Hi nll-ga!
After much research I have compiled the following information for you
that I feel might prove useful in your endeavor. I have included
several cases regarding district boundary issues. Unfortunately I
could not find one single case where the petitioner has won. However
the cases should prove helpful by learning from the previous
petitioners experiences. Perhaps if there was a collective effort
amongst the 15 other Garden City residents who are in the Franklin
Square district, the Commissioner might be more apt to approve a
boundary change?
If you have any questions about the information I have provided, feel
free to request a clarification of my answer. Please be sure to give
me enough time to respond before you rate my answer.
Best of luck to you!
chellphill-ga
http://wwwsgi.ursus.maine.edu/gisweb/spatdb/urisa/ur94002.html
"The New York State Division of Equalization and Assessment (E&A) has
developed a School District Verification (SDV) system to correctly
assign school district codes to taxpayer address records."
"Method 3: Geographic Information System (GIS) Method...Prior to this
project, digital school district boundaries had been captured for 455
school districts in New York State using ARC/INFO GIS software. These
represent school districts that are wholly contained in counties with
approved real property tax maps. During the course of this project, 52
school districts in Nassau County were digitized from nearly 1,000 tax
maps and added to the GIS. This GIS now includes 507 complete digital
school district "
http://www.portfolio-of-homes.com/cgi-bin/webdata_pro.pl
A comparison of both school districts
*Cases involving district boundaries:
*http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume34/d13237.htm
Appeal of_________ from action of the Board of Education of the
Franklin Square Union Free School District regarding its refusal to
alter a school district boundary line.
"Petitioner appeals the refusal of respondent Board of Education of
the Franklin Square Union Free School District to alter its boundary
with the Garden City Union Free School District. Petitioner seeks an
order transferring her property and that of several of her neighbors
to the Garden City district. The appeal must be dismissed. "
"Respondent contends that there is no legal basis for the relief
sought by petitioner, in the absence of consent by either the Franklin
Square or Garden City district. Respondent further claims that the
appeal is untimely. Respondent also asserts that petitioner has failed
to join certain necessary parties, both as petitioners and
respondents. Respondent finally alleges that its educational program
will be substantially injured by the loss of school tax revenue and
State aid if the fifteen affected properties are transferred to the
Garden City Union Free School District as petitioner requests."
"The appeal must also be dismissed on the merits. The petition states
no statutory basis for the appeal, but it appears that petitioner
seeks relief pursuant to Education Law '1508, under which, in some
circumstances, a district superintendent may order a boundary
alteration even though not all affected districts have consented.
However, previous decisions of the Commissioner have interpreted
'1507(2) to limit the district superintendent's authority in this
regard. Under that provision, no boundary alteration may take place
that affects a union free school district having a population of 4,500
or more, and employing a superintendent of schools without the written
consent of the district's board of education. According to the records
of the State Education Department, the Garden City Union Free School
District meets the criteria set forth in Education Law '1507(2), and
it is clear from the record herein that that district has not given
its written consent to the alteration sought by petitioner. As a
result, the district superintendent correctly refused to act pursuant
to '1508 "
"Regarding the Franklin Square board's refusal to consent to a
boundary alteration, absent proof that the refusal was not in the best
interest of the children involved or was arbitrary and capricious,
such decision will not be set aside (Matter of Dykeman, 21 Ed Dept Rep
241; Matter of Murtagh, supra; Matter of Hoffman, 9 id. 114). The
paramount consideration in cases involving a proposed alteration of
district boundaries is the educational interest in the children
involved (Matter of Hartzell, 7 Ed Dept Rep 128; Matter of O'Connor,
et al., 4 id. 8). Petitioner must make a clear showing that the denial
of the relief requested will adversely affect those interests (Matter
of Ruscoe and Nickles, 14 Ed Dept Rep 197; Matter of Denslow, et al.,
8 id. 17). The record indicates that petitioner has failed to meet
this burden of proof and that the determination of the Franklin Square
Board was not arbitrary and capricious."
*http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume34/d13357.htm
Board of Education of the Franklin Square Union Free School District
regarding its refusal to alter a school district boundary line.
(other cases that might prove helpful)
http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume32/d12948.htm
relating to the determination of a boundary between the Shenendehowa
Central School District and the Waterford-Halfmoon Union Free School
District.
http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume34/d13289.htm
Board of Education of the Carmel Central School District regarding a
school district boundary.
"Petitioners contend that respondent's refusal to consent to the
boundary alteration is arbitrary and capricious and not in the best
interests of their children. Specifically, petitioners contend that if
the boundary line was changed, their children would be closer to
school and the ride to school would be shorter. Petitioners also
assert that parents would have increased opportunities to be involved
in school events. However, the proximity of the school to home is not
a basis for redrawing school district boundary lines (Appeal of
Bearup, supra; Matter of Cooper, et al., 15 Ed Dept Rep 293).
Moreover, the difference in distance between petitioners' home and
respondent's school versus the Mahopac schools (approximately 14
miles) is not sufficient to warrant the substitution of my judgment
for that of respondent."
" Furthermore, petitioners offer only conclusory statements, and no
concrete evidence, that without the boundary change, their children
will be isolated from other children attending respondent's district."
http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume38/d14119.htm
Appeal of GEORGE ROBERTA from action of Dr. Dudley Hare, Jr., District
Superintendent of the Sole Supervisory District of Putnam and
Westchester Counties regarding a school district boundary.
http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume34/d13364.htm
Appeal of the BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE SOUTH GLENS FALLS CENTRAL
SCHOOL DISTRICT from action of the Board of Education of the Hudson
Falls Central School District and Gerald Carozza, District
Superintendent,Washington-Saratoga-Warren-Hamilton-Essex Board of
Cooperative Educational Services regarding a school district boundary.
http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume38/d13985.htm
Appeal of FRANK A. OCWIEJA, on behalf of MATTHEW J. and KAREN E.
OCWIEJA, from action of the Board of Education of the Greenburgh
Central School District regarding a school district boundary.
http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume31/d12620.htm
Appeal of NICHOLAS and BARBARA MICHAILIDES, from action of the Board
of Education of the Brewster Central School District relating to
alteration of a school district boundary.
http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume39/d14363.htm
Appeal of ANTHONY and ANNE SZPYLMAN from action of the Board of
Education of the Alexander Central School District regarding its
refusal to alter a school district boundary line.
http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume41/d14597.htm (*very
interesting case)
Appeal of the BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE HARBORFIELDS CENTRAL SCHOOL
DISTRICT from action of the Board of Education of the Huntington Union
Free School District and Robert and Veronica Elia relating to school
taxes.
(http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/rscs/chaps/Laws-Regs/Attendance/3203.htm)
Links that might prove helpful if you plan on requesting a boundary
change.
http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/appeals/faqs.htm
Frequently Asked Questions Concerning Appeals to the Commissioner of
Education
http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/handbook1/home.html
Regulations of the Commissioner of Education
http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/mgtserv/BOCES_forms/GuideToReorganizationOfSchoolDistricts.htm
Guide to the Reorganization of School Districts in New York State
"Union free school districts are governed by a board of education
composed of between three and nine members who serve three, four or
five year terms. Board size within these limits may be changed by the
voters of the district. See Education Law 1702-1703."
http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/mgtserv/BOCES_forms/ProceduresforSchoolBoundaries.htm
Procedures for Determination of School Boundaries
"When the boundary determination includes school districts located in
two different Supervisory Districts, the determination must be made
jointly."
*"Procedure: A request for a boundary determination may emanate from a
district, a request from a property owner, or a resident with school
age children. It is usually desirable to have a request in writing to
assure that the required effort is directed at the proper problem."
*"For further information, please contact Suzanne Spear, (518)
474-3936, NYS Education Department, Management Services and SDO/BOCES
Unit. She will provide the necessary technical assistance to District
Superintendents in this process."
http://unix32.nysed.gov:9210/offices/BOCES_Directory/NASSAU.htm
As of May 15 Nassau BOCES will have a new address 71 Clinton Road
Garden City, NY 11530
http://www.nassauboces.org/board/
The Board of Cooperative Educational Services of Nassau County
http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/district_detail.asp?Search=1&details=1&DistrictName=garden+city&City=garden+city&State=36&Zip=11530&County=nassau&DistrictType=1&DistrictType=2&DistrictType=3&DistrictType=4&DistrictType=5&DistrictType=6&DistrictType=7&NumOfStudentsRange=more&NumOfSchoolsRange=more&ID2=361176
district profile for garden city
http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/district_detail.asp?Search=1&details=1&DistrictName=franklin&State=36&Zip=11010&County=nassau&DistrictType=1&DistrictType=2&DistrictType=3&DistrictType=4&DistrictType=5&DistrictType=6&DistrictType=7&NumOfStudentsRange=more&NumOfSchoolsRange=more&ID2=3611460
district profile for franklin square
Information you might consider when preparing your petition:
http://www.marblearchrealty.com/TownDes/gcdescrip.htm
"Residences within village boundaries are also within the Garden City
school district. This assures children entrance into a top-rank public
school system that has long attracted young families to the area."
"Brokers link high housing prices to the excellence of Garden City
public school system. "It's in direct proportion," said Fred Stutzmann
of Stutzmann Realty."
"Nearly all of the school system's 3,500 students go on to college.
Average S.A.T. scores last year were 557 in verbal and 560 in math.
Both scores are about 50 points higher than state and national
averages. In September, five seniors in the 232-member class of 1999
were named National Merit Semifinalists, and 47 students were named AP
scholars by the College Board for high scores in Advanced Placement
exams. Honors courses are offered in English, math, science, social
studies, foreign languages and art.In addition to the four-year high
school, The district has three primary schools for kindergarten and
first grade, two elementary schools for grades one to five, and a
middle school for grades 6 to 8."
http://216.239.39.100/search?q=cache:IkhfmKxU0cgJ:www.co.nassau.ny.us/assessor/pressrel/05-15-03.html+nassau+county+new+york++%22school+district+boundaries%22+&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
"The Department of Assessment disagrees with the finding regarding
school district boundaries. While neighborhood delineation is an
important task in the valuation process, neighborhood boundaries, at
times, do cross school district boundaries. The audit findings fail to
support the claim made, which has been more of a perception problem
than a valuation problem. Clearly, there are situations where
neighborhood boundaries, as used for valuation purposes, cross over
school district boundaries. The Department of Assessment will continue
to monitor the neighborhood delineation process each year and make
adjustments as warranted by the marketplace."
http://www.orps.state.ny.us/ess/fvm/fvmb.htm
"This organization of local government differs markedly from the
systems used in most other states. Typically, assessment is a
county-level function elsewhere in the nation, and as a rule, school
districts do not cross county lines. While some New York counties, on
a voluntary basis, play very helpful roles in terms of coordinating
reassessment projects and otherwise supporting municipal assessment
activities, others do little more than perform the limited number of
mandated county-level functions such as tax mapping. One-third of New
York's approximately 700 school districts cross county lines, with the
result that they not only must raise their tax revenues in multiple
municipalities but also in multiple counties. A single school district
may contain portions of ten or more towns, with each town "segment"
assessed in a radically different manner than its neighbors (Figure
3). In such cases, two or more assessment rolls -- which may reflect
widely differing levels of assessment -- must be used to impose a
single school (or county) tax levy. This relatively large number of
local government entities, often with overlapping geographic
jurisdiction, results in a costly and cumbersome local fiscal system
as compared to the systems found in most other states. "
http://www.poconorecord.com/report/taxing/000393.html
"The school property tax situation is even more convoluted in New York
and New Jersey be-cause many school districts there only take in
fractions of municipalities. Students in one small upstate New York
town might be assigned to five different school districts, with
home-owners there paying different tax bills depending upon which
school district their properties are in. Even property owners within
the same school district might well be assigned different tax bills
for comparable properties, if those properties are in two different
municipalities."
http://www.orps.state.ny.us/about/01annual/
"School districts that are not congruent with municipal/county
boundaries
A product, in part, of the post-World War II consolidation of some
10,000 school districts statewide, the substantial majority of New
York’s school district boundaries do not coincide with municipal or
county boundaries. A single school district can contain as many as
fifteen or more municipal segments. As a result, New York’s school
districts face considerable challenges in apportioning their levies
among varying segments. "
Other links that may be of interest:
http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/rscs/chaps/Attendance/Att-Listserv_Info.htm
"discover how to share attendance information with others and request
feedback on attendance issues"
http://stateaid.nysed.gov/scripts/sa/proppub_02.idc?280218 Property
Tax Report Card For GARDEN CITY(280218) 2002-2003 School Year
http://stateaid.nysed.gov/scripts/sa/proppub_02.idc?280217 Property
tax report card for Franklin square 280217
http://www.nysed.gov/stateaid/dist/a280218.html GARDEN CITY UFSD
(280218)
http://www.nysed.gov/stateaid/dist/a280217.html FRANKLIN SQUARE UFSD
(280217)
http://stateaid.nysed.gov/trans/safzon.htm child saftey zones
http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume37/d13906.htm
from action of the Board of Education of the City School District of
the City of Oneida regarding attendance zones
http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume33/d12998.htm
Board of Education of the City School District of the City of
Schenectady regarding attendance zones.
http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume39/d14273.htm
Board of Education of the North Colonie Central School District
concerning school assignment. |
Clarification of Answer by
chellphill-ga
on
07 Jun 2003 15:47 PDT
Hi nll-ga,
My apologies for taking so long to get back to you, I have been
out of state for the past week and just got in today! Thanks for being
so patient!
Here is all the information I can find pertaining to the case of the
Elia's vs the board of Education of the Huntington Union Free school
District
http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume41/d14631.htm
http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume41/d14597.htm
"The owner of taxable property that is so located that the boundary
line between two school districts intersects (a) the dwelling on said
property or (b), in the case of an owner-occupied single family
dwelling unit, the property on which the dwelling unit is located may
designate the school in either of such districts to which the children
lawfully residing in said dwelling on said property shall attend by
filing with the district clerk of each of such districts a notice of
such designation . . . and, until a subsequent designation shall be
made and filed, such children shall be deemed to be resident children
of the district designated and shall be entitled to the school
privileges of such district as resident pupils without the payment of
tuition."
"As Huntington points out, the parcel of property located in
Harborfields is extremely small. However, the case law interpreting
this statute has held that the size of the parcel is not
determinative. In Crowe, et al. v. Macfarland, et al., 138 AD 2d 788
(3rd Dept, 1988), the court held that a property owner who acquired a
0.1-acre parcel to add to his 4-acre parcel met the statutory
requirements of §3203, where the only portion of his property
intersected by a school district boundary was the newly acquired 0.1
acre parcel. The court further held that the motivation of the owner
in purchasing the property is not a proper criterion in interpreting
or applying the statute (Id.). Thus, the designation of Harborfields
by the Elias was permissible under §3203, and the size of the property
they acquired within the designated district is not relevant to this
inquiry, nor is the reason they acquired it (Board of Education of the
Syosset Central School District, 38 Ed Dept Rep 791, Decision No.
14,144, aff’d, Bd. of Ed. Oyster Bay-East Norwich C.S.D. v. Mills.,
Sup. Ct., Albany Co. (Sheridan, J.), January 31, 2000)."
"That section requires the owner of intersected property to file "...
a notice of ... designation on or before August first in any year and
thereafter or ... when its owner-occupant’s first child commences
attending school from such residence and thereafter whenever the
ownership of such taxable property changes hands in an arms length
transaction...." Thus the failure to file the notice of designation by
August 1 is not dispositive of this appeal since the Elias did not
acquire the property in question until September 4, 1998. Had the
Elias moved into a property with an intersecting boundary line on
September 4 they would still have had the right to make a designation
notwithstanding the August 1 deadline"
http://www.nyssba.org/adnews/leg_agenda/leg_ag080601_3.htm
"The commissioner of education has ordered the Huntington school
district to pay the Harborfields school district more than $6,000 in
school taxes collected on a residential property that is intersected
by the boundary line between districts, even though only one square
foot of the entire property is located in the Harborfields district."
"The commissioner determined that the family's designation of the
Harborfields district was proper and, therefore, that Harborfields was
entitled to the school tax revenue."
"In reaching this result, the commissioner paid deference to earlier
court decisions on the issue that held that neither the size of the
parcel nor the motivations of the owner in purchasing the property has
any bearing on the right to choose schools."
"In one case cited by the commissioner, a court previously upheld a
property owner's purchase of a contiguous parcel consisting of
one-tenth of an acre in a neighboring district for the purpose of
contriving a parcel intersected by district boundary lines."
http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/SB/oct01site/whatsnew1001.html
(The article in full can be located towards the bottom of this page
under "commisioners decisions")
"The Commissioner sustained an appeal by the Board of Education of the
Harborfields Central School District (“Harborfields”) seeking the
return of tax monies levied and collected by the Board of Education of
the Huntington Union Free School District (“Huntington”) for property
intersected by the boundary of the two districts. In September 1998,
the Elia family, whose residential property was located wholly within
the Huntington school district, purchased from their neighbor one
square foot of contiguous property that was located within the
Harborfields school district. Upon acquiring the new property, the
Elias designated Harborfields as the district of attendance for their
daughter pursuant to Education Law §3203. The Commissioner found, in
accordance with prior case law, that the size of the acquired property
and the reason for its acquisition are irrelevant. The Commissioner
concluded, therefore, that the designation of Harborfields by the
Elias was permissible under §3203, and that Harborfields was entitled
to receive the amount of taxes Huntington levied and collected on the
Elias property for the 1998-99 school year. (See also: Appeal of the
Board of Education of the Harborfields Central School District, 41 Ed
Dept Rep ___, Decision No. 14,631, dated August 27, 2001, wherein the
Commissioner similarly determined that Harborfields was entitled to
receive from Huntington the amount of taxes levied and collected on
the Elias’ property for the 1999-2000 school year.)"
Other cases dealing with intersected boundaries:
http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume34/d13247.htm
http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume38/d14097.htm
http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume37/d13832.htm
http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume34/d13344.htm
http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume38/d14144.htm
" As respondent points out, the parcel of property located in the
Syosset district is extremely small. However, under the case law
interpreting this statute the size of the parcel is not determinative.
In Crowe, et al. v. MacFarland, et al., 138 AD 2d 788 (3rd Dept,
1988), the court held that a property owner who acquired a 0.1-acre
parcel to add to his 4-acre parcel met the statutory requirements of
§3203, where the only portion of his property intersected by a school
district boundary was the 0.1 acre parcel. Thus the designation by the
Albalas of Syosset was permissible under §3203, and the size of the
property within the designated district is not relevant to this
inquiry."
"As previously explained, the size of the parcel in the designated
district is irrelevant (Crowe, et al. v. MacFarland, et al., supra)."
Education Law §3203(1)
http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/rscs/chaps/Laws-Regs/Attendance/3203.htm
http://www.orps.state.ny.us/MuniPro/muni_theme/muni/offadr.cfm?swis=282011
Village of Garden City Officials
http://www.dos.state.ny.us/lgss/list9.html#lulac
NY State zoning laws
http://www.mynassauproperty.com/AddressSearch.asp?submnu=Address&mnu=PSearch
Nassau county assessors web page.
(enter the address of your neighbor to see what school district they
reside in)
So far, from my research, it does appear that everyone who has
purchased a section of property in the neighboring school district has
been successful in being able to designate which school district they
choose to have their children attend.
I would recommend that you talk it over with your neighbors, to see
what they think of the situation. You may also want to print off the
information regarding the Elia’s case, and discuss the matter further
with an attorney.
Best of luck to you!
chellphill-ga
|
,
0 Comments
)