What is so good about Local Control?

To answer your question in the title-- (0.00 / 0)

local control is the next best thing to parental control over the disposition of their off-spring, whose usurpation by the state is resented by many people--people who have the same attitude towards the children they own as they do other property.  
Parental, especially paternal, interest in off-spring has traditionally focused on what benefit can be derived from them by putting them to work at home.
The public pays for schooling because the majority of parents have no interest in and perceive no benefit from having them prepared to leave home and become socially productive.

---

by: hannah @ Wed Jan 06, 2010 at 15:40:30 PM CST

I sometimes sense a disconnect (0.00 / 0)

People say they want local control but it had been very hard to find folks to run for seats, particularly in this challenged district.

The town of Roxbury has not had a rep on the board for over a year.. its a very small town and they can't find anyone that wants the hassle.

Hope > Fear



Create a free Blue Hampshire account and join the conversation.

---

by: Mike Hoefer @ Wed Jan 06, 2010 at 19:24:10 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Thanks for raising the issue (0.00 / 0)

My daughter lives in Montgomery County MD, where county government is the norm.  Good schools.  My grandsons have taken advantage of a local high school that offers the International Baccalaureate Program.  The elder was accepted at 6 of the 7 universities with architecture programs he applied to, and wait-listed on the 7th.  So their educations in public schools were and are great (the younger is in high school).  Of course this is an area that is still doing well economically, being a DC suburb, and parents tend to be well-educated.  But I would think resources can be much better allocated and expenses kept lower by consolidating buying supplies, heating fuel, etc.  

I wonder if local control is just another way of keeping the property tax as our funding source.  With an aging population, housing too expensive for young families, and rich retirees, who could care less about schools, moving in,  kids are going to be the bottom of the totem pole, if they aren't already.  But we will keep the "NH advantage," although I can't figure out what that is, for me.  

We believe in prosperity & opportunity, strong communities, healthy families, great schools, investing in our future and leading the world by example. We are Democrats; we are the change you're looking for.

---

by: bloomingpol @ Wed Jan 06, 2010 at 17:02:20 PM CST

I too have heard good (0.00 / 0)

things from a County Style system in Fairfax VA.

I do think the property tax is a related issue. But I'm not sure which comes first the chicken or the egg.

Hope > Fear



Create a free Blue Hampshire account and join the conversation.

---

by: Mike Hoefer @ Wed Jan 06, 2010 at 19:21:24 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Government structure (4.00 / 1)

It's a subject I am interested in, and just wrote about in the UL. If you are interested here is the link:

http://www.unionleader.com/art...

I think there is some government in NH we can eliminate, and some we could consolidate. If you want a laugh, read the comments; it is amazing how people can say that I am a socialist looking for bigger government when the point I was making was for less government!  

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Wed Jan 06, 2010 at 17:10:51 PM CST

Having been a selectman in a small town (0.00 / 0)

I think some consolidation would be great.  Duplication of effort in small neighboring towns is such a waste of time and money.  
The comments in the UL are amazing.  And the nastiness is really incredible.  They must be terribly afraid and hurting to have so much venom in them.  But the evil they know is much less scary than the good they might get if they were willing to change a bit.  

We believe in prosperity & opportunity, strong communities, healthy families, great schools, investing in our future and leading the world by example. We are Democrats; we are the change you're looking for.

---

by: bloomingpol @ Wed Jan 06, 2010 at 18:40:37 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Great Piece (0.00 / 0)

Almost like we timed it!

Can't make it through the comments though.

I sometimes I think we should do a Blue Hampshire invasion on one of those UL threads.

Hope > Fear



Create a free Blue Hampshire account and join the conversation.

---

by: Mike Hoefer @ Wed Jan 06, 2010 at 19:34:45 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Hawaii has one school district. (0.00 / 0)

Is that better? I don't have a clue.

But one could certainly make a case that, given the Claremont ruling that public education is a state responsibility, we should eliminate school districts and have each principal report to the NH Department of Education.

(The DoE might find a need for an intermediate level of hierarchy of two.)

---

by: elwood @ Wed Jan 06, 2010 at 18:01:15 PM CST

County (0.00 / 0)

other than the std arguments against County Gov. one could image a County Commissioner of Education that is that intermediate level.

Would probably want that to be an appointed/professional position vs. elected.

Hope > Fear



Create a free Blue Hampshire account and join the conversation.

---

by: Mike Hoefer @ Wed Jan 06, 2010 at 19:39:02 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Warning: Apostasy alert (4.00 / 3)

There is a reasonable argument that one of the hidden costs of small educational districts is that the public entity is unable to bargain on equal terms with teacher unions that are organized on a much larger basis and have far better negotiating skills and resources. I have read arguments that this ends up being both costly to the public and a brake on experiments on innovations such as merit pay systems. As a former small town school board member, I think there is some truth to this argument.

There are undoubted benefits to small districts-- they do in fact seem to act to eliminate some level of wasteful spending in education, which, given our horrendous reliance on the property tax, can have a devastating effect on the elderly. Furthermore, communities differ and policies made from on high often are inappropriate in particular settings. (When I was on the school board in a small town, I voted against almost every single federally 'mandated' policy (with the not insignificant exception of ones relating to special education) because they simply didn't reflect the needs of a town of less than 2000 people, no matter how appropriate they might have been for New York or Chicago.

These real values of local control have a serious cost however. It is very costly and wasteful for every small town to have a fire department with a full array of equipment. The administrative costs of having separate police departments in each small town are considerable and drive taxes to levels that crush people. There are some innovative efforts at regional cooperation that seek to create efficiencies of size, but the political reality is that the turf wars are fierce and no one wants to cede power or resources.

I think that KS is right and that we need to step back and rethink what forms of government service best on a small level and what forms cry out for regionalization. In spite of the hysterical responses on the U-L site, this really shouldnt be a left/right argument at the outset, but rather a discussion of what works and what doesnt work. People who are afraid of discussion and need to call names wont add anything to the discussion and are unlikely to learn anything from it.


"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  

---

by: Paul Twomey @ Wed Jan 06, 2010 at 19:57:36 PM CST