- this county is less than 1% of NYS, so "State Taxes" are being paid by the other 99% of NYS.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Captain

Jan-12-14 12:26 PM

Yesterday I posted my opinion about the cost to get a teaching degree & labor costs for public schools. I believe these are the 2 main factors destroying public ED. Colleges drive up the costs for public schools b/c higher earnings are needed to pay off expensive college loans. As a result, college educators demand higher pay, after all, they expect to earn more than those at the lower level. Each level uses the other to justify pay raises.

I agree, low enrollment is an issue, especially if it's due to local employer closings b/c it results in districts losing tax revenues paid by such employers. But when labor costs are too high, and tax revenues can't support standard curriculum, it's NOT a low enrollment issue, it's a spending one, and the immediate response is to threaten sports & academic programs, as usual.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

czychrab

Jan-12-14 10:00 AM

Just once I would like to see a corner of the front page of every newspaper in the country dedicated to school budgets. I want to see where ever dime is spent. When we go over our household budgets for a month we can always see where we are over-spending and fix the leak before the pipe explodes! Talk to teachers who have left the profession. Every one of them will tell you they are no longer able to teach. Too much politicking and testing. Too many suits wanting to act like they are important. They wouldn't recognize a child if they fell over one. The teachers recieve no respect and are not trusted to do their job. Then, to, get rid of those who are teachers only because they want the summer off. That is no reason to teach.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Christopher

Jan-12-14 9:57 AM

The Observer is getting awfully slack about posting Sunday Commentary!!

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

commentor

Jan-12-14 9:29 AM

Sad state of affairs but remember it's for the kids. Big problem is a lot of board members on a lot of boards are simply unqualified to make intelligent and correct decisions!!! They have as much knowledge about the business at hand as a hairdresser trying to do brain surgery.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Christopher

Jan-12-14 9:21 AM

No, lowering enrollments and lower populations are the issue. You can complain about salaries all you want to, but nothing is going to improve in the long run. Of course, if teachers made only $40,000 and no Admin more than say $60,000, all problems disappear. Next question, who'd go to college and spend over $100,000 to take a job paying those salaries? Answer: NOBODY.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Captain

Jan-12-14 8:06 AM

Isn't it funny how limited funds are now threatening sports programs at CVCS, yet when it came to agreeing to costly separation pkgs for its Supt & HS principal, it wasn't?

This past Sept, the OBSERVER wrote: "In 2012, 30 teachers & admins, which is 13% of its staff, earned more than $90,000 annually. No other north county school comes close to that percentage."

Overly generous payrolls & secret back room deals is what's threatening sports programs AND academic courses at CVCS. Sadly, CVCS isn't alone. Most BOEs immediately blame declining student enrollments in an attempt to hide their own fiscally irresponsible decisions.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrBear

Jan-12-14 7:56 AM

That whole school board up there needs to be replaced.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bob1957

Jan-12-14 7:18 AM

yes it does. It also matters when the Athletic Director of CVCS posts on his office door sign up for spring sports during winter for all of a week. Who would even notice it. He and his buddy did the same thing in Falconer (see Superintendent's comments about what happened their) messing up the basketball team. This whole presentation at the Board meeting was a ruse to merge school teams at the expense of CVCS students and our school budget revenues. Dishonest and a game to achieve an objective. Most students were not even aware of the list let alone where the sign up was located, no there were not announcements for sign. All a ruse.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Christopher

Jan-12-14 7:09 AM

Agreed.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 14 of 14 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web