Thank you for the excellent reality check in your April 6 editorial, “School funding - don’t celebrate yet!”
While the State Legislature was able to pass a budget on time for the second year in a row after 20 years of late budgets, once again it is a budget that does not do enough for Queens and its schoolchildren. That is why I voted “no” on the portion of the budget affecting education spending. It continues to leave our young people shortchanged.
The lawsuit brought by the Campaign for Fiscal Equity (CFE) has been litigated, appealed, and reargued. The time to comply with the State Supreme Court’s order is now. Every year we wait, we lose a class of children who, by Court decision, have had inadequate funding for a sound, basic education. Unfortunately, the budget that just passed only increases operating aid by $1.1 billion, including only $400 million for New York City schools. By not complying with the Court’s ruling, the Legislature has thumbed its nose at both the court and the State Constitution, which the court cites as the basis for its ruling.
Even more disappointing is that the Senate’s Republican majority soundly rejected an amendment to the budget, which I voted “yes” on, that fulfills the CFE case by providing $2.6 billion in additional operating funds, including a $1.15 billion increase for New York City schools. That extra money could be allocated by closing tax loopholes for corporations and individuals making more than $500,000.
We should not continue to look for ways around the CFE decision. We should simply find a way to comply.
John D. Sabini
Senator
Let us count all the homeowners
In my previous letter regarding landmark designation for Broadway-Flushing Homeowners’ Association (BFHA), I expressed my concern about the lack of a referendum, accountability, and the process of inclusion. I am grateful to the BFHA for service on behalf of our neighborhood but my concern for the “character of the neighborhood” is tempered with a greater concern for the rule of law and due process.
This is not a debate about who loves the neighborhood more. The usurpation of our rights to the exterior of our homes by a government bureaucracy is not a trivial matter. Landmark designation imposes new regulations, fees, and restrictions on our property rights. The price for living in a civil society is paying taxes, conforming to zoning codes and regulations, etc. As a responsible citizen, I accept all the above.
Recently 130 of 257 homeowners in Fieldston, an enclave in Riverdale, signed a petition withdrawing their support of Landmark designation after learning more about the restrictions.
Why can’t the final approval of landmark designation be submitted to the homeowners for a vote, be done by door-to-door canvassing or polling? Who makes the final decision and what data will be used to make that decision? Will the most vociferous group at the hearings prevail? Who opposes a vote on the issue and why?
I remain… a concerned homeowner.
Ed Konecnik
Flushing
Getting the word out about York
Thank you so much for your show of support at the York College reception held on Wednesday, March 29th. We so enjoyed the opportunity to highlight the many and varied York alumni who have gone on to build successful lives and careers.
I just celebrated my first anniversary at York College; however, the college clearly has been building a solid register of successful alums over its nearly 40-year history. This event marks the beginning of sharing the accomplishments of our alumni in new and wide-ranging ways.
I am delighted to be in the position to get the “York” story told to as many who will listen. I am proud to relate the many successes of the students and faculty, past and present. They are the force that drives all of us at York to continue to work hard to provide affordable and quality higher education as a senior college of The City University of New York.
Marcia V. Keizs
President, York College
