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.

ALL Students, Not Just Some    

     In a recent March 15 post, I discussed a comment made during a Brunswick's School Board meeting public comment period. The commenter vaguely claimed that a program that was responsible for producing the success of Brunswick Junior High math team had been eliminated. I found that claim unsettling. I know that there have been budget years where financial/program choices must be made, but I did not recall that math teams nor other programs offering enrichment  had been eliminated. Upon further fact finding, it appears that there have been no talent program, nor extracurricular math activity elimination. Rather, the gifted/talented program in Brunswick's schools has been expanded.  A more inclusive talent program in broader areas of talent is now available to all K-12 students. Student eligibility is assessed each year in attempt to identify ALL students whose needs change over time. Giftedness/talent can appear in more areas than academic areas. Brunswick schools are home to some highly talented students in the Arts and Music areas as well as the academic areas. Thus, an expanded Learning and Enrichment in the Arts and Academics program has been developed and is now available to eligible students. I can envision a Brunswick School Department Visual Arts and Performing Academy, can you?  We can dream. But back to the topic of this post.

    Currently, student's verbal, mathematical, and non-verbal talents are assessed using multiple measures, including teacher observation and recommendation. All eligible students are offered Talent Development programming during the school day. At the Brunswick Junior High School, there continues to be a 6th grade Math Team, a 7th grade Math Team, an 8th grade Math Team, and an 8th grade Math Counts Team. These teams meet before/after school. All of the math teams "learn and practice new math concepts in preparation for local and state competitions".  In the Math Counts team, "all students interested in challenging written and oral competitions can participate.  The top four scorers at the State Final Meet win a trip to the National Competition".

I am glad Brunswick offers this expanded gifted/talented enrichment program. It creates the opportunity for ALL students to expand their horizons. That is what public school is all about. ALL students, not just some.