Our recent editorial on the hiring of a private investigator to seek out students illegally attending Herricks schools was the subject of several critical letters, including one from the Board of Education. For the sake of those who didn’t read the editorial, those who only read the headline and those who missed the point of the editorial, we offer the following explanation.
1. More than one writer was upset with our use of the word “hunt.” Merriam Webster defines hunt as “b: to search out: seek.” It is our understanding that Joseph Wendling, a retired police officer, was hired to “seek out” children illegally attending the Herricks schools. Calling Mr. Wendling a “private eye” was hardly “abusive slander,” as Tim Coffey wrote. According to Merriam Webster “private eye” is synonymous with “private investigator.”
2. We made it clear that “lying” to get one’s children in a better school district “is of course wrong, even when the intentions are good.” And we recognized the right of the Board of Education to seek out and remove children who live in other districts. On this there was no ambiguity.
3. What we did say and what angered some is that we are impressed by parents who care enough to attempt to get their children into better schools when their own schools are second rate. We are more troubled by parents who don’t care about their children’s education.
4. We assumed in our editorial that the children illegally in the Herricks schools live in poorer districts. Writer Coffey shared unkind and somewhat bizarre thoughts about people who happen to be “poorer.” He wrote: “The core reason the poor are poor is not because the rich [are] rich. Rather it’s because most of the poor invariably have bad attitudes and worse behavior leading them to make the wrong decisions over, over and over again in their lives, resulting in chronic failure.” Nearly 10 percent of the population in New York is currently unemployed. Many of them are growing poorer by the day. Do they have “bad attitudes?” The people starving in East Africa must have very bad attitudes. Shame on them.
5. Mr. Coffey goes on to say that the children will learn from their parents’ bad example. “Theft is an attribute of low character,” he wrote, “excuse mongering aside, and one that is readily passed on to children who are quick to grasp what is going on.” Is there even one person in the state prison system who can trace his criminal behavior to the day his mom told a lie to get him into a better school?
6. Although we are not accountants, we question some of the math that fueled the anger with our editorial. Critics charged that each of the 39 illegal students cost the district $15 – 20,000. The taxpayers, they said, ultimately pay the cost for the illegal students. The district includes three elementary schools, a middle school and a high school. The cost of educating a child is an average based on an overall budget. It is possible that if they were spread out among these five schools that the illegal students cost nothing more than the price of text books. This is far less than the $20,000 used to hire a private investigator.
We did not nor do we encourage lying. Nor do we make light of the district’s concerns, even if we disagree with their approach to this problem. In fact, although much of what they wrote was critical, we appreciate the letter from the Herricks School Board in which they agreed with what we believe was the main point of our editorial.
They wrote, “We do agree with one thing in the editorial – our elected officials truly do need to take a look at the public school systems, not only in Nassau County, but statewide and nationally. That starts with an honest discussion with politicians at all levels of government, and we are willing to be a part of the conversation so ‘that every child is offered a quality public education’ regardless of where they reside!”
Illegal registrations and more serious problems will continue until every child in Nassau County has access to a quality public education.
A Blank Slate Media Editorial
