Clown Cars And NYC Charter Schools

Don't you just love to laugh at those circus acts where dozens - sometimes hundreds - of clumsy clowns exit a really tiny car? The way they fumble out the doors, onto the ground and on top of each other, you know they were hiding in some hatch underneath that small automobile. Still, the thought that they're trying to create a "magic" scene of stuffing the red-nosed entertainers into a Volkswagen Beetle is, I think, a hilarious comparison to how the general public tries to smush lots of things into considerably small physical spaces. 

Let's see how many we can get in here!!!

Speaking of smushing things into small spaces, a recent report in the New York Daily News revealed that charter school representatives are upset with city officials for turning down various requests to facilitate public space.

One group claims that the city has denied 79 percent of applying charter school requests to occupy space in public buildings.

Considering how many meetings I've covered for the Canarsie Courier that focused on charter schools requesting space in an already-established public school - where studies show there is "underenrollment" - I was angered at the Daily News article for being so broad in its disheartening report.

Over the years, public engagement sessions have been hosted all over the city so that parents and teachers could provide feedback on charter schools seeking to co-locate at a certain school. Charter schools seem to be the bane of the general public's existence. Parents by and large have claimed students from a new school will take away resources available to pupils who already attend the public school. Some parents have also voiced their concerns over academic competition among charter and public school students.

Let's get real! Charter school reps shouldn't blame the city in general for denying them space in a school - they should blame the yammering parents, teachers and civic leaders who fight to keep charters out of buildings they consider a second home to the community's children. It's true - if you fight hard enough against an issue and you make enough noise, you just might frighten away those who are looking to share your home!

There are more schools in the city now where multiple "academies" exist in one building. Doesn't matter how small the school building is physically - it only matters that the ratio of students to classroom space is under a certain percentage. The Department of Education (DOE) typically calls these schools "underutilized" and, of course, school officials who don't want to share their space will challenge the DOE about those figures and the space their school actually has available.

In some instances, charter schools may be turned down because public engagement has so strongly protested egregious co-locations, such as placing an elementary school inside of a high school. Concerns over the safety of younger students sharing space with teenagers is reason enough to take that co-locating idea back to the drawing board.

Personally, I refer to buildings like South Shore High School in Canarsie the Clown Campus,  where more than a handful of small academies - some with long and highfalutin names to make them sound pretentious and overly successful - are jam packed into one space. Say all you want about how much space is "physically available"...Show the us the crazy "formulas" created by some intelligent agency whose engineers may or may not even have children enrolled in that public school! Every year or so the DOE manages to shove another school inside of a school building with multiple academies! Is this the DOE's way of treating our children like clowns in a circus? Just get as many of them in there as you can!!!

Even though there haven't been many complaints about charter schools that share space with public schools, as a community we have a right to protest their requests and turn them down just like any other plans brought to the table that will effect childrens' learning experience.

Hey - I'm sure if you asked all those clowns coming out of that tiny car if they wanted a separate ride to the circus instead of piggybacking off someone else's already-cramped trip, they'd gladly go where they're not packed into a place they're probably not welcomed.

Sheltering Our Homeless Isn't The Biggest Problem

When I exit the Times Square train station every week day, I'm reminded of the growing homeless problem in New York City. With dozens of bums setting up makeshift beds compiled of flattened cardboard boxes, stuffed garbage bags and metal chairs, you can't walk down one block and NOT see a trash-strewn body radiating the stench of human feces.

Now that I've created a visual (and perhaps stirred your nostrils) I can definitely attest to the fact that since Mayor Bill de Blasio has been in charge, the homeless problem is getting worse. Not only is  the percentage of bums in the street increasing, the homeless are also taking over the subways. When I get on the L train at around 6 in the morning, there's at least one or two homeless men in each car - some lying down - taking away seats from those who are on their way to work - some are sitting crouched over in a two-seater with huge garbage bags next to them.

Some of the homeless people I've seen on the trains travel with shopping wagons filled with GARBAGE. Real garbage - not items like their clothes or perhaps blankets. They travel with TRASH - including dozens of empty soda bottles or bottles filled with what appears to be their own urine. Also attached to their mini-home-on-the-go are torn up plastic bags that obviously can't be used to hold anything! Other homeless individuals are trekking around with years-old newspapers and ripped up literature that I'm sure has no lucrative purpose...right? Are these people able to function normally? What person in their right mind (who is mentally healthy) travels all over the city with dozens of bottles filled with their own urine? Did I miss something?

Rent-free, perfect home! Courtesy of NY DAILY NEWS

Let's get real! Now that Mayor de Blasio has planted his pipe dreams of establishing more homeless shelters in the city, should we feel better about the possibility of there being less homeless people on the streets? Or are his elusive plans - which don't pinpoint specifically where the 90 new proposed shelters will be located - proof that he's clueless about how bad the situation really is?

I've been known to strike a few negative chords among my blog readers, who think I'm cold and heartless due to my general statement/belief - that most of the homeless population does NOT want help or housing. Many officials have found that homeless individuals do NOT want to stay in shelters because the conditions there are worse than the streets or subways.

Put it this way - if there were an increasing amount of homeless people turning their lives around and becoming a productive part of society, where are all of those reports??? In my opinion, instead of highlighting de Blasio's plans which may or may not involve using hotels to house the homeless, what percentage of that "growing homeless population" WANTS to live a productive life?

Has anyone surveyed how effective drug abuse programs are and how effective treatment is for those wagon-pushing street dwellers? As we've heard from various news reports, there are homeless people mad/insane enough to push an innocent straphanger onto train tracks!

Mental health facilities may be able to diagnose and medicate those who have imbalances and diseases like schizophrenia. Sadly, people with mental diseases - which prevent them from functioning at a job - may never live in a clean and habitable home.

What about those who point the blame at the high cost of living in our city? Certainly, if you're reading this blog and you have a job/career and a roof over your head, you're functioning normally enough to know that you need to make money and be a productive part of society - no matter where you live or how many roommates you have to tolerate at once to have your own "place."

The New York Daily News does an excellent job of contradicting its own reports with diverse/contrasting articles. In their March 1st edition, they showcased de Blasio's "Nowhere Plan" on page 5. However, to prove that displaced residents with brains - who function normally and want out of the shelter system - they published a story on page 12 in the same issue titled: "Grad To Be Here," which highlights Rosemary Rodriguez, a once-homeless teen who earned a "Beat the Odds" scholarship worth $10,000. As the article states, the 17-year-old and her family were forced to seek refuge in a shelter. But the determined youth didn't let unfortunate circumstances stop her from taking vital steps that could lead to her professional success. The article proved to me that if a teenager could fight through a tragic situation, why can't a normal adult (carrying torn shopping bags in their feces-laden pockets) turn their lives around to be...I don't know...a city worker? Maybe a drug counselor?

What excuse will we make for the thousands of homeless who increasingly refuse to even TRY to make a decent living? If homeless individuals are content with their day-to-day operations and if they're perfectly fine with wreaking of alcohol and yelling out obscenities to strangers for no reason during a quiet morning commute, then why convince them to live otherwise? Some people collect urine bottles while others collect pipe dreams of wiping out homelessness...