We Will Wait

 

 

Betsy DeVos has revealed the way politicians work. In a recent interview with Education Week, the U.S. Secretary of Education said she is not giving up on her vouchers and school choice initiatives. Prior to becoming the Secretary of Education, she has worked tirelessly in Michigan to replace public school with private school vouchers and school choice. Ten years ago, Michigan schools were in the middle of the US for student achievement measures. Over the past ten years as DeVos has donated large sums of money that has resulted in large numbers of public school students using vouchers to attend the school of their choice, including charter schools, the data does not present a good picture for the achievement levels of students in these schools. Michigan students' now perform at the bottom of the rung in achievement measures of all the states. Mmmm....

 

 During the interview with Education Week, DeVos acknowledged that lawmakers in the Legislature and Senate declined to fund her school choice proposals, both Republicans and Democrats. As she continued her remarks, she said it was important for her school choice initiative to be presented "at the right time and under the right circumstances.  I've been at this work for a really long time. I'm impatient, but I also understand the necessity for patience and for the right dynamics to be developed. So what comes to my mind is a really good motto that a family advisor has shared with us at a regular interval, which is 'hasten slowly', and I think that's a really good phrase for me to keep in mind. The reality is that most of the momentum around this, and frankly most of the funding around it comes at the state level. More and more states are adopting programs that embrace a wide range of choices. And I expect that to continue apace."

 

 Choice is a pretty benign word and could have positive connotations. Let's recall the data around school choice. It got pretty ugly in those states where DeVos and her like-minded billionaires who fund school choice activities and donated money and influenced politicians. The public schools get decimated. Segregated schools become the norm. Overall student achievement declines.

 

 DeVos and others are coming for the community schools near you. Their rhetoric will be cloaked in positive words. The time will never be right in our Maine communities for the kind of destruction she promotes. There will never be the right circumstances for her and other billionaires to drive a wedge through Maine's public schools. We will listen carefully and stand by our publically elected local school boards, our local public schools. We will elect leaders who champion public schools.

 

We also need to support our public education advocates in other states. School choice advocates wait for the 'right time and the right circumstances' to act. We all now know. 



 

The Truth About Public Education

 

 

There are many untrue words spoken about public education in order to advance the privatization of our public schools and political agendas promoting so called 'public' charter schools and vouchers. Diane Ravitch is a relentless supporter of public schools and shares many REAL facts about education today. Here is a link which provides more truth about public education and begins the never ending need to expose the true money grabbing, segregation motives behind the charter school and voucher hacks. It is only the first of a series of eight videos, each one addressing reasons we should strongly support our public schools. As Diane Ravitch releases each one, I will post a link to them so the audience that hears the truth grows wider and wider. Once you listen to this first video, there are three other Related links to videos/interviews at the bottom of the page that are equally revealing about the history of the education privatization movement.

 

 

http://networkforpubliceducation.org/2017/09/8-powerful-voices-defense-education-diane-ravitch/

 

Where Does All the Money Go? Part 2

 

 

Many politicians argue too much money is spent on public education. Well, where does the money go? It goes to pay professional teachers and administrators a professional wage and benefits. By the way, teachers' salaries have lagged behind most other professional salaries in the last few years. Just saying....   Special education and other student support activities costs are a significant cost item for all public schools. Lights, heat and other costs to operate and maintain buildings and grounds in which to hold classes and other activities also cost money. Technology is becoming a huge cost factor in education just as it is in any other business. Transportation costs to safely carry students to and from school daily also consume a fair amount of money. Most towns and cities, in Maine at least, also carry debt payments on their buildings, which consume a large amount of money each year until that debt is paid.

 

Many have complained that school budgets contain money for things not needed. All of the above surely are needed to provide a comprehensive education to ALL children. In addition, state and federal mandates require school departments to allocate money to testing and other activities that create additional costs for school departments.

 

Did you realize that our government spends about $1 million a month to provide Betsy DeVos with police protection? That was the cost for ONE MONTH! Twelve million dollars a year would pay for many teachers, support staff and administrators in most schools in Maine. School departments that have been struggling to contain costs.

 

Why is it that this amount of money is allocated without blinking an eye, no questions asked? School boards go through hell each year at budget time justifying to the public every penny they asked for. In Maine, Governor LePage berates school boards and superintendents for spending too much money on things he disagrees with. Maybe Congress should grill the federal Education Department in the same way that local school boards get grilled for justification of that money.

 

"Non-Profit" Charter Schools

 

 

Does this sound right to you? Suppose a state allows charter schools but only those that are non-profit. This sounds OK. These schools attract students and the school receives tuition money for each student enrolled, just as public schools do. Teachers are usually paid less than public school teachers, many of them from Teach for America, so personnel costs are low. But suppose the state also reimburses, with public money, the charter school for annual lease reimbursements paid for their 'school' buildings in which they operate their school. Suppose further that the rental company to which a non-profit charter school pays these rental costs has no employees, perhaps run by a part-time consultant and volunteers. Suppose the rental company is owned by the same person who owns and operates the non-profit charter school. Can we imagine where this is headed? Yes, you are correct. The owner of the charter school, perhaps also owns other charter schools as well. This owner of several charter schools "pays" lease fees to the "rental company" for all of the charter schools s/he owns.

 

Wouldn't you say this owner is inappropriately benefitting from this type of arrangement? I would. This is exactly what happens in Pennsylvania (and other states) whose laws require charter schools to be non-profit. If you are interested, you can check out the details of School Facilities Development, Inc. which rents school buildings to Propel charter schools in Pennsylvania, both owned by the same person. Propel's 11 school building locations collect from the state about $3 million each year for lease payments then turns it over to the School Facilities Development, Inc. Public education money diverted to private individuals whose purpose is to make money.

 

So, maybe charter schools are really about real estate and money-making schemes and not about education? As Maine's experience with charter schools is just beginning, I hope our legislators take notice of what happens in other states. 

 

Where Other States Go, Let Maine Not Go

 

 

I follow education issues in most states across the nation. I do this because inevitably some politician or business person or lobbyist will offer that Maine needs some education idea that is or has been tried in other states. For example, earlier in my blog I have written that some policy and other initiatives that exist in New York has been or is being considered for Maine. The idea of regional administrative units that Governor LePage wanted and used as a bargaining chip in last year's budget is one of those examples. Wouldn't it be nice if we asked about the success (or failure) before we in Maine agreed to this.

 

 

The charter schools in New York have been in the news lately. It seems that the charter schools have had a high rate of teacher turnover and are having difficulty hiring enough certified teachers. The charter school solution to this has been to propose reducing the existing standards teachers have to meet in order to teach in a charter school. Even though New York charters have some very relaxed teacher standards currently. For example, their charter schools can hire uncertified teachers. One of their biggest source of uncertified teachers is to hire people from Teach For America. (New college graduates who are just beginning their working careers and want to 'make a difference'. Sorry, but the use of inexperienced college graduates is just a way to take advantage of them - they will work for peanuts; and it does a disservice to the students they teach who very often have high need for superior teaching and support services.)  Another source of uncertified personnel is tenured or tenure-track college faculty. (In New York one of the ways to begin a charter school is to gain approval through the State University of New York Charter Commission which oversees the charters they approve. Pretty nice deal.) And lastly, charter schools in New York can hire uncertified 'individuals who possess exceptional business, professional, artistic, athletic, or military experience."  It appears that even these exemptions aren't enough to keep 'teachers' who will accept low pay and questionable working conditions for any prolonged period of time. One of the tenets of good business practice is to invest in your employees - pay them good wages and benefits, treat them like professionals, and show them they are valuable to accomplishing the mission of the school. Well, the mission of many charter schools is primarily the bottom line - to produce a profit - not necessarily do what is necessary to promote the success of ALL students.

 

 

So, what was the response to the State University of New York Charter Commission's proposal to further lower standards for charter school teachers?  The Chair of New York Board of Regents, Betsy Rosa, opposed the proposal.  New York Education Commissioner, Maryellen Ella, opposed the proposal. Who else do we need to oppose the proposal before we understand that the way charter schools staff their schools is unacceptable? Using cheap, inexperienced labor to educate students does a disservice to the students and undervalues the professionalism needed in education today. I hope Maine citizens and politicians are watching.

 

Encouraging News - Unanimous Bipartisan Support for Public Education

 

 

Although many have been dismayed by the news coming from the DeVos Department of Education, today some encouraging news gives us reason for hope. Both Republican and Democratic lawmakers on the Senate appropriations subcommittee that oversees health, education, and labor spending, rejected President Trump's (and DeVos') K-12 budget request. Budgets submitted by Trump had previously requested cuts in some areas of education spending and increases for new expanded private school choice initiatives. President Trump's overall education spending request included an overall $9.2 billion dollar reduction for the Education Department. And these funds would have been used in dramatically different ways seeking to drain money from maintaining a public education vision to diverting funds to private school choice programming.

 

Instead, the Senate appropriations subcommittee increased most areas and sought to bar the federal Education Department from moving forward with DeVos' priority school choice initiatives. The Senate subcommittee inserted language that specifically directs Betsy DeVos to obtain Congressional approval to use these funds to create a school choice initiative using the Title I funding they proposed. Also encouraging is that the House appropriations panel had similarly rejected a DeVos proposed school choice initiative in their budget bill they approved earlier this year. Let's hope that the House AND the Senate appropriations panels have sent a clear unambiguous message to the White House and the Education Department - that using federal funds to dismantle public education programs while boosting private school choice programming is unacceptable.

 

Programs aimed at teacher training and afterschool and summer programming that are vital to students from disadvantaged backgrounds have been supported by both Senate Democrats and Republicans who sit on the appropriations subcommittee.  That's good news - continued professional development for teachers is important to sustain high quality public education. And sustaining programs for students who need additional support to reach their potential is vital. Both President Trump and DeVos - please take notice.

 

 

 

 





 

Social Media and Schools

 

 

Last year I wrote about a controversy involving school board members strongly advocating for the school department to begin to use Facebook and Twitter for communication with parents and others. At that time I strongly opposed this use of social media. It wasn't long before those school board members had coerced school staff into launching the use of Facebook as an official school department communication tool. 'Follow us on Facebook' soon appeared on the school department website - just one click away. Advertisements around the borders of the school department Facebook soon followed. The ubiquitous "You May Also Like" sections appeared. Links to business websites soon appeared. 'Featured posts' also emerged. All this garbage simply detracts from the true educational mission of a public school department. Captive advertising. Nothing will convince me that the use of social media is compatible with educational institutions.

 

Here's another really good reason. The Washington Post has reported that Facebook officials have reported to Congressional investigators that it sold political ads during the 2016 U.S. presidential election campaign to a Russian troll farm who wanted to target American voters. Facebook Chief Security Officer Alex Stamos reported these paid advertisements and featured posts "were intended to sow discord among the American electorate by amplifying divisive social and political messages. These ranged from LGBT matters to race issues to immigration to gun rights." All this was only discovered after the fact during a review conducted by Facebook of their ad buys, which Stamos reported violated their policies.

 

So, Facebook not only owns whatever is posted on Facebook and uses it however and whenever they desire, but they also have contributed to the alleged Russian influence of our democratic elections. So, what does Facebook do with all the information posted on a school's Facebook page?  Would you trust they use your information responsibly? 

 

What Sports Are Safe?

 

 

There have been numerous indicators that some sports that are played by school children are not safe. Football, soccer, lacrosse, ice hockey, martial arts, wrestling, boxing, and other high impact/contact sports are known for blows to the head and resulting in concussions and sub-concussions. Helmets do not protect the brain inside the head from jarring back and forth inside the skull. The NFL is now settling lawsuits and funding research on the effects of head injuries, concussions, brain damage because players who no longer play the game are experiencing the effects of chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE). Namely, CTE causes depression, anxiety, problems with movement, speaking and other cognitive deficits. Some high profile deaths and suicides of former NFL players have been linked to CTE.

 

Just what are the symptoms of sub-concussions? Sub-concussions come from less forceful hits that don't cause an observable concussion. There aren't any visible symptoms or signs of injury until the cumulative effect of brain injury occurs. For example, Dr. Michael Lipton, Associate Director of the Gruss Magnetic Resonance Research Center at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine found that over time the brain cannot repair itself from repetitive hits to the brains of soccer players who 'head' the ball. Brain scans of soccer players who frequently 'head' the ball reveal brain damage to the white matter of brain tissue. The brain could not adequately repair itself from these hits to the head and after 1,800 headers the brain is permanently damaged resulting in memory and attention problems. I wonder how many practices and games does it take before this threshold is met?

 

What are the symptoms of a concussion? We likely can all say we have seen the physical act of a blow to the head or body that would shake the brain inside the skull. But can we see the brain injury that occurs with the naked eye? Probably not. Some who have experienced a concussion may pass out or forget what happened right before the play. There may be confusion, dizziness. But some people who experience a concussion may not have clear symptoms. Most will recover from a concussion within a few hours to a few weeks to a few months. While this recovery is taking place, the brain is more susceptible to damage.

 

Why do we continue to idolize these high impact/contact sports? Why do we go out of our way to introduce elementary age children to these sports, and the exposure to brain damage, just so they will be prepared to play JV and varsity level sports. And if they make these teams, continue their exposure to brain damage?  Somethings wrong here. Can't we learn from the mistakes of the NFL football players?

 

 

Time for Vouchers for Educational Choice?

 

Is it really time for an expansion of government sponsored vouchers to promote school choice? We all need to become informed about vouchers, education savings accounts, and tuition tax credits - all variously named, but all related to vouchers. And there will be a push for the often heard phrase, tax reform, to include diversion of public monies from the public schools into the private pockets of so called education reformers. Each of these 'education reforms' continue to erode funding for traditional public schools and harm the programs offered to all students, but especially harm students from disadvantaged backgrounds.

 

Here is a question to ponder at the outset: What if the amount of money that is, and will be, dedicated to vouchers, either federally and/or at state levels,  PLUS the dollar amount the billionaires and millionaires donate to this effort, PLUS the tax break dollar amounts the billionaires and millionaires receive, were all allocated to the public education system?

 

In the proposed federal education budget, President Trump and Betsy DeVos have highlighted school choice, with a plan to spend $1.4 billion to expand voucher programs in public and private schools, with a long-term goal of spending $20 billion a year. The breakdown: about $250 million would be earmarked for private school choice programs and about $168 million will be for charter schools. Where do these dollars come from?  Cuts from existing educational programs. Additionally, the Trump administration advocates all federal, state and local dollars to follow students to the school of their choice. More dollars flowing out of public schools.

 

Already, in other states, we see draconian measures being employed to approve vouchers. Consider Texas where Lt. Governor Patrick 'led' their State Senate into a proposed 0 dollar budget for state education funding unless he also received an approved voucher bill. Yes, you read that correctly - ZERO dollars. How can that be, you may wonder? These blackmail, starvation tactics sound all too familiar as the Maine Legislature just completed its budget process, during which Governor LePage simply and unilaterally eliminated all funding for system administration in all schools across our state. LePage's real primary targets were to eliminate Superintendents and local School Boards with whom he regularly clashes. His demand was for a statewide teacher contract and the creation of regional entities that will allegedly perform system administration functions more cheaply. Unlike the Texas Senate, there were some Maine legislators who saw that his proposal was detrimental to schools. LePage succeeded in eliminated funding for system administration, but not the statewide teacher contract. Once the regional entities are up and running, the push for statewide contracts will be back. The topic of this blog is school vouchers, but the same strong arm tactics slowly attempting to privatize education across the nation are rearing their ugly heads here in Maine. Do you hear echoes of President Trump's words: 'We will withhold payments to insurance companies and just let the health insurance markets implode, and then we will get real health reform'. LePage: 'I will withhold all the funding for Superintendents and School Boards and just let the public education system in Maine implode' (my words, his thoughts).

 

Questions to ponder as I end this blog: What is the tuition, fees, and incidental costs of attending a private school? Much more than the amount of an individual voucher, I suspect. Much more than the value of a tuition tax credit, I speculate. Will ALL students have equal opportunity to access a private school by using a voucher? Will ALL private schools accept ANY student who applies regardless of ability to pay? Will all private schools, when they accept pubic tax dollar voucher money, be accountable to achieving the same (unrealistic) achievement results as public schools? We need to gather the facts about public school funding, vouchers, education savings accounts, education tax credits rather than base our actions on suspicions and speculations, as I just did. The facts that I know so far are not encouraging.

 

Political pushes for vouchers (and charter schools) continue to erode public schools. Call it a slow and painful starvation. Look around our country, the same political goals and strategies for 'education reform' will soon be playing at a legislative committee meeting near you. Or at least, at those meetings that are open to the public.

 



Who Wins - No One





     In March I wrote about a controversy brewing in Brunswick. Brunswick had acquired a parcel of land on the ocean for nonpayment of taxes. Along with several town councilors, a vocal group of citizens monopolized the public comment period during many town council meetings insisting that the land should be retained and owned by the town and made into a public waterfront park. The town council spent many hours hearing from town residents; received many written comments/emails from town residents. A group of citizens gathered signatures on a (on-line) petition 'requesting' the council to put the decision out to citizen referendum. 'Request' is an understatement. Their voices grew louder and more insistent. The newspaper articles grew nastier. In the end, the council voted to put the property up for sale. The citizen group sued the town saying the town council did not follow municipal law and should have heeded their petition request for a referendum.

This group was very sure that a court would agree with their position, ie. that the town council vote to sell the land not only did not follow municipal law, but their action had a 'chilling effect on the citizen right to petition their government.'

This week the court ruled in favor of the town. Sometimes elected officials have hard decisions to make that don't necessarily please the constituents who elect them. Sometimes constituents make hard decisions harder. No one really won in this case. There was a lot of animosity surrounding this issue and has further divided this town. The same animosity has existed with the school board. Hard decisions have had to be made. The townspeople are further divided. 

Charter Schools, Vouchers, Scholarships



"Civilization is in a race between education and catastrophe. Let us learn the truth and spread it as far and wide as our circumstances allow. For the truth is the greatest weapon we have."  HG Wells

"Education is for improving the lives of others and leaving your community and the world better than you found it."  Marion Wright Edelman

"Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world."  Nelson Mandela

"Whenever people are well informed, they can be trusted with their own government." Thomas Jefferson

     These are quotes from people from different times and circumstances. Their messages echo through time and place and inform the present. Our public education system is being systematically dismantled, here is Maine and across the United States. Let us all know that there are businessmen and women systematically chipping away at the public institution created to benefit EVERYONE; created to help EVERYONE reach their highest potential; created to promote our democratic way of life for EVERYONE.

Politicians are helping drain what precious few dollars are left from supporting public education, sometimes knowingly, sometimes unknowingly (I will give some the benefit of the doubt). Here is an example:

-The Maine Legislature approves the operation of charter schools in Maine. The Maine Charter School Commission is created and political appointments are made to this body to approve and monitor charter schools in Maine. Two of those charter schools are Maine Virtual Academy and Maine Connections Academy, another virtual school.

The most recent evaluation/review of the Maine Virtual Academy is summarized on the Maine Charter School Commission website as:

1. Meets Contract agreement for: recurrent enrollment from year to year; financial performance & sustainability (although I noted they are in process for arranging for an audit so this lacks independent verification); governance board performance; adequacy of facilities maintenance (which is an office suite used by faculty for online learning delivery); and transportation (it is hard to determine what exactly the determinants of success are - MeVA reports having no costs for student transportation, ..... but there were field trips..... mmmm);
2. Partially meets Contract agreement for: Student Academic Proficiency; Student Academic Growth; Addressing Achievement Gaps between major student subgroups; post-secondary readiness; school social and academic climate; parent & community engagement (as an online school, it would be interesting to know what 'community' this school is going to engage?).  Arguably, these are the most important success indicators of a school and peppered throughout the report is that MEVA 'did not collect this data'. Why? All other public schools are required to. One of the last recommendations in this report is "increase attention to special eduction enrollment and the provision of FAPE for students with disabilities."
3. Does not meet Contract agreement: Student attendance. Maine's public school average daily attendance is 94%. MeVA average daily attendance rate is 85.6%. This likely affects the student academic proficiency and growth indicators. The last recommendation in the report is "address systemic truancy issues with particular attention to students with disabilities."

While the oversight of the Maine Charter School Commission is positive, the performance of this online charter school mirrors that of others in other states. Part of the application and review process to operate in Maine includes providing evidence of readiness and willingness to operate according to Maine law. It appears to me that the Maine Charter School Commission granted permission to an entity that either was not prepared to comply with Maine law the first day of operation or it was unwilling to comply with the law as it opened its doors to students and families. Why else would this school not collect the very data that is required to determine their level of compliance/success?

The most recent review of the Maine Connections Academy is also summarized on the Maine Charter School Commission website:

This charter school meets all of its contract agreements with the exceptions of:
1. Student Academic Proficiency is noted 'unknown due to unavailable state test scores'. This is no fault of Maine Connections Academy.
(My editorial: All public schools had to wait until spring to receive this state achievement test score data, making the use of the data useless for that school year. Why did most public school children spend upwards of 6-7 hours completing a test whose results would not be available for most of the following school year? My view: millions of taxpayer dollars wasted when these same dollars could have been spent on activities at the local level that could have directly positively improved children's educational experience during that year school spent waiting for the data from the state.)
2. Student Academic Growth in both reading and math is noted as decreased (as measured by the LEAP, a federal achievement test) from the previous year.
3. Student Attendance contract agreement is partially met.  Daily average attendance did not meet the state average daily attendance rate.There are three other interesting target goals, which were met, in addition to meeting the average daily attendance rate.  They include a 'retention rate of 70% of students during the school year (they don't want students dropping out during the school year),  a 50% re-enrollment of eligible students from one year to the next, and a continuous enrollment of students for multiple years. These are not only for the benefit of students, but it is for the bottom line profit margin, too. One might ask: is a 30% drop-out rate during the school year acceptable? Is a 50% drop-out (or 'not invited back') rate acceptable? This is the real eye opener - even though this virtual academy met most of their performance targets. Nationwide, this is the pattern with virtual schools resulting in less and less student diversity enrolled.

Recently, the entire Little Rock, Arkansas school district was taken over by the state. The elected board was removed. In swooped the Walton family (yes, the Walton family who owns Walmart) to buy Little Rock Garland School. The school will likely be converted to a charter school. Walmart donates millions to Teach for America. Charter schools then cozy up with Teach for America and use new inexperienced graduates who will work for much lower wages to staff  charter schools. Considering that most regular public school teachers are on probation and mentored for 2-3 years to prove, and continuously improve, their skills, these Teach for America pre-professional staff only stay for a few years in the charter schools and then move on. There is no union to support them. There is a never ending supply of cheap (inexperienced!) labor for charter schools. Where does the money saved go - a lot of it goes into 'owners' wallets as 'profit'. Taxpayer, public monies siphoned away from the public school to 'follow the child' to the school of their choice. Then the 'profits' of the charter school go into the pockets of private businessmen, who donate millions to political efforts to continue the drain on the real public schools and resulting strain on taxpayers.

Chicago public schools are in similar disarray, being closed and converted to charter schools with the same financial consequences. Arkansas and Chicago schools are but a tiny fraction of public schools across our country experiencing this hostile takeover. Mississippi has more students attending charter schools than regular public schools. Maine can learn many preventative lessons from the stories from other states. 

Let us all be well informed about charter schools, in Maine and across the US. Let us all know the truth about charter schools. Let us all learn about the charter school movements in other states. Let us "all spread the information as far and wide as our circumstances allow." We will then know what to look for and guard against in Maine charter schools, current and those to come in the future.


Next up: The hot topic: school vouchers; 'scholarships' created using public/taxpayer dollars and other political moves to drain away money from public schools.

I Hate to be a "I Told You So", But.....

     Here we are in the beginning of a new fiscal year and the end of another contentious state budget process. What was accomplished during this budget development process? The Governor and both Republicans and Democrats claimed they were held hostage (via a state shutdown that no one wanted) by the 'other side'. Winners and losers. That's the way our society views success now. Pitiful.

     In an Oct. 29, 2016 post, I expressed my doubt about the success of the then pending vote on Referendum Question #2 which would levy a surtax on the wealthiest Mainers and dedicate the use of that money to public education, specifically money to be allocated to direct classroom instruction. To be clear, I supported, and still do, the notion that public education should be adequately funded.  The PICUS report, which I detailed in that October post, concluded that Maine underfunds public education by millions of dollars. Further, Maine citizens passed a previous referendum calling for the state to fund 55% of public education. I questioned whether passing another referendum would make any difference since future legislatures and governors can choose to ignore voters' wishes when developing the budget.

     So here we are in July of 2017, eight months after Maine voters supported Referendum Question 2. And after the current legislature voted to again ignore the will of the voters regarding funding of public education. Governor LePage offered a draconian education budget in which he simply would not fund ANY system administration costs statewide. Luckily, there were a majority of both Republicans and Democrats who recognized that fatally flawed plan and worked to restore some of the funding public schools need to operate. However, many school districts' budgets were reduced. And the 55% state funding of education costs? Not yet. The surtax on wealthy Mainers which would have been dedicated to classroom needs? Ignored. Many school departments statewide have had to year after year make difficult choices about what to fund and not fund in their schools. Many towns/cities held their breath while developing a budget with no idea of the amount of state funding coming their way, causing great conflict between local property taxpayers; pitting those who could afford to pay more property tax against those who truly couldn't afford rising taxes. Turmoil at the state level. Turmoil at the local city/town level. Turmoil within the schools when parents and kids realize a program, a service, an extracurricular option has been defunded or eliminated.

     Please tell me who was really held hostage during this legislative session?  Governing by referendum is not ideal. Governing with the ideology that taxes should be done away with is not conducive to promoting the 'common good', which public education is an example of. Everyone benefits from public education. And everyone loses when public education is further eroded.

    

 

 

Stability

  

 

Recent news accounts reporting the deportation of a respected coffee farmer illustrates the hardship some children face in public schools. This adult farmer had been brought to the US by his parents from Mexico when he was a child. In the interim, he married and had two children. He built a respected coffee farming business in Hawaii. He has been cooperating with immigration officials and  waiting for 10 years for his citizenship paperwork to make its way through our court system. There is no reported evidence that he has committed any crimes while in the US. But his time in the US has come to an end, he involuntarily left for Mexico and his family has been torn apart. Why? How will his children fare during this time of separation? When will they be able to see their father in person again? He is not allowed back in the country for 10 years. This just seems cruel.

Recently, the Supreme Court ruled that President Trump's travel ban can be applied very narrowly, but also the justices ruled that people with close ties will be allowed in this country. Doesn't this send a message about immigrants already in this country? How can having 2 children with American citizenship not qualify for 'close family ties'?

Children learn best when their lives are stable. Many factors can negatively affect children's lives and learning- poverty, illness, learning challenges, moving from place to place, family instability to name a few. Let's think about this farmer's deportation order. Our government has initiated an action which could very well challenge these children's education. How will the family make their living? Can they continue to operate their coffee farm as efficiently without their father? Will this cause a slide into poverty? Will the family need to move and thus necessitate the children to leave their current schooling situation and begin anew somewhere else? Schooling transitions usually produce academic challenges. Most importantly, we all hope the family can weather this stormy time of instability and continue to maintain the ties that bind them together.

     Where will Trump's policies, and those politicians who help pave the way, lead us?  

  

???

 

     By now we have all seen the photographs of the world leaders at the recent G20 summit meeting. One was very revealing. It showed all the leaders lined up. Our President Trump was on one end, with an awkward distance between him and all the others. His facial expression and body language was totally different from all the other leaders. It appeared that there was just no emotional connection that he was 'left out' of this important group of men and women. It seemed like he was out of his element. The 'art of the deal' mentality was not going to be an effective tool for him during this meeting. His superficial charm hasn't seemed to win over any of these leaders. Has he, or will he, just shrug off the real reason he was disconnected - he has said and done things that have made interacting with these leaders difficult. He really is personally responsible for the things he has said and done that have been upsetting to world leaders, but it doesn't seem like he is disappointed. He will just continue on his path. He will not admit any guilt, never has. In fact, it is likely he will concoct some fake news story (lying seems to come easy to him) that will lay the blame on someone else and probably display a bit of an angry tantrum while tweeting out the lie. But he will continue on his narcissistic way as if he is the center of the world that will again reveal his true nature.  The US had made a commitment with the Paris Climate Agreement, but Trump seems unmoved by commitments.

 

     Here's to hoping the good citizens of America can salvage our world reputation.

 

     

 

Problems Maine Does Not Need

 

 

     In a previous blog, I have written about New York's education system. In that post I discussed their regional school units which are led by superintendents who work part time for the local areas and part time for the state commissioner. Last year Maine's Blue Ribbon Commission studied ways to improve our schools and reviewed New York's regional system of education. During one of the Commission's meetings, a representative from New York responded to a question asked about the availability of effectiveness data. He said that the effectiveness of the NY regional system of governance had not been reviewed/tested. It appears all is not well with New York's statewide system of education. A group of parents has filed a complaint with the State Commissioner of Education against New York City alleging the city is not following the mandated class size law. In 2007 the DOE developed a class size reduction law pledging that class size for kindergarten through third grade shall not exceed 20 students; fourth through eighth grade classes shall not exceed 23 students; and high school core classes shall not exceed 25 students.  Rather than reducing class size, the DOE has allowed class size to increase since the 2007 law was enacted. The New York DOE data shows kindergarten through third grade class size has increased 18%; fourth through eighth grade class size has increase 6%; and high school class size increased 1.5%.  Many parents have shared their personal stories of their elementary school aged children in classes far above these maximum limits claiming their children's education has been negatively impacted.  Here is a link for more details: http://dianeravitch.net/.

     Where was the "local superintendent" during annual budget development? Surely class size, among other things, was discussed when determining the number of teachers needed each year to teach the total student population?.  Oh yeah, recall.....their superintendents work part time advocating for local needs and part time working for the state commissioner.  Mmmm.......

 

     So, as Maine has just completed a contentious state budget development process, let's remember that one sticking point that dragged the process out and caused a short state government shut down was the amount of funding for public education statewide. Not only did this cause the state government shutdown, but EVERY town/city in Maine faced the daunting task of building not only balanced school budgets, but also town/city budgets with little information regarding available state revenue for the coming year. Governor LePage and some Republicans had strongly advocated a pilot statewide teacher contract as an integral part of the budget. In New York one of the components of the regional system is a variation of a statewide teacher contract.  For Maine to open the door even a crack to a statewide teacher contract, would be opening the door to a regionalized system of governance and the kinds of problems that New York is facing. A regionalized system of governance for public education compared to Maine's historical local control/school board system concentrates the decision making and power further and further away from the classroom and closer and closer to political ideology.  Our toxic political climate destabilizes public education, the social institution that professes to build knowledge, skills, attitudes that are foundation for opportunity for a successful future and our democratic society. 

 

 

Reflections: How Children Learn

 

 

     I have been thinking about all the negative tweets coming from the President lately. Perhaps it isn't worth thinking about, but I wonder where it will all end. If ever. I wonder if he intentionally engages in his negative tweets to deflect attention away from the other investigations about him. I wonder if he purposely and calculatingly is trying to destroy the press as we know it. I wonder if he is just plain addicted to tweeting, can't stop himself and his tweets are a reflection of his personality and everyday way of life. There is plenty to examine. Exactly what an effective teacher would wish for when teaching children effective critical thinking skills. An experienced teacher could help children examine the President's tweets from many different angles and consider the tweets 'a teachable moment'.

 

     One perspective that might have children engaging in question after question when reading these tweets might be from the rules most schools are required to have regarding harassment. Many schools have policies regarding the kind of behavior expected in schools. The rules regarding harassment apply to everyone in the schools: students, school staff, and even extends to contractual workers when performing any kind of work for the schools while on school property.  I would offer that these rules would apply to the President if he were to visit any of these schools. There is even strong debate about schools' responsibility of enforcing behavior expectations during non-school hours, off the physical location of school property when students use school issued laptop computers.

 

     Let's consider a hierarchical definition of harassment. It is the rubric that the Brunswick School Department uses to help students and others understand behaviors that are unwanted and might be considered harassment. The rubric consists of 3 levels: Level A offers examples of behaviors that might be considered harassment: dirty looks, 'annoying behavior toward others'. These  behaviors call for common courtesy to just stop if you are engaging in purposely unprovoked annoying behavior that others dislike and they can't just leave the area to avoid the person annoying them. Key words: common courtesy.  Level B offers examples of behaviors that most people would consider general harassment: "teasing, name calling, spreading rumors, posturing, socially excluding others, threatening". These behaviors demand intervention and consequences in order to maintain an environment where students can learn, teachers can teach. Level C offers examples of behaviors that would very likely be legally harassment: "stealing, offensive physical contact, negative comments toward another person because of their race, religion, ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation".  I would add 'gender' to the rubric's Level C behavior - it is a legally protected status in our state and nation. These behaviors are examples of behavior that violate the law and invite law enforcement involvement in addition to the school administrative consequences.

 

     How would you evaluate the President's tweets? Are they aimed at specific people? Do they fall into any of the above categories that our nation's schools are required to prevent students and staff from engaging in?

 

     I am glad to see some of our lawmakers, both Democratic and Republican, publically offering their views of the President's tweets. Children are learning from this....but just what are they learning?

 



A Danger to Avoid

 

     I would like to add my voice to the current debate regarding finding common ground on the State of Maine budget. There are many ways of finding common ground on this budget. The sticking point currently seems to be funding public education. I have written long before in previous posts about my position on a statewide teacher contract. It appears that this issue is a major negotiating item for Legislative approval of the budget. Governor LePage has come out and signaled his support of  the GOP proposal of piloting a statewide teacher contract as a way to find common ground on the budget. Ask yourself why he would support this. Because it would put negotiating teacher contracts under his political control (or whoever the governor may be). A statewide contract would not save money. In fact, it would likely add to the cost of education if all teachers in Maine were offered the same PROFESSIONAL salary and benefits. Or, in the alternative it would create yearly havoc in school departments across Maine because someone in Augusta would be willing to not negotiate in good faith. Create havoc - sounds familiar. It is exactly what Governor LePage, and now, President Trump, engages in. When systems are in turmoil, they are susceptible to devastation. Exactly what both LePage and Trump advocate. Reduce government by devastating the very institutions central to our way of life.

 

     I would hope that giving up local control of education and agreeing to even a pilot statewide teacher contract in Maine meets strong and continuous refusal. A statewide teacher contract would put education perilously close to the governor's control. This current governor is no friend of public education! His views on public education, as are the current federal views, are devastating public education. I hope the integrity of public education is supported in a way other than opening the door to a statewide teacher contract. Even if that means a statewide government shutdown. Public education is fundamental to our democratic way of life and is worth continued struggle to maintain it for the future. 



 

Children Need Healthcare

 

 

     As our federal representatives begin to debate the proposed GOP healthcare bill, let's remember that in order for children to do well in school they need to be healthy. The proposed bill cuts Medicaid funding which many families with children depend on for their healthcare, specifically 39% of all children and 76% of all poor children.

 

     And where will the money 'saved' go?  To tax cuts for insurance companies and the wealthy.

Obama said it well in his recent tweet: this bill will pave the way for a "massive transfer of wealth from middle class and poor families to the richest people in America".

 

     When we consider the transfers of money from the federal education budget and Medicaid, children will be hit hard in this next proposed federal budget.

 

     Unbelievable.





Looking Forward - And Backwards

 

 

     The citizens of Brunswick have voted to approve the School Department's 2018 budget (even with the uncertainty of the amount of state contribution) and to locally fund the building of a new elementary school to replace the old Coffin School. What do we have to look forward to now?

 

     While I believe a new elementary school is needed (and the junior high school also needs replacement and a new name to match the middle school philosophy), I hope the building plan is tweaked to maximize taxpayer investment. Recent citizen commentary has included a reflection of the building of the Harriet Beecher Stowe School in 2007. We can recall that conflicting ideas included whether that school was needed, but was approved following citizen and Maine DOE approval. However, the school department had to support its building proposal in response to a citizen initiated lawsuit which claimed the new school was not needed. While the lawsuit was dismissed, the size of that new school was reduced to save money. Fast forward to the present and that school is now overcrowded and cannot accommodate the current student population, let alone any future growth. The plans approved for the current new school that will replace Coffin does exactly the same thing. The building is built to one use only - as 2 smaller schools built out as wings separated by shared administrative space on the ground floor. The architect originally showed plans which included 2 stories with classrooms (music and art included), gym with stage area, cafeteria, community spaces and hallways on both levels with the shared administrative space on the ground floor. Looking to the long term future (of hopefully more than 40 years), this one use plan decreases flexibility in use and growth. The key phrase that was echoed time and again is 'small school'.  The plan literally divides the building in half with separate wings for separate small schools. The second floor was reduced to cut costs. Does this sound familiar?  Did we not learn from reducing the size of Harriet Beecher Stowe School?  Repeat: let's maximize taxpayer investment so we don't risk another overcrowded school in the future.

    

     While we are addressing overcrowded schools. In the future, the School Department also needs to have flexibility in using the buildings we currently have to address year to year fluctuations in school populations. Building schools with maximum flexibility factored in and then using them with flexible plans can save taxpayers from having to build new schools.  IF the sum total of school buildings in the school department is unable to accommodate a growing school population, then an addition to a school makes sense....if it has been designed that way from the beginning. Instead of adhering to a fixed mindset of how to build new schools and how the schools we have are used, there may come a time when a school and/or schools' population require us to move students around in the different schools. One of the choices offered to deal with the current overcrowding of both Coffin and Harriet Beecher Stowe schools was to move some of the second graders to Harriet Beecher and the fifth graders to the Junior High which the architect determined was underutilized.  It was loudly dismissed. There was also a muted undertone of converting the two elementary schools back to a kindergarten through fifth grade configuration. The ONLY way the School Board could come to agreement on a new school plan was to not talk about reconfiguring these schools ---- which will cost money to retrofit Harriet Beecher Stowe.. Stay tuned for the chorus of reconfiguring our elementary schools to begin. Reconfiguring for the sake of reconfiguring is unproductive and expensive. If reconfiguration talks begins anew, discussion of the fifth grade moving to the junior high should be included, perhaps easing some of the use issues at the elementary level.

 

     

 

Correction of Inaccurate Reporting

 

 

     Previously, on June 2 and June 4 I wrote about my concerns regarding the Brunswick School Department budget and my belief that a Pre-Kindergarten program that serves Brunswick preschool aged children should be operated by the Brunswick School Department and included in the budget rather than contracted out. It was reported in the local paper, The Times Record, that Cub Camp, would be offered but it would not be operated by the Brunswick School Department. I had encouraged those interested to contact the School Department Superintendent, Mr. Persanoski, and inquire why the Brunswick School Department would not operate this valuable, albeit abbreviated, program that research shows time and again produces positive results for those children who attend.

I visited Superintendent Persanoski today and asked him if the money to operate the summer program version of Cub Camp was included in the budget AND if the Brunswick School Department would operate it rather than contracting out this program.

I AM HAPPY TO SAY THAT SUPERINTENDENT PERSANOSKI ASSURED ME THAT THE MONEY TO OPERATE CUB CAMP IS IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET AS PRESENTED TO THE TOWN COUNCIL AND THE ONE THE PUBLIC WILL VOTE ON JUNE 13TH.


SUPERINTENDENT PERSANOSKI ALSO ASSURED ME THAT THIS PROGRAM WILL BE OFFERED AND OPERATED BY THE BRUNSWICK SCHOOL DEPARTMENT AND WILL NOT BE CONTRACTED OUT.

     This is good news and changes my vote. Even though I believe the final dollar amount for the School Department budget is less than adequate, I will support the budget. Even though I believe the Town Council overstepped its authority, I will support the budget and continue to educate the public about the very good reasons there is an independent separation between the School Board and the Town Council. Even though I believe the School Board should concentrate their efforts on working with the Superintendent to develop a yearly budget and develop policies that guide the direction of the school department and not try to get cozy with the Town Council and politicize decisions, I will support this budget. Even though I would like the School Department to move more quickly on developing policies and practices that offer equity and quality programs and services to ALL students enrolled, I will support this budget.

I also hope that the Town Council looks back into the historical records to see that after a period of keeping tax rates 'low', inevitably a back log of needs is created and tax rates increase to meet the needs of the citizens in town. You can find the historical tax records on the Town of Brunswick website in the Assessing Department under 'Notices, Documents, and Forms'. You might be surprised to see that in 2016 Brunswick's effective tax rate was $20.54 and has been climbing from a $13.32 rate since 2006.  Compare this to Brunswick's effective tax rate of $28.83 in 1970 with 6 years of higher tax rates in the $24, $26, $27 range.

Sooner or later, tax rates 'right' themselves when a town's political body operates on a 'keep the tax rate to no more than 2% mentality'. We still have a ways to go before we match the 1970 rate of $28.83. And many many pent up needs in this town that have been accumulating during those years of lower tax rates.

You Get What You Pay For



 

     The Brunswick School Department budget is on its way to the voters. Residents of Brunswick will decide, yes or no, if they support the budget the town council approved after the town council demanded a $1.3 million reduction in the school budget while increasing the town budget $1,060,145 (4.7% increase).

 

 

     There are various reasons to reject this budget. Some town citizens believe the school budget is too high and should be rejected. Another reason is because the budget is too low and it cuts too deeply into programming and services; and unfair due to a difference of opinion of how any additional state school subsidy will be spent. Another reason is because there is a perception that the Town Council's actions are punitive toward the School Board. There were continuing comments from councilors that 'although they cannot tell the School Board how to spend its money, they can say how much is allocated to the school department'. (Wrong - the voters of Brunswick actually decide this.) Additional comments this year extended to how the school department salaries are too high compared to town employee salaries and 'we have stacks of school documents to prove that'. (Does this sound like line item meddling? This year's public airing was about salaries and contracts; last year it was paving of the high school parking lot.) A third reason to vote against this budget, my reason, is because there is a reduction in student support programs/services and one of those services is being contracted out to a community agency. The beginning of a slippery slope.

 

 

     The Brunswick community has taken great pride in its educational program for many years. Boasting occurs each year around graduation time about the colleges graduates will attend, many out of state and private. Many accolades are given to the students who challenge themselves and take Advanced Placement courses and are enrolled in gifted and talents classes. Admittedly, great accomplishments. But beneath these positive statements lies the fact that these opportunities (in small classes) were available to some while other students have not always received the educational support needed for them to be successful in maximizing their potential. Over the past six or seven years, a coherent and consistent student support system has been researched and begun to be put into practice. Each year, even through tough budget years, these services and the staff to provide them have been incrementally initiated and included in the budget. (Usually not by adding new staff but by redirecting money from retired teachers to the new initiatives.) The goal is to have these support services available at all schools in Brunswick to quickly and effectively address all students' academic and social needs to promote ongoing achievement, rather than failure, moving closer and closer to graduation day. Each of Brunswick's schools are making progress in their ability to offer these student support services. 

 

     A Pre-kindergarten program has been researched and identified as a goal for about 8 years. The research is clear that a high quality Pre-kindergarten experience produces positive results in addressing social and achievement gaps. Space and budget limitations have prevented this from happening. In order to move this goal forward, inch by inch while waiting for a new school to be built, a summer program at Coffin School called Cub Camp began two years ago for incoming kindergarteners who already have identified social and/or academic gaps. Cub Camp was offered at Coffin School where they will attend, familiarizing them (and their parents) with the school campus, school routines, school staff and new children who will become classmates. Each child enrolled participated in activities that will not only make a new school environment familiar and less intimidating, but also begin to address the social and academic skills they are behind in.

 

     But this year, there was not enough money to operate Cub Camp during this summer. It is reported that the program will be contracted out and provided by a community agency. The little money that was allocated for it will be paid to this community agency. Contracting out support services that are integral to the educational mission of our schools, in my opinion, continues the inequity that has existed in the Brunswick schools for a very long time. It also is dangerous because it creates a segregated path for students right at the beginning of their school experience, the path that has been separate from those students in gifted/talented classes and Advanced Placement courses.

 

     Segregated and unequal school experiences that are supported by an inadequate budget is the most important reason to reject this budget. Many years ago Plessy vs Ferguson found separate, but equal was illegal. Please say no to this budget so the Town Council will begin to realize that a comprehensive education, not just a basic template plan that gets us through this year and ensuing years so we can also have a new school, is in the best interests of ALL students.  Please say no to this budget so the School Board will realize that their responsibility is to identify, with the help of the school department, a budget that supports a comprehensive education that meets all students' needs.

 

     The efforts at collaboration with the Town Council over the past several years were naïve and counterproductive. A Town Council that is over-controlling and bitter about the legitimate separation between them and the School Board only has continued to erode the public confidence in the schools. There is good reason that there is an independent School Board separate from a Town Council. There is good reason that a School Board works with school department staff to identify a comprehensive education program rather than the basic education that the EPI school funding formula allocates dollars to.  

 

Why Outsource Brunswick's PreK Program?

 

 

A June 2, 2017 Times Record article reported that enough money has been raised locally in Brunswick to run a summer Cub Camp.  This is a Pre-K program for preschool aged students who are identified as 'needing extra attention' in social and/or academic areas to get them ready for entering kindergarten. In previous years, Brunswick used federal money to operate this program run by the Brunswick School Department and staffed by Brunswick School department staff. This year reductions in federal money jeopardized the continuance of the program, which required $21,000 to operate during the summer. (A summer program was the precursor to a full fledged Pre-K program which has been waiting for implementation because there is no space in our schools during the school year to operate it until a new school is built.) A community group offered to fundraise to supplement the $10,000 the School Board allocated for the program in the Brunswick School Department budget. Space and budget limitations have now been addressed: the $21,000 has been identified and space in the school buildings is available during the summer.

 

BUT WAIT!  The Times article also indicates that the program will no longer be a Brunswick School program, but rather operated by another entity. We need to know more details. Why won't this Pre-K program be continued to be offered by trained staff through the Brunswick School Department? Previously, there was some interest by a School Board member to have a community program deliver the program. This School Board member is also a board member of said community program in question. Sounds like a conflict of interest to me. Why transfer public dollars to a community program?

 

Before we vote on the budget, let's be sure that our tax dollars are used appropriately. Ask the Superintendent why Cub Camp is no longer a Brunswick School Department program. I will be asking that very same question of him. I will not vote for a budget that outsources critical student support services to community agencies unqualified and unable to provide a complete, coherent set of student support services and highly trained personnel to children who require them to prepare them for kindergarten entry. I will not vote for a budget that uses public tax dollars in a way that doesn't allow for program oversight and evaluation. And I especially will not vote for a budget that is built on a conflict of interest of individual Board members.

 

 

 



 

Preliminary Look at Transfer of Money to ?

 

 

 

     Let's recall the push to 'improve' public schools by focusing on measurement of student achievement via testing. The testing movement has been rife with problem, with schools being closed and transferred to private entities to run. Recall the punitive measures for public schools whose student achievement scores did meet 'expectations' of ever increasing scores. Now, let's recall the ever-increasing number of charter schools who operate under the guise of being 'public' schools, receiving public tax dollars, but having the luxury of being free of many of the mandates that public schools must adhere to. Similar to the public schools, some charter schools' (and private schools) achievement test scores meet unreasonable political expectations and some do not. The only federal voucher school program is located in DC. Their student test scores indicate that after a year in private school, voucher recipients' achievement test scores were worse when compared to scores of student who continued enrollment in the DC public schools. I have written previous posts about how research shows time after time, that student achievement scores are related to socioeconomic conditions, ie students from low income backgrounds USUALLY have lower achievement test scores regardless of the kind of school they are in and students from middle and upper income backgrounds USUALLY have higher achievement test scores. The political cry to improve public education has been an attempt to rewrite the story of public schools as Republicans have tried for years to ruin them to accomplish their goal of segregating schools along lines of income and race.

     Enter 2017 with a new president and education secretary. Trump has vowed to reduce the federal government's role in public education. DeVos has repeatedly favored private and charter schools, ignoring the research showing they offer little difference in benefit to children, with some research showing their is actually a regression in achievement. The difference, however,  does lie in choice. Together, it appears, Trump and DeVos will attempt to shift significant dollars away from public schools and transfer it to private and charter schools, through the use of vouchers to parents. The story goes like this: parents choose the school they would like their child to attend; the public school relinquishes the federal, state and local dollars per child for each child who chooses to attend a private or charter school. All in the name of school choice. Here is Maine public schools have been besieged with continuous budget reductions/cost shifting which will only be exacerbated by further reductions of federal, state, and local dollars per child times however many children claim a voucher.

     In reality, that number of dollars in the form of a voucher hardly covers the cost of tuition to a private school. Here in Maine a sampling of private schools show a tuition range from $58,000 to $57,500 to $30,555 to $38,000 to $28,000 per year for a high school student. There are fees in addition to tuition. A voucher will not cover the cost of a private school tuition and fees. Who will be able to supplement the voucher amount to make up the difference? Most families will be hard pressed to do so and some families will just not be able to achieve that. The end result will be students from higher socioeconomic backgrounds will populate private schools. Foreign students whose families will pay a higher tuition to attend American private schools will also populate the private schools. And a few students whose families are able to 'borrow' money for tuition and fees and/or qualify for financial aid from the private school. End result:  private schools whose student population is segregated along social class (higher income) and public schools whose student population is segregated along social class (lower income).  The exact goal the Republicans have been trying to push through for years.

     A second Republican goal has been to reduce the size of the federal government and specifically reduce/eliminate the role of the federal government in education. Republicans have also said education should be locally controlled and that states have a role in setting education policy for their states. Question: will the public education of children from wealthy communities be equal to the public education of children from less wealthy communities? I think we all the know the answer.

     So Trump and DeVos now embark on presenting their proposed education budget to Congress. Their budget that slashes $9.2 BILLION in funds for higher education (ex. funding for college work-study programs would be cut in half) and public schools K-12 (ex. transfer to private and charter schools from public schools about $400 MILLION plus another $1 BILLION to require public schools to have policies that favor choice programs). Let's hope that Congress is much more responsible to the American public. This amount of transfer of public funds will result in schools segregated along income and racial lines and will continue the erosion of public schools.

 

Where Will the Money Come From?

 

 

     The fourth wealthiest man in the world, Warren Buffet, has added his voice to the healthcare debate in this country. He commented that healthcare costs have risen much faster in the US than the rest of the world and will increase much more if the Republican plan approved this week is allowed to take effect. He also said that his own federal income taxes would have been 17% less had this law been in effect. "It's a huge tax cut for guys for me. And when there's a tax cut, either the deficit goes up or they get the taxes from somebody else."  We all know the deficit is loathed by Republicans and they spew garbage about reducing it every chance they get. So, where does that leave the Republicans to find the money to cover the loss as they repeal most of the taxes that paid for the Affordable Care Act?  Millions of Americans will lose their insurance because the subsidies will no longer be available to them and they will not be able to afford the predicted sky rocketing cost of insurance. Hospitals will lose millions of dollars (and perhaps continue to go out of business) as their unreimbursed costs of charity care increases. These unreimbursed charity costs will drive up insurance rates for the rest of us. More hospitals will merge and/or close, making access to hospital care harder to access just as more people will delay healthcare until a health crisis sends them to hospital emergency rooms for the most expensive care.

 

So, Trump, and other wealthy individuals, will benefit by seeing their taxes decrease. They will be able to afford health insurance. (Along with members of Congress who exempted their insurance plans from the proposed revision of the health plans they say will be so good for the rest of the American public.) Most insurance companies will continue to earn billions in profits. All for me, none for you. What a pitiful model of selfishness. And here is the latest GOP quote that echoes this selfishness as well as stupidity and greed and other narcissistic traits all too common today:

 

          At a recent town meeting style constituent meeting, Idaho Rep. Raul Labrador, a                        

Republican, had the stupid audacity and selfishness to say, "Nobody dies because

they don't have access to health care."

 

Well, a 2009 study published by the American Journal of Public Health prior to when the Affordable Care Act became law, found that 45,000 people die each year because they don't have health insurance.

 

 

 





 Wise Words From A Woman

 

 

     Janet Yellen, the Federal Reserve Chairwoman, recently offered advice for improving our economy. Will President Trump listen? Will Governor LePage listen? She said women entering the workforce in the mid-20th century were "a major factor in America's prosperity." She went on to say, "Evidence suggests that many women remain unable to achieve their goals.  If these obstacles persist, we will squander the potential of many of our citizens and incur a substantial loss to the productive capacity of our economy at a time when the aging of our population and weak productivity growth are already weighing on economic growth." Recently, she said, women are less likely to hold paying jobs than men. She asserted that to bring more women into the workforce, policies would need to shift to include increasing paid leave, affordable childcare, and flexible work schedules. (New York Times, May 6, 2017: "To Lift Growth, Help Women Go to Work, Fed Chief Says")

     Let's go further and advocate for a livable wage. Equal pay for equal work. Just having a job in a workplace with owners/supervisors who understand the social need for good paying jobs should be part of this discussion. We have all heard these justifications. Let's also highlight that when women work outside the home in minimum paying, less than full-time jobs it is often not enough to support a family. How does this affect children?

     Public schools know all too well how poverty affects children. Most arrive at the threshold of their school years in kindergarten already academically and socially behind their peers. It is difficult for them to 'catch up' with peers who are making strides, growing physically, socially, and cognitively. Not only do they need to catch up, but they fall further behind even as they are working hard to catch up! These same children usually come to school hungry, requiring schools to build nutrition programs that ensure hungry children get fed so they can then pay attention and learn. These same children are likely to require cohesive well developed student support services and either extended school day and/or school year programming to address their learning and social gaps.

     Many schools also offer pre-K programs as a regular part of their K-12 education. Some states encourage pre-K programming.  The Maine Department of Education has encouraged our communities to include pre-K programming in their public schools. Towns and cities who do include pre-K programming receive reimbursement from the state. These schools receive a per pupil reimbursement for each pre-K child enrolled. Some schools understand that early intervention is the best prevention for school dropouts, truancy, and later criminal activity.  The research is abundantly clear that children from low socioeconomic backgrounds benefit from these pre-K programs. These pre-K school programs located within community schools with highly qualified staff close the academic and social gaps experienced by these children. The children arrive in kindergarten prepared to learn and socialize. They are familiar with the school buildings and school staff. School staff are familiar with them. This familiarity is important to very young children. Highly qualified staff and access to learning and social support specialists make a difference in addressing the variety of learning and social needs children have. 

     Speaking of prevention - let's listen to the Federal Reserve Chairwoman and all advocate for workplaces that recognize the need for progressive policies that enable woman to work (AND earn a livable minimum wage).  Our economy will not recover with the continuation of 'trickle down economic' policies and practices.  When more families climb out of poverty, then there will be fewer children living in poverty. Then there will be more children who can happily attend school, well fed and able to learn.





Shameful Politics

 

 

     While many of us held our breath during the first round of Republican calls for repeal of the Affordable Care Act, it became apparent that many Americans have come to rely on this program for affordable and accessible health care coverage. Additionally, even many of whom initially opposed the ACA are now voicing their opposition to the legislation that was passed in the Legislature this week. One must ask what deals were made that persuaded those politicians who opposed it before and why now they think it is good enough to vote for it? Let's hope that more rational heads are at work in the Senate as they offer their proposals.

 

     While I have not read the bill, I have heard that the health plan that has been proposed for us citizens is not the health plan that members of Congress and their staff will enjoy. Why, buried within this bill (if reporting is accurate), is there an exemption for the health plan of Congress and their staff? Why are they privileged to be able to be immune from the substantial risks the rest of Americans face? I don't know how they can show their faces in public. Shameful!  

 

More Politics

 

 

     It would be interesting to explore various funding sources that are used to operate our public schools. First, we should understand that school departments legally do not have revenue generating authority. The traditional means to fund schools has been through a combination of federal, state and local appropriations. The federal government's contribution to running public schools is 7%; Maine has set the state's contribution at 55%; which leaves local contributions at about 38%. Is this reality? We all know that in Maine neither the federal nor state government appropriation targets have been met. This has created tensions at local municipal levels resulting in either local school budgets that cut programs/services or increases in local property taxes to maintain school programs/services.   This is the case throughout the United States.

 

     President Trump's proposal for the federal Education Department includes large cuts and large additions, both which will result in cumulative cuts to school departments across the US.  As expected, a $9 billion proposed cut would compromise the ability of schools across the nation, including Maine schools, to provide necessary staff professional development and after-school programs. The federal education budget proposal seeks to add $1.4 billion (presumably using the $9 billion cut) for private school vouchers and charter schools, with $1 billion dollars to follow students to the school of their choice. In Brunswick, before/after-school programs and professional development activities benefit all students, but they especially support students whose achievement levels are lagging. Brunswick School Department has a well designed assessment and intervention system that identifies students as they are falling behind and provides immediate and targeted academic and behavioral support to eliminate achievement gaps before they become too large. Every penny counts to operate these programs, as they do in other school districts. One program that Brunswick lacks is a pre-K program due to the lack of space and money to support it, even though a quality pre-K program would address achievement gaps prior to kindergarten entry. The infrastructure required to build and maintain these programs that promote school achievement cost money, but cost efficiencies build up over time. Once space is allocated and staff is trained, the benefit can be there for future years. These efficiencies then allow the building of new programs that can use the same space and trained staff, like a pre-K program, over time. However, when politics intervene, such as eliminating or redirecting large sums of money, a dismantling effect slowly erodes the very programs that benefit so many students. At some point, the cost efficiency, and the programs, disappear.

 

     This is exactly what we have seen over past years. Federal mandates and initiatives which then trickle down to state mandates and initiatives such as voucher programs and charter schools, divert dollars from public schools to private schools. (As long as charter schools are not required to follow the same rules and regulations as public schools, as long as they do not have public oversight, I and many others view them as private schools.) When a per pupil amount of money is identified to follow a student (ie. deducted from a school departments overall budget) to a private school of their choice, over time this accumulated amount erodes the cost efficiencies that can be achieved.

 

     Governor LePage laments school superintendents as wasted administrative money, but he supports charter schools. Charter schools will have their own administrative structure that will be supported by public dollars. Charters outside of Maine have also had boards whose members have made fiduciary decisions that send 'operating' dollars to businesses they or relatives own. The wife of a board member 'owns' a charter school building where the husband, and other board members, decide the school will be located. When does the rent increase?  A board member owns a testing company that a board decides to use for their assessment program. A relative of a board member is a staff consultant to the director.  Ethical? Would public tax dollars be better spent supporting a pre-K program or an after-school program or be diverted to profit for some business?

 

     As we move into budget deliberation season, let's keep our heads clear and rationale. Let's make good decisions that benefit students even as money is drained away as 'per pupil' dollars might flow to private schools and charters. And let's scrutinize all laws pertaining to public schools, current and proposed, that will allow money to flow out of our schools to 'choice' and charters. In time, the political pendulum swings. Let's preserve the heritage of our public schools. 

A Historical View of Brunswick Taxes 

http://www.brunswickme.org/departments/assessing/notices-documents-and-forms/

Who likes to pay taxes? Who likes to benefit from the services taxes enable us to have? Just rhetorical questions. We probably would get many different answers.

As we move into budget development season, I thought it might be interesting to investigate the historical tax rates in Brunswick. It turns out this information is readily available on the town of Brunswick's website. For those as interested as I am, the link above will take you to this data.

Budget development begins in Brunswick with a poll of town councilors about their comfort level with any tax increase.  Comments range from, "I'm not comfortable with anything over 2%" to "We might be able to do 2.5%" ..... or 3%". In other words, comfort levels are all over the place. Let's take a look at the historical tax data.

A look at the tax rate at 10-year intervals (using available data on the website):
1967    $24.60
1977    $17.50
1987    $15.12
1997    $18.00
2007    $13.32
2016    $20.54

What might we learn? That when rates are kept low for long periods of time, it is inevitable that cumulative unmet needs don't go away and rates begin to increase. High rates right themselves over time and low rates right themselves over time.

A look at the lowest and highest rates:
1989    $12.96
1970    $28.83

What might we learn? That our current tax rate is not the highest, nor lowest tax rate in the history of Brunswick. .

A look at the highest rates during a continuous 8-year period of time:
1974    $22.16
1973    $23.77
1972    $27.00
1971    $28.25
1970    $28.83
1969    $26.56
1968    $23.76
1967    $24.60
The rates for this 10 year period coincides with decreasing property valuation from 95% to 55%.

What might we learn? That Brunswick's 2016 tax rate of $20.54 is increasingly approaching the rates of an 8-year continuous period from 1967-1974, during which the tax rates were the highest (using available data). 

A look at the average rates during 10-year time periods:
1967-77    $25.97  (decreasing % valuation from 95% to 57%)
1978-88    $18.59  (variable % valuation ranging from 61% to 100%;  100% occurring in 1988)
1989-99    $17.89  (variable % valuation ranging from 84% to 95%)
2000-10    $17.49  (100% valuation in 2000 then variable valuation to 60%)
2011-16    $18.53  (variable % valuation ranging from 66%-70%)

What patterns are there? As property valuation decreases, tax rates increase. Perhaps the completion of the current property revaluation will reduce tax rates as has occurred in the past? What might we project for the next 4 years? Perhaps 2017 is the beginning of a multi-year period of  tax rates that will decrease somewhat AND also be stabilized. Brunswick may need to consider the number of projects that have been delayed for a number of years.  Let's hope these next years will be the beginning of a period during which the people of Brunswick will take care of its citizens, employees, schools and other buildings, roads, landfills, and all the other needs that have been slowly accumulating to the point that action is required sooner rather than later. Perhaps a higher, but stable year over year tax rate is better so needs can be met as they arise rather than keeping tax rates variably low, only to spike when the unmet needs have reached an unmanageable level.