From the National Association of State Boards of Education (NASBE) – on High School Athletics and Academics
Ed Higgins speaks to the Cafe readers.
“I have always respected his (Ed’s) integrity and sincerity when it comes to matters that effect the community.” From comment by Rocket Scientist
“It goes without saying that the … woeful Connecticut system for funding education will likely guarantee that all area Towns will have to continue in the struggle to meet…educational needs”
While it is most enlightening to read the very thoughtful and well-stated exchange of thoughts and opinions on very important local budget issues and concerns, it is troubling that the dialogue on this invaluable weblog seems to have developed a tenor that, hopefully unintended, takes the appearance of pitting one characterized constituency in Town against the other – be it the K-8 family and supporters vs. the Woodstock Academy or the Town Fire Departments and the funding allocated to them. While the grist certainly makes for interesting and often thought provoking commentary (even if sometimes appearing somewhat one-sided) it may be questionable if it will, in the long run, have a beneficial net effect.
The most recent example is the posting which has drawn into question the likely need by Woodstock Academy to expand the athletic complex to accommodate new and ongoing programs that have witnessed a dramatic increase in participation by students – namely the new football program, the existing boy’s and girl’s lacrosse programs, and the highly successful soccer programs. The possibility of creating new field space is described as, “ …an inordinately expensive- and unnecessary- football stadium that the Town does not wantâ€?, reflective of “self-aggrandizementâ€? on the part of Woodstock Academy. These postulations are interjected into the public discussion even before any plans are brought forth for such improvements or consideration given to the likely undertaking of a community capital campaign to help fund the same.
Lost in this characterization is any consideration to the fact that the continuing improvements at Woodstock Academy (including renovations to libraries and facilities) are integral to securing needed longterm financial commitment to support the Academy by alumni and families. Such an approach has been successful at Norwich Free Academy and has helped NFA to build an institutional endowment that has the net effect of lessening the financial strain on local municipal budgets in Norwich and the other sending communities.
It is also important to bear in mind that the existing and future athletic fields and facilities developed by Woodstock Academy have, historically fulfilled an unmet need for the same that the Town simply has not, and likely for the foreseeable future cannot, meet to accommodate recreational programs for younger students – be it the Winter rec basketball programs, baseball and softball leagues ( not accommodated at privately owned Roseland Park), and youth soccer programs that need spaces in addition to the school fields. Expansions of playing fields by Woodstock Academy will very likely continue to help meet these needs and allow for expansion of such Town programs.
It goes without saying that the existing, woeful Connecticut system for funding education will likely guarantee that all area Towns will have to continue in the struggle to meet the yearly escalation of the ‘fixed costs’ for meeting our educational needs, but in wrestling with the same we need to try to find common ground and work together. It is questionable whether anonymous public commentary that seems to have the net effect of promoting and hardening divisions between the evolving constituencies in Town ( K-8 families, WA families, Emergency Services, Elderly residents on fixed incomes, etc.) will have a beneficial effect along these lines.
Please leave your comments.
Ed, Your statement is refreshing and very much needed. Yet, I don’t think that the Cafe is polarizing the community by allowing people to speak their minds. I think this forum is exposing the polarization that has existed long before the Cafe’s inception a year ago. I remember how heated and nasty the local Selectman campaigns and elections were over the last seven years and the harassment going on at the polls a year ago. The Cafe did not bring this about – but it has just provided some transparancy. There can be no doubt that some of the commentary at this sight is difficult to read and listen to. I find myself cringing quite often. Nevertheless, I favor getting this all out on the table. People are thinking these thoughts regardless of their willingness to put these thoughts in writing here or express them in Town meetings. Where would we be, and for that matter, where would the United States be without the right of dissent and free speech. I also don’t think that most of us are limited only to one of the camps that you having identified. I, for example, support the Academy and believe in the importance of the new football program not only in principal, but with a check put into the mail yesterday. At the same time I am truly sympathetic with the travails of the K-8 school system and I support Frank Baran’s leadership. So I am in several of the camps that you have listed. Without the knowledge and insight that I have gained from others at the Cafe, I would be truly in the dark and probably completely uninterested.
Well stated – both Ed and Cain. On the issue of transparancy, where else could we be able to hear/learn the perspectives and opinions of one of the more outspoken members of the Board of Trustees of the Academy than right here.
Ed, well said & I have always found you to be a level headed and thoughtful individual. You probably read the BOE thread where I took a quick shot at moderating for common ground- good luck to you!
Cain, ‘Leadership’? you lost me quickly on that one, I’ve looked for the signs of that and can’t find them. Otherwise good post.
Citizen w/child, While I agree to some extent, transparency only applies to those with the guts to put their name on it.
My other problem with all of this is; when a post is started regarding the problems in Woodstockistan, they always seem to gravitate to the national or worldwide issues. While that may be well intended- we need to FOCUS people! Further, as we all find the cafe interesting, I believe the opportunity for it to be an action platform sadly lacking. I cringe at the fact that intelligent people post their thoughts but seem unwilling to take action. Ed, maybe I am validating part of your point?
referee, Cafe is definitely NOT an “action platform” what ever that might mean. For example, we will NOT endorse any candidate (although contributors can certainly express their preferences and do). The Cafe is a local medium for expression of ideas with the intent to enlighten and persuade others. If any of us succeed in enlightening and persuading others, then the Cafe has met its mission. For example Ed enlightened us with his unique perspective and persuaded us that we need to be careful about polarization, and Cain and Citizen with Child added some good points in clarification.
Ref, I believe that gravitation to national and international issues is sometimes essential and valid. For instance, in order to understand why our educational system is being stretched we need to understand what is happening at all other levels which include state and federal funding, mandates, and legislation. Once we have a better understanding of these facets we can begin to fight our battle at these levels. This is really what needs to be done. Unfortunately, this fight often involves understanding and participating in politics which are convoluted, full of misleading rhetoric, and influenced by a variety of national and international issues. The cafe has offered a forum to delve into this arena and perhaps enlighten and educate the voting electorate. An educated, voting electorate is one of the most powerful action platforms.
Ed – You are ignoring the basic fiscal reality of limited resources to meet competing demands. This is a problem in any town but is greatly aggravated in Woodstock by Prop 46, unique among the area towns you mention – we are not all in the same boat as you suggest. The town does ultimately have to decide between fire trucks, schoolbooks, etc. That is what public budgeting is – making resource allocation decisions. These basic choices cannot be wished away. And you ignore some critical facts that relate to the Academy. First, they have a preferred funding mechanism within a rigid, limited fiscal formula. Second, they maintain an aggressive, sophisticated political program to protect their position. So taking your own advice to “work together”, why not answer the basic question – do you seriously believe it is more important for the Academy to develop a new football program/facilities, which it has lived without for 75 years, than to replace old textbooks, rehire fired teachers/aides, and recover lost gifted/talented and instrumental music programs at the K-8 level? Do you deny there are limited resources and the K-8 system is being forced to gradually strip its educational programs in order to fund the Academy athletic expansion? Do you deny the Academy has loaded its Board with CPSers that unleash unlimited vitriole against the K-8 system? Lets “work together” starting with you answering these questions, and stating where your educational values lie.
One may feel like the cafe does polarize different factions, but in fact, I believe it works well to give voice to many who would never speak without the availability of anonymity. This truly is like a confessional in some ways (sorry, I forgot which commenter said that first). Woodstock does have the added complexity of the spending restrictions of Prop 46, although it doesn’t seem to restrict the town’s wish list. I do think that people will find common ground, but not until everyone comes to terms with exactly how small the pie really is.
I’d really like Ed Higgins to respond to Karnac’s comment above which hits on several relevant points.
Hey Ed! Welcome to the Cafe! Are you the new PR guy for the Academy? Boy, I’ll tell ya’, you are Kinder and Gentler than Ernie Wetzel! What an improvement! I just have one request! Could you go to the next meeting of the Trustees and point out to them publicly that Woodstock has a UNIQUE STATEWIDE and INCREASINGLY SEVERE fiscal problem? Don’t forget to remind them its called WOODSTOCK Academy because it was established to educate WOODSTOCK PUBLIC students! I know they will immediately offer to WORK TOGETHER to help Woodstock solve its UNIQUE FISCAL PROBLEM! Boy, its a good thing you showed up to help us rise above the lack of educational resources in this town! I was afraid the two school systems might be pitted against each other! Thanks!
Mr. Higgins, You have eloquently crafted some good points, but I can’t disagree with Mr. Karnac (or is it Ms. Karnac?. The financial constraints on Woodstock due to P46 makes it very difficult to sell the idea that all towns are suffering together on how to fund public education- we may all have the same symptoms but we do not have the same disease!
You mention that a WA football program with new fields would bring great benifit to Woodstock because the town sorely needs soccer and athletic fields. I think this might be an excellent argument to support the football program at the point when, and if, development plans are available and town residents are privvy to the physical, financial and quality of life trade-offs. I’m not sure that argument can be made just yet. Is it possible there wouldn’t be any field time available for town recreation programs after the lacrosse teams scheduled their games and practices, football scheduled their games and practices and all the permutations of soccer teams at WA got their fare share of use? Who knows at this juncture, but its food for thought….I agree that building an institutional endowment is always a wise and necessary goal for an independant institution…..yes, all those great improvements tend to drive alums to open their wallets and provide additional support, and according to your theory, lessen the financial burdeon on the town. But how do greater endowments lessen the financial burdeon on a town??? Yale Univesity has the 2nd largest endowment of any higher education institution in our country- has the city of New Haven had a lessened financial burdeon as Yale’s coffers have overflowed over the years? With a longstanding business relationship with that university, I can tell you the answer is emphatically no! Please explain your logic on this point!
Ed,
What did you think of the heinous actions of those U.Miami football players over this past weekend? College sports has not seen that kind of criminal behavior in any other sport. Players involved in onfield riots, removing their helmets and using them as weapons and kicking their opponents lying on the ground. They should be criminally prosecuted!
For all the unifying effect that football is argued to have on school spirit, the fact is it is an extremely violent sport and of limited value when one measures its benefits beyond high school. Compare it to basketball, baseball – softball, cross country – track, volleyball, soccer and golf and the utility of skills acquired in competing in those sports that can be realized after high school graduation, and the value of instituting a football program at Woodstock Academy must be questioned. Add to that consideration, the substantial cost that the football program at the Academy imposes in an extremely restricted funding environment in Woodstock, and the reasonable person must conclude that the initiation of the football program at the Academy was misguided.
The Academy forced the issue onto the Town by embarking upon the football program, as you say, before any plans were brought forth for such improvements or consideration given to the likely undertaking of a community capital campaign to help fund the same. The efforts of the booster club have been admirable and I don’t wish to take away from that success. But, the majority of the expense for the football program, especially the need for additional athletic fields to accomodate the program will be directly borne by the taxpayers of the sending towns, forty percent of which is Woodstock (a percentage likely to increase when Brooklyn moves to Region 11). It seems to me that the way the Academy handled this matter was typical of their usual method. They determine what they want, and they impose it on the sending towns. It doesn’t matter to them the effect that such action will have on the other components of the education systems of the lower grades.
Your exhortations here are disingenuous. It is actually passively aggressive for you to implore all of us who see the effects of the Academy empire building to find a way to get along with a program that ignores the plight of the other part of the educational system. The comparison to NFA is not valid. They have received a multimillion dollar donation from a single donor that has enabled them to be unique in terms of the “Academy” schools. Much of their physical improvements followed that donation. Woodstock Academy should more appropriately be compared to schools like Gilbert Academy. These schools, while privately chartered, and not subject to direct oversight of government, are almost purely publicly financed. Given that reality, they must acknowledge that there are limited resoures to fund the entire school programs where they are located. Thinking that the creation of new facilities and institutions of new athletic programs will be the impetus to raise the kind of capital necessary to fund an endowment like NFA is foolish. The cart has been put before the horse, and now it will become necessary for the K-8 programs to cut more from their budgets, in order for the expansion of the Academy to be accomodated. It’s just plain selfish for you to suggest that the victim just needs to find a way to get along with the victimizer.
You communicate your message differently than Mr. Wetzel, but in the end, your purpose is equally transparent to his. Both of you ignore the effect that your unbridled support for Woodstock Academy has upon the other part of the school system, and consequently, you both are contributing to the degradation of the lower grades. The normal person would find it quite difficult to find common ground with someone who acts as you and Wetzel have with blinders to anyone else’s interests.
Seadog, Can you tell us where we can find information on contributions to the NFA endowment? My understanding is that NFA’s endowment is over 60 million. The recently retired Superintendent of NFA was given credit for building much of this endowment in a Norwich Bull article last June. It would be interesting to understand this success story better for comparison with the activities of the WA. In my experience Trustees and leadership usually play important roles in building endowments (can you imagine the WA trustees doing this with their present composition?). I would like to know more about the NFA story.
There are many examples of the negative side to professional sports – and top tier college sports to a lesser degree. At the high school level, I think the academic literature suggests a positive impact on other academic pursuits. I will have to look for something that supports this statement though.
I find this an excellent, well written, well thought out piece by Mr. Higgins. I have always respected his integrity and sincerity when it comes to matters that effect the community. His wife, Peg Higgins was a member of the BOE for a term and she brought a very balanced and thoughtful perspective to the Board. While many lament the fact that the Academy has started a football program, at the expense of the K-8 system, I have to believe that what Mr. Higgins says is true about the funding coming from private resources and not from the income derived from Academy tuition. That being said, I am sure that somewhere down the road football, or some other sports team will have to be accomodated and when the generosity of the community runs out where will the funding for these activities come from? The way we fund education in Connecticut has been and will always be the blame. We can no longer continue to pay for education on the backs of taxpayers through the property tax. I have heard it said over and over again that this is not the best way to fund education and until someone in government steps up and “builds a better mousetrap” we will contine to burden people with higher taxes and more inequitable sharing of the expense to educate our children. As for the Cafe providing a forum for discussion and ideas, I for one am glad it exists.
While I have always found Ed Higgins to be a highly civilized individual, and generous with his time in the community, I take exception to his statements regarding the anonymous nature of the commentary on the Cafe. There are three basic reasons making this neccesary. First, the CPS crowd has for many years created an extremely hostile environment in our local government. Unfortunately, the political leadership of this group has found a home with the Woodstock Academy Board of Trustees, where they continue their campaign against the town’s public school system. Second is the Academy itself, which for many years has been rumored to use their private status, and control over the high school careers of our children, to reward their political allies and punish their political opponnents. Third, its a small town, so people may wish to oppose others views whom they know and respect without recourse or enmity. In this environment. without anonymity, the reality is there would be no discourse at all.
Ed,
I’m curious, how do you feel now about the leadership of the Academy searching for “common ground” given their decision last night to tie the rebating of any budget surplus to the Town to the signing of a new contract? The best way to mend fences would have been to rebate the money first, then come to the bargaining table. Unfortunately, I’d have to say that finding common ground with the BOE is the LAST thing that the Academy Board of Trustees wants to accomplish.
For anyone who doesnt know- there is a meeting tonight concerning the “capital plan”. We are about to vote on an 8 million dollar “plan”. Why is a “recreation field” on this plan for over 350,000.00 (75,000.0 over several years) when we short sheeted the “maintenance” school system over $400,000.00? This doesnt make any sense to me. If we are going to borrow at all, why put items like this on the table?
Stranded….I am horrified to learn this and I’ve confirmed it with a Board of Ed representative. I have been told that the Board of Ed tried to bury the hatchet by voting to pay tuition for Woodstock students at the Academy based on a larger number of students than we actually send. This was done because there was some language in the previous contract defining how this should be paid by the BofE (although not in place now) and that language was used by the Academy when this years budget was created. The nod to overpay by our B of E was a gesture of fair partnership. In return, the Trustees voted to, in essence, single out the Woodstock Board of Ed above all other sending towns because the two parties can’t come to terms on a contact. This is juvenile behavior! Putting this type of a condition on an arrangement whereby the B of E is still mandated to send Woodstock kids to the Academy regardless of a contract, is just petty, immature and unjustified! I was also told that the B of E offered to sit back down at the bargaining table many months ago with a mediator- clearly they are trying to do what should be done. Who are these trustees? Do they really think the public believes they are do-gooders? Additionally, If I were a lawyer, I would hit the law books to determine if in fact their decision to rebate a surplus back to one segment of the public and deny to another segment of the public may be illegal. Atty. Higgins?
For clarification purposes:
1. Woodstock is not mandated to send its students to the Academy. The Academy is, however, required to accept all students that Woodstock chooses to send.
2. The Academy first offered to reopen negotiations based on the August meeting – the B of E replied affirmatively with condiditions including, among other things, the use of a mediator.
3. The stipulation on the refund is only on the agreement to send grades 9 – 12 for the 2007-2008 school year — it is not conditioned upon a contract.
4. Perhaps it is a gesture of good faith on the part of the Academy Board to allow the B of E to retain the excess to help fund the K-8 that the B of E claims is being robbed over time to fund the 9-12 portion of the budget.
APOV, Thanks for your clarification. Unfortunately meeting minutes that would clarify these points take for ever to post. The Cafe certainly does not want to present only one side. So keep us informed.
FYI
The WA Trustees meeting of October 17th was filmed and will be aired on their channel which I believe is channel 17.
Having attended the Trustees meeting, I would recommend that any one attempting to follow these discussions take time to watch what was discussed and filmed. Unfortunately, there is no like coverage of the Board of Ed meetings. The next BOE meeting will be next Thursday, the 26th at WMS, 7pm.
Before you will get to see the film of the October 17 meeting, the Trustees will have held a Special Meeting on October 24. That meeting will discuss Woodstock BOE’s letter of October 13 offering to pay for 16 more students than are currently at the Academy. This could easily have been part of the discussion at the Academy’s October 17 meeting, but to do so would have undermined the Academy’s position that they have a deficit this year, so they suppressed a discussion of the letter. If the contents of the letter had been discussed, the Academy would then have been required, by their own analysis of the problem, to return more money to the sending towns. Instead they ignored the letter and overstated the deficit.
The October 24 Special Meeting will also discuss a response to Woodstock BOE’s 9th Grade program. An evaluation of the costs associated with such a program, were it to become necessary out of financial desperation, has not even gotten out of a BOE subcommittee yet. Woodstock BOE will not meet until October 26. Does everyone see what is going on here? The Academy is going to brow beat the Board of Education into submission by extorting a commitment from them to send all students from grades 9 – 12 there, regardless of the financial effects of that decision, and while refusing to return all the excess funds that rightfully belong to the taxpayers of Woodstock. At the same time, the Academy will undertake a public relations assault on the BOE by suggesting that there is a threat that actually does not exist. Ruthless tactics! The BOE needs to get real and understand who they are dealing with here.
Another Point of View- You are correct about the use of the term ‘mandate’ only if you use the term to mean a state or federal requirement. I have used the word in a general context- the Woodstock B of E is mandated to send our children to Woodstock Academy because they must provide an education for our children and they have no other feasible alternative in our town. On your other point- a stipulation is a condition, not a contract- regardless if it is oral or in writing, a stipulation is a form of a contract. Lastly, your 4th point is completely self-serving if in fact the Trustees used that logic in putting stipulations on giving back the surplus. That is not a ‘good faith’ gesture. That gesture was, without a doubt, a strong-arm tactic to muscle Woodstock B of E into doing what the Academy wants- not a gesture to acknowledge the Bof E has funding problems and an acknowledgement that the Trustee could help them. You are standing on very weak ground with your logic!
We are bothered by the fact that Ed Higgins made these assertions, did not substantiate them in any way, and has apparantly declined to address the challenges made here. Perhaps he realizes there is no credible response.
…… I now have a keen appreciation for what Gulliver must have experienced upon waking from his slumber to find that the good, yet anonymous, citizens of Lilliput had just about bound him to the ground, for good, hand and foot.
Utterly lacking in time or ability to effectively respond to the numerous well-expressed comments and critiques, above; I would offer some historical perspective and information regarding the new football program at Woodstock Academy. It is most unfortunate it is now being characterized, in some quarters, as being a haphazard, irresponsible and self-aggrandizing undertaking by WA.
The spring 2005 decision by the Woodstock Academy BOT to proceed with the new program culminated a year-long committee feasibility study that also identified strong student and community support coupled with a commitment by supporters to raise and provide $ 70,000.00 over a three-year period to help offset the significant equipment and start-up expenses. A review of the WA annual budget by supporters also revealed that even with the new football program, projected annual budget allocations for all WA related –extracurricular programs (all athletic offerings; arts, theatre and music programs) would still be will within the 1-4 % of the overall operating expenditures that appears to be the norm for Connecticut high schools.
Whereas in the past, fall sports offering for boys at WA was restricted to the 40-60 positions on the highly successful and competitive soccer programs, and 15 + spots for runners on the cross country teams; there are now some 75 additional boys training and playing on the new football teams. These are also students who would likely have no meaningful opportunity to otherwise participate in the various community recreation sports programs that are available and open to younger children.
While some comments intimate that offering football will encourage the reprehensible conduct and buffoonery recently witnessed in a Florida college game; with the impressive staff coaching the new Woodstock teams, it is hoped that there will be meaningful opportunities for very beneficial mentoring that can make a tremendous difference in the lives of adolescent boys in today’s challenging society. This need was very thoughtfully underscored in a recent posting on this site noting the benefits of having qualified guidance counseling available for younger students in the school system.
While it may be wishful thinking to hope that some common ground or unified approach can be maintained in the struggle to meet the competing demands and needs in these seemingly intractable budgetary times, the pejorative assignment of differing viewpoints to one identified camp or the other will do little to further this end. I remain most appreciative for all the hard work and efforts being made by the volunteers serving on the Board of Education, the Board of Trustees and the Board of Finance who are surely making their best efforts in working through these difficult times.
[...] Divergent opinions about the value and need for the football program at the Academy surfaced in response to Ed Higgins’ article (“We Need to Find Common Ground�). In posting his views about the importance of Woodstock’s citizens finding common ground in dealing with differences of opinion, Ed exposed himself to the real world, e.g. the ‘Lilliputians’ of Woodstock. I found Ed’s response in a comment drawing the analogy, of him being Gulliver, thought-provoking, e.g. “I now have a keen appreciation for what Gulliver must have experienced upon waking from his slumber to find that the good, yet anonymous, citizens of Lilliput had just about bound him to the ground, for good, hand and foot.� [...]