Hamden Opposes New Haven’s Magnet Tuition Quest

"if I were them."
Apparently, Hamden BoE does not teach the predicate nominative.

So these selfish folks want New Haven to absorb "cut services, personnel, before and after school programs" by itself.

"if I were them."
Apparently, Hamden BoE does not teach the predicate nominative

Only if we are being exceptionally prescriptive. A politician using two esoteric grammatical constructions in one phrase would sound stilted in modern context. He's already using the subjunctive "were;" saying "If I were they" in a sentence meant to convey informality and familiar understanding would be the wrong choice in my view.

Both our boys have come up through the New Haven Interdistrict Magnet Schools. They have had a very high quality public education, and have I hope returned to the system many positive intangible things. I do not want our guys to be a financial burden on the City of New Haven of course. The state should step in to help settle this issue in a fair manner.

Curt Leng has some issues with the English language. He wants to "educate Hamden student's in-district." Educate the student's... what? That is a possessive there, Mayor.

Also, if you don't want to send them out, keep them. New Haven sure doesn't need them.

Checking -

Hamden cant keep them if they want to go. The state mandates that they can go where they want to go. That's what theyre complaining about.
Just another fine example of good intentions in Hartford not quite working out.

I would like to see some numbers: 705 students from Hamden in NHPS. What does NH get? What does Hamden get and/or save ($1,586,250). What will be the real cost of keeping these 705 students in Hamden to taxpayers, minus the funding the State may share with them?

or NHPS-- what do we currently GET for these 705 students? What will we lose/get from returning these students to their home districts? If there is an accountant in the house; can we see the columns of numbers> ? Otherwise: this is grandstanding by pols and speculation from the rest of us, who don't have the real numbers.

Hope my grammar meets up to the high standards of our "readership" ;)

These letters embody the classic fight-over-the-crumbs tension that comes with money-follows-the-child.

>>> "or NHPS— what do we currently GET for these 705 students?"

$7,227 x 750, plus some to cover their busing. To be fair, Hamden is also already getting their own ECS amount for the very same kids, with no cost to educate them. I wonder if Hamden has really thought through educating 750 more kids with no increase in funding.

>>> "What will we lose/get from returning these students to their home districts?"

$7,227 x 750, plus transportation, unless we were to completely give up magnets, which would surrender far more -- I have heard $30 million as an estimate when you consider federal grants and buildings and everything. Magnets bring in more than than their per-student allocation, but it might be irregular year-to-year as grants come and go.

Folks would like to think we'd also be saving the difference between that $7,000 and the higher overall per-student cost of education in New Haven, but there are so many fixed, centralized costs that the amount that actually gets to the school buildings and classrooms is still roughly $7,000 - $8,000 per student. Removing Hamden students doesn't remove the need to pay for human resources, powerschool, snow removal, and electricity (or curriculum audits and lawsuits).

Dear Jill-- please don't be naive or expect readers to be naive. Education is about the money and who gets it. Towns are not dying to educate residents of other localities. We want the money; we want to be rid of students who will "hurt" test scores; we want the money... I said that twice because that's what it is about. Sheff vs.O'Neill was about shaking down surrounding towns for their money. It's a nice dream to use education to achieve social harmony goals but those goals take a back seat when put up against the money. If taking students and shuffling them around did not make money, no town would voluntarily do it. Hence ; the lawsuits and bickering over "tuition" and everything else.
This reality does not make me happy. Seeing our children and teachers used as pawns does not make me happy. But it is the truth. No one who has the power, seems to want to stop it; especially bankrupt towns and cities looking for easy monetary fixes.

>>> "Education is about the money and who gets it."

This is a cynical line we have all been sold in neoliberal America that has become reality in part by us believing in it and acting as if.

Education used to be, and ought to be, about shaping the future adults who will be our neighbors, doctors, bus drivers, and voters in a few years. If you don't want to live among ignorant people who fall for things like windmills cause cancer: pay for education. If you don't want to drive over bridges designed and built by people who cut corners: pay for education. If you're worried about hiring people who can't make change from a $20: pay for education. If you don't want your elected representatives chosen by people who are easily snookered by propaganda: pay for education.

Just because it can be monetized, doesn't mean we shouldn't resist the financialization of public goods. I bet the money didn't follow the child when you were in school.

>>> "No one who has the power, seems to want to stop it"

We have more power than you think. It might be a long-term project, but we need to be working toward full funding of a decent education for everyone in the richest state in the US. And that starts by believing it is both possible and right to act for the benefit of the students.

There is always money for priorities.