I rent and live in a 2-family house, so I do not *directly* pay school taxes. I guess you can say that I'm one of "these people" "living in social services" as I receive Food Stamps every month..I get $10.00 (and BTW, I was told to spend it "wisely.") I also receive SSDI, although I do work part-time from home. BUT, I vote in all elections, including school elections. So, just because someone is receiving social services, of any form, does not mean they are not aware of what is going on in their community AND many do take part in their community. Ya know, I think I'll add elitist along with egotistical.

FUWB, are you a Gloversville resident? Do you attend the Board meetings?

Many of these resident's are living in social services. This does not create a more equally shared tax burden. Many of these people do not tend to get involved with current event's in their community, such as voting and school budget's. They do not receive a yearly tax bill, and therefore they do not comprehend the impact that this can have on ones life. Unfortunately, people like yourself are forced to pick up the slack. What Gloversville needs is more owner occupied homes back on the tax rolls. People who feel that they have a true investment in their community, tend to stay more involved with it's internal workings. I have no more to say on this issue except, good luck.

And Fedupwithbull, I did not call that kid disabled, that was a really stupid way of interpreting what I wrote. LET US EXAMINE WHAT YOU WROTE ON 09-29-08 at 11:29 AM.

The school district doesn’t have to offer busing for anyone that isn’t disabled, according to something I read from MOUNTAINMAN on another article. So I think Mountain man should be happy her kid doesn’t have to walk all the way down the mountain to school. FIRST YOU QUOTE MOUNTAINMAN AS SAYING THAT THE SCHOOL IS ONLY OBLIGATED TO BUS HANDICAPPED CHILDREN, AND NEXT YOU IMPLY THAT MOUNTAINMAN SHOULD BE HAPPY THAT HER CHILD WILL BE RIDING THE BUS! PERHAPS MOTHEROF2, YOU SHOULD SPEND MORE TIME WITH FATHEROF1, AND LEAVE THE BIG SCARY ISSUES TO THE GROWNUP'S!

I agree with you on the poor choice of location for the Middle School. I imagine this was the most cost effective location, due to it's close proximity of the High School.

And Fedupwithbull, I did not call that kid disabled, that was a really stupid way of interpreting what I wrote. I couldn't care less anymore, if it ever comes to a vote, about bringing back all of the door to door pick up, I will be right there saying: NO WAY, NO HOW, I don't think any child should be picked up at their door, except the Head Start program and even that I didn't do, I brought my child to school myself, still do and I will bring my second child to school myself. I care about every moment I get with my children. I guess the rest of you don't care about that. I am done!

Gloversville: $18.74 per $1,000 of assessed valuation - a 16.5 percent decrease

This was after the new assessment where mine nearly doubled, so also did the tax. Even though the cost per 1000 was down the price went way up! I would like to add your online name to mine. It fits nicely!

BUT voters got NO say on whether to close the school and build on the MOUNTAIN where EVERY child deserves a ride. On a road that on sunny days you cannot see to drive up. But I am glad to see we are finally getting your attention!

if you want door to door pick up then pay for it yourself its called a taxi! NO,IT"S CALLED TAXES! TAXES OF WHICH,3 OUT OF 4 MUNICIPALITIES ARE PAYING MORE OF THAN YOU ARE! oldjoe you are pretty childish to comment on someone's spelling mistake."differants" was meant to be Difference Ha ha WAS ANYONE ELSE DISTURBED BY THIS? Alright now I am confused,And in that case who is stupid, We need someone to point out the obvious to the board.I THINK IT'S SELF EXPLANATORY!

Gloversville: $18.74 per $1,000 of assessed valuation - a 16.5 percent decrease

Johnstown: $25.67 - a 2 percent increase

Bleecker: $18.74 - a 0.6 percent increase

Caroga: $35.35 - a 4.4 percent increase

Mayfield: $27.96 - a 12.6 percent increase.

Despite the fact the tax levy increased from about $11.3 million, city residents will pay $18.74 per $1,000 in assessed property value. That represents a $3.68 decrease in the tax rate from last school year At a special meeting of the school district Board of Education Friday, a roughly $12.1 million property tax levy for the 2008-09 school year was approved. The board also approved the tax rates per $1,000 of assessed property value for the five municipalities in the district - Gloversville and the towns of Johnstown, Bleecker, Caroga and Mayfield. The following are the adopted 2008-09 property tax rates for the Gloversville Enlarged School District and the percentage of change from the previous school year.

Gloversville: $18.74 per $1,000 of assessed valuation - a 16.5 percent decrease

Johnstown: $25.67 - a 2 percent increas

Voters to get say on Gloversville Estee school redevelopment plan

The Business Review (Albany)

The Crossroads Incubator Corp., the real estate arm of the Fulton County Economic Development Corp., gave the public a look at what the former Estee School in Gloversville could look like after a $6 million redevelopment project. School district voters will decide whether to allow the school district to sell the vacant building to the CIC May 18. The 170,000-square-foot school has been empty about five years following the construction of a new middle school.

If the sale is approved, the CIC plans to purchase the building for $150,000 and spend approximately $6 million to $8 million transforming the school complex into 29 residential units, and mixed-use space. Currently, instead of generating taxes, the school building costs the school district approximately $30,000 per year for insurance, heat, electric and maintenance.

How anyone can be uninformed about schools purchasing buses, is beyond my understanding. It's the same way each and every time the district (or any district in NY State) needs buses, it has to be voted on by district residents.

And, like it or not, state education law gives boards the right to adopt a contingent budget with or without putting a budget up for a second vote. Many issues need to be resolved and/or changed at the state level, personally, I think this particular right should be done away with.

Just understand, to make "real" cuts in any budget involves cutting programming/services and personnel. All cuts effect the county as a whole (unemployment) not just our little part of it.