Ballard To Cut After School Programs

19 Comments

Comment by Lisa Sirkin on August 21, 2008 at 11:26am

Arghhhh...this is the reason why these funding cuts make me so upset. If the debate focused on the dollars and cents, it is "easy" to cut $500,000 from an arts line-item on the budget or to cut 9 Parks programs. But when it is put in terms of these great kids doing this fantastic project, it gets harder to justify the cuts. If you are available, the Parks and Recreation Committee meets tonight at 5 p.m. in the City County Building (Room 260). New director Stuart Lowry is presenting the budget. Since he is a former Children's Museum programmer, I think he needs to hear these kinds of stories!

Comment by Kirsten Eamon-Shine on August 21, 2008 at 11:28am

Oh, Shalom, this is so great. I hope that people are reading this and seeing the DEEP VALUE of the work that is accomplished in these truly necessary programs.

Comment by Steve Stuck on August 21, 2008 at 11:39am

I am a dollar and cents guy. Does that mean I do not like children or after school programs.........no. What people are concerned about is how to fund our city and get out of debt. Instead of complaining, why don't these groups present a budget and find new ways of funding instead of complaining to taxpayers.

Taxpayers for too long have shouldered these programs and now we are facing hard times of budgets being bloated.

So what I challenge SI Arts and Children proponents is to find ways of showing how to keep taxpayer funding and what other programs we can cut? I also challenge you to go out on the news and ask the public/business sectors for help instead of relying on those of us who are taxed and want the government cut down.

If this comes across harsh, so be it. But the constant "save our children taxation" programs are not working anymore. We need a new stream of revenue that helps these kids and not the overall paychecks of workers.

Comment by Chris Horn on August 21, 2008 at 1:18pm

we need to look at the money being spent and how many children actually participate in these activities. I fully agree that programs like these have a good purpose, but perhaps there is a better way to go about it. To be frank, these programs dont seem to be having a large effect considering the current state of crime in this city. Lets get creative and see if we cant find a better solution.

Comment by Michael J Dukehart, II on August 21, 2008 at 2:33pm

I was a latch-key kids growing up. I see nothing wrong with it. It taught me responsibility. I think there is too much hand holding these days and that someone somewhere has to have something for these kids to do that they are losing out on important aspect of growing up...you know like resposibility for their own actions and making up their own minds. There are plenty of free things to do in the city parks and in neighborhood friends yards. Our mayor and those under him do not need to play social direct for any resident in the city. Let's get back to basics here people......Once the crime is at or hopefully below decent levels; and litteral crap stops flowing into our rivers/; and all roads are passable without a need for a realignment every 6 weeks.....then we can look into the extras. All the wonderful art and park programs inworld being in Indy won't mean a grain of salt if people no longer want to leave their homes.

Comment by Kirsten Eamon-Shine on August 21, 2008 at 2:52pm

@ Steve Stuck: Programs like these actually are a critical investment for communities like ours - they result in reduce juvenile crime, better academic outcomes, and children receiving the supportive services that they need to be successful.

@ Michael Dukhart, II: If our children aren't a "basic" element of building a successful community, I'm not sure what is. Having a safe place for kids to receive tutoring support and enrichment activities isn't playing social director; it's ensuring that children have safe, productive environments.

I don't think that anyone engaged with youth development programs is unwilling to look at the overall budget and consider appropriate cuts, even to youth services and programs that allow kids to experience cultural activities. But this is a question of priorities - let's look at the whole picture before cutting services that are sustaining some of the most underserved children in our community. Furthermore, programs like this have a long-term impact, but that impact has been demonstrated. This overview pulls together several studies to demonstrate the impact that afterschool programs can have.

Comment by Michael J Dukehart, II on August 21, 2008 at 3:19pm

But can anywhere in this city be safe right now. Since when are park programs or any after school program immune from the idiots that we have allowed to over run our city with crime, murder and drugs. Make the city safe and 6/7 year olds will not be shot comeing home from an afterschool activity like happened yesterday.

Comment by Shalom Black on August 21, 2008 at 3:24pm

@Michael-- being a latchkey kid today, especially in urban areas, is very different from being a latchkey kid even 10-20 years ago. In my sister's suburban neighborhood, schools have reported that children are engaged in gang-related activities in 3rd or 4 th grade!! In some of the programs we do in elementary and middle schools, we have to be careful with what colors, numbers, or other symbols kids are allowed to use, because of gang activity. Giving kids a safe place to go after school can drastically reduce gang activity.

@ Steve, Chris, and Michael-- I've seen lots of research documenting the economic impact of after school programs in other areas, and I'd very much like to see Indianapolis do such a study. Providing before- and after-school programs allows single parents to go out and find full time jobs, rather than staying at home to care for their kids and drawing welfare. This is a decision that many single parents are faced with, especially in urban areas where crime and gang activity are rampant, and parents don't want their kids running the streets. As a taxpayer, I personally would rather pay for after school programs than for welfare.

And I completely support "save our children taxation," as you call it, because children have no choice as to where they are born and who they are born to. We can't punish children for problems their parents might have. Kirsten is right, we are investing in the long term impact of these programs, not in short term fixes to our crime problem.

Comment by Chris Horn on August 21, 2008 at 3:35pm

im interested to hear how some of the local programs are doing. How many children are attending these programs? what percentage of children attending these programs get into legal trouble compared to the percentage of children not going to the programs that get into legal trouble. Im in favor of helping less fortunate children, but are we doing it the right way? Are these programs as effective as they could be? Do these programs draw in those 3rd and 4h graders who would otherwise become involved in gangs or do they draw in the children who wouldnt?

Comment by Shalom Black on August 21, 2008 at 3:53pm

@ Chris-- Those are really good questions. I'm not sure if there's been a large-scale study done here in Indy; I know of studies from other states. I'll see if anyone at our next Afterschool Coalition meeting knows of any studies, and if there are grant resources available for doing a study like this in Indy in the near future. It's sometimes hard for those of us 'on the ground' in youth development to find the time to step back from our programs and assess their efficacy on a larger scale.

I can give you some numbers for the Indy Parks programs that are being discussed at tonight's meeting. From my observations at the sites, most had 40-60 kids in attendance at any given time. They may have attendance caps due to funding, I'm not sure.