By Rebecca Shalomoff
Similar to the passionate debates made across the country about the use of taxpayer-funded vouchers to send students to religious schools, local residents continue to battle over how much of District 15 funds should support area students primarily attending private Jewish schools.
The changing demographics in the Lawrence School District over the past few years with half the student population enrolled in private schools have brought about increased dialogue between school officials on both sides about providing more services for private school students.
A bridge between the two communities was established when two parents of students attending yeshivas, Drs. Asher Mansdorf and Sol Blisko, joined the Lawrence Board of Education last year.
However, since financial mismanagement and a resulting budget deficit in the Lawrence Public Schools was revealed last summer, forcing board members to increase taxes by 14 percent, even though voters had only approved a 7-percent increase, the public-private schools dialogue has turned ugly.
I think, unfortunately, when there was no budget crisis, people didn't care where the money went, Blisko said. Now, people think they are being shortchanged. The public school parents feel that the money should only go to the public schools. The private school parents feel they are being shortchanged because the demographics [show] that 50 percent go to private schools. And 50 percent of the taxes are from private school parents.
Most recently, the argument between private and public school parents has been played out in the local newspaper, with residents bashing each other in letters to the editor.
In the March 21 issue of the Nassau Herald, Cathy Mantovani of Inwood wrote in response to a Lawrence resident who made comments in an article featured in the New York Times which outlines the Lawrence district's current fiscal crisis: He feels that private-school parents were already doing more than their fair share . . . Imagine if all of these people moving into these larger homes and utilizing the private school didn't burden our schools budget with added expenses such as transportation costs, maybe our school taxes could be reduced.
Mantovani's letter drew several critical responses from residents of the private school community. One letter to the editor written by Naomi Kaszovitz of Lawrence stated: Rather than understand the needs of the private school children whose parents pay more than half of the school taxes in District 15, she tries to put the blame for the District's financial problems on the private school community.
Charged comments on using public funds for private schools also have been made during school board meetings.
There is no place OK for us to be paying for a non-public schools education . . . I do not think that we should be paying for non-public school education, Cedarhurst resident Michael Herzog said at a November meeting, to which members of the audience responded with applause.
As board members face the task of making budget cuts, residents are demanding that money be cut from the private schools before touching any public school activities.
In a country that holds as one of its basic tenets the separation of church and state, America continues to undergo advances in state and federal regulations in the use of public funds to support religious schools. New York State passed an amendment to the constitution that allowed public funding of transportation for private schools. A few years ago, in the case of Anguilar vs. Felton, public schools were given permission to provide instructional services in non-public schools. The 2000 ruling for the Helms case in the U.S. Supreme Court allowed the financing of computers and other instructional material for religious schools.
In the $80 million budget for 2001-2002, District 15 tax dollars provide $5.7 million in services to non-public schools, which is $1.1 million more than the cost mandated by New York State. About half of the amount covers transportation costs; $1.5 million goes toward special education and related services; and the rest is for textbooks, computer software, library materials, use of public school buildings, health and welfare services.
With the budget and board of education election taking place on May 21, the public-private school issue has become a platform that candidates are running on. Rumors have been swirling that more private school parents plan to seek a third or fourth spot on the board.
If some candidates for the board focus on the needs of public schools or the needs of non-public schools, it's because they see a perceived need to do that which leads to a conflict we've seen at board meetings, said Superintendent of Schools Dr. Mark Rosenbaum. I don't believe it's a matter of one side being right or wrong. It's a recognition that our community has changed. To ignore that fact probably does not serve the overall good of the community.
I think we always have to be very clear in our understanding of the need to separate church and state as defined by the Constitution and Supreme Court, he added. But at the same time, if there is a way to provide responsible sharing of resources, we have to address that.
