The Joint Finance Committee is scheduled to vote on school funding issues Tuesday, May 15. Now is the time to email or call. Talking points here; email addresses here; contact info here. Much more under School Finance and Take Action.
Thomas J. Mertz
Filed under AMPS, School Finance, Take Action
Jim Horn (of Schools Matter, The Education Policy Blog and Monmouth University) thinks it is time turn the tables on the “failing businessmen and politicians” who have been promoting and legislating ill-conceived accountability requirements for our schools and start demanding that they be held accountable for their failures.
Jim has posted an initial list and I think it is a good one.
§ all American citizens will have health insurance coverage that offers equal coverage and facilities for mental and physical health;
§ the federal government will have devised a menu of school integration plans from which school systems across America will choose in order to live up the Supreme Court decision of 53 years ago which declared that separate schools are inherently unequal;
§ American business and government will deliver to the American people a practical plan for full employment in jobs that offer livable wages;
§ All families in America will be offered affordable and quality child care whose cost will be based on income;
§ A minimum wage, workmen’s compensation, and social security withholding will be provided to all workers, both citizens and immigrants. Businesses that do not comply will be forced to close until they do comply.
§ State governments and the federal government will devise a funding structure for public schools that is not dependent upon property taxes.
§ Business and government will take the action required to reduce greenhouse emissions of Americans to a level that will sustain a healthy planet.
§ A national action plan that includes private and public commitments will be offered to rebuild the infrastructure of America, to offer adequate and affordable housing for all Americans, to reenergize the arts, to enhance our parks.
§ Once these things are done, American businessmen and politicians, if they still have the urge to do so, may continue their public school reform initiatives–if they are willing to include the public in each and every step of their reformations. Otherwise, forget it.
I’d add something about a just system of taxation. What else belongs here?
Thomas J. Mertz
Filed under Accountability, AMPS, Elections, No Child Left Behind, School Finance
Dave Zweifel’s piece in today’s Cap Tmes like Ed Garvey’s recent Op Ed points the finger of blame for school woes where it belongs: the irrevokably flawed state funding system.
The whole thing is worth reading, but the heart of it is at the end:
But it occurred to me that the real reason all those people were there — with the exception of those involved with the school naming controversy — was because of those stupid revenue caps that the state Legislature has forced down the throats of every school district in Wisconsin — caps, incidentally, that have the blessing of WMC.
Someone loses because of those caps. Here in Madison, where the caps have created a need to cut $7 million from the budget, among those paying the price are the Marquette neighborhood and Catholic school kids who need rides to school.
The legislative Republicans and former GOP Gov. Tommy Thompson all came up with this great idea, claiming that it was the only way to stop reckless spending by school districts.
Well, some, including the budget-slashing proponents at the state’s largest business lobby, are finding that maybe that spending wasn’t so reckless after all.
Thomas J. Mertz
Filed under AMPS, Budget, Local News, School Finance
Many of you have been following the budget debate here in Madison over the last two months. Sadly, this is not the first time that MMSD has had to cut the budget, however, it is the most dire, as cuts have come to directly effect schools and their neighborhoods. Parents and community members have spent hundreds, if not thousands of hours lobbying the board to save their school or program. Districts across the state are engaging in similar difficult conversations.
While people are quick to show up at school board meetings when budget cuts are being considered, the public officials most able to address the problem are rarely approached. The revenue for school budgets comes from a combination of local and state taxes. However, school boards have no authority to directly determine the level of local spending. Local districts can only raise additional dollars through the passage of an operating levy, which historically in Wisconsin have a 50/50 chance of passing. The legislature and the governor determine the design of the funding system as well as the level of state contribution. They make the rules of the game and control the majority of the purse strings. Rather than organizing to lobby the school board who can only pick among a collection of unpopular options, citizens need to work at the state level and encourage the legislature and the governor to reform the funding system.
There is growing support around the state to fix the funding system. However, nothing will get done until the legislature feels pressure from its constituents. There are a number of relatively easy actions that can be taken to urge the legislature to solve this problem.
Get educated. While the intricacies of the funding system are mind-boggling, it is not difficult to grasp the concepts behind the system. There are many ways to learn about this problem so that you can speak confidently about the issue. Two easy first steps are listed here.
· Connect with others in Madison who are concerned about this problem. abcmadison is a local group that has formed to address this issue. You can join the group by going to yahoo.com and searching for abcmadison. Fill in the information to get on the e-mail list. Plan to attend the next meeting which is scheduled for May 16th, 6:30 in Room 103 of the Doyle Building.
· Visit the MMSD website, http://www.madison. k12.wi.us/. Click on, “Take Action on School Funding,” under Hot Topics. Among other things, you will find information on legislative issues, links to recent newspaper articles about school funding, and how to write a letter to your legislator.
Talk to your legislators and the governor. The legislators who represent Madison support education finance reform. Let them know that you appreciate this support, but are interested in knowing what they are doing to take a leadership role in reforming the finance system. Furthermore, Governor Doyle has not taken a leadership role to solve this problem. He needs to understand that the people of the state of Wisconsin support public education and want to see the problem fixed and that we expect him to do something about it.
Talk to your family, friends, and neighbors. The problem can only be solved if a grassroots effort across the state develops and pressures the legislature and the governor to act. Public schools are a public good, and we all enjoy the benefits of a strong public education system. While it is obvious that parents and students have something at stake, others in the community need to realize that they too are affected by the quality of public education in the community. Talk to others you know, especially people who live in other parts of the state, and ask them to get involved in their community. Furthermore, reform will only happen when citizens from across the state pressure the legislature. Madison cannot do it alone.
Reforming the funding system is no easy task. It requires a long-term, sustained effort to focus the governor and the legislature to address the problem. The more people express their concerns the better the chances of success. Please take a few moments out of your busy schedule to learn more about how the state is impacting the quality of education in Madison and other communities around the state.
Deb Gurke is a citizen representative of the Madison Metropolitan School District Communication Committee. You can reach her at 608-238-2350 or dgurke@wisc. edu.
Filed under AMPS, Budget, Local News, School Finance, Take Action
Although I can see a continued (albeit smaller) role for property taxes, school funding from other sources is needed and on the big picture, I’m with Ed Garvey (and am wishing he was our Governor instead of Doyle).
Ed Garvey’s words also give me another chance to plug educational historian David Tyack’s “A Conservationist Ethic in Education Reform” and remind all that there are many good things about the “Status Quo” and if “innovation” means closing neighborhood schools, increasing class sizes, cutting arts and extra curriculars, then I want no part of it.
Thomas J. Mertz
From today’s Capital Times:
Ed Garvey: Schools’ problem is a horrible system of funding
By Ed Garvey
May 8, 2007
OK, I’m mad as hell and, as the star of “Network” yelled, “I’m not going to take it anymore.”
What has driven me to this state of mind? An editorial in Sunday’s Wisconsin State Journal was the immediate cause. Stupidity in state government tax policy is the underlying factor, and the fact that our children and grandchildren will struggle in substandard public schools was the impetus I needed. We must get serious about public education.
First, the obvious. This nation has enough money for the military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, now estimated at $2 trillion.
Here in Wisconsin we have plenty of dough for every new prison project and for longer sentences for crimes. We spend like drunken sailors on shore leave when it comes to highway bypass projects dreamed up by the highway lobby, but we apparently cannot afford excellent public schools.
Nope. Can’t do it. We spend $25,000 to $30,000 per year per inmate in our prisons, but we can’t take care of special needs children.
The State Journal editorial was titled “For schools, status quo is not an option.” While the School Board got an unenthusiastic pat on the back for cuts approved last week, more cuts are needed, according to the newspaper.
Here in a nutshell is the educational philosophy of the State Journal: “Schools must create ways to deliver education more cost-effectively.”
As if education can be packaged, wrapped up and delivered like a Mother’s Day gift. Well, it ain’t that simple.
Education is not a commodity to be “delivered.” It is a process involving the administrators, teachers and students. The students aren’t customers, and they don’t “consume” education over lunch. They need attention — some more than others. They need the best teachers, and we all need an educated citizenry.
The State Journal added to my angst with these words, “The board saved more than $800,000 by increasing class sizes in art, music, physical education and in other classes called special.”
Whoa, Nelly! The editors might as well shout it out — “Who cares about art, music, debate, forensics, drama, dance anyway? Aren’t our kids in school for job training?”
What is the real problem? Not smaller classes, or too much extracurricular activity. It is the nutty funding of education. Our schools have been held hostage to an absurd system of funding our schools through property taxes.
The Madison School Board has just voted to close or consolidate schools (your choice). They cut almost $8 million from the budget needed for programs, but the anti-education Wisconsin State Journal editors want deeper cuts without once suggesting the impact of these cuts on the education of our students. They ignore the impact on our community.
Excellence in our schools? Secondary. Saving money is all that seems to matter.
But I have to ask, saving for what? To fall behind other school districts? To watch math and science scores plummet? To see many of our best teachers leave? To find that professionals will look elsewhere to raise and educate their kids?
I guess I am a suspicious type. I suspect the State Journal will soon begin a crusade to push state politicians to support the Milwaukee voucher program, created by the neocon Bradley Foundation, for Madison. In Milwaukee, vouchers are given so children can go to any school — private, parochial or charter — at taxpayer expense. Why? Because underfunded public schools are failing.
If the public schools in Madison fail because of insufficient funds, the State Journal will argue that it is time to give poor parents “an option” to send their kids to private schools at taxpayer expense. In other words, abandon the bedrock of our democratic system: public education. Needless to say, there will be precious little discussion about the experience of those kids who remain behind in the public schools.
The “option” we really need? Enough money for smaller classes, enough for special needs kids, enough for the gifted.
So, you ask, how can school districts deal with the animosity from property taxpayers when we know the property tax is the worst tax ever devised? The money from property taxes should be linked to property, not to schools.
And that is the point. As corporations pay a smaller percentage of property taxes than homeowners, the burden falls on the middle-income families who are struggling.
So? Move school taxes off the property tax. Period.
Change the debate. Our schools are not “inefficient.” The tax base to support education is nuts. Money for schools must come from sales and income taxes. OK, possibly 25 percent could come from property taxes.
Stop inflicting wounds on our children and focus on a Legislature dominated by contributions designed to keep the givers from paying their fair share. Even they should want an educated work force.
Larger classes. Are you kidding?
Ed Garvey is a Madison lawyer, political activist and editor of the fightingbob.com Web site.
Filed under AMPS, Local News, School Finance
Most of the “We Are Not Alone” series offers glimpses of how other districts are suffering. I’m happy today to post an entry that focuses on positive action for improvement in New Glarus. It isn’t much, but these days any signs of hope are good.
Some highlights (full story):
NEW GLARUS — A new name and a focused purpose were the results of the meeting of the Citizen’s Action Committee in New Glarus Wednesday night.
After discussion that covered a variety of topics related to the failed school referendums, the committee set a short-term goal as one step on the path toward its long-term goal: a strong future for New Glarus schools.
To that end, the committee has renamed itself the Concerned Citizens for a Strong School. The committee will remain a group of citizens, rather than being appointed by, and thereby connected to, the school board.
Bright also said the board is considering holding a referendum in the fall for money that will cover the operations of the schools for the 2007-08 school year.
According to John Johnson, director of educational informational services for the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, state statutes allow districts to pass a referendum to exceed revenue caps by Nov. 6 and still have them apply to the current school year.
Bright said the school board made a policy change at its last meeting which will allow the public to more easily voice its opinion at board meetings.
“They (the school board) are going to discuss ways to make themselves more accessible to the community so people have the opportunity to (be heard),” he said.
Thomas J. Mertz
Filed under AMPS, Local News, Referenda, School Finance, Take Action, We Are Not Alone
“Be Thankful for What You’ve Got” (listen) by William DeVaughn
There are many, many things about the process and the results of the April 30, 2007 MMSD Board of Education budget meeting that I am not happy about. From my emails this morning I know that I am not alone. I intend to write about some of these in near future. This evening I want put down a few words on things I am thankful for (in no order).
§ Lindbergh will remain open
This is a school that has achieved much, despite a high “at risk” population and inadequate facilities. I am glad that a majority of the Board recognized how fragile these accomplishments are and decided that the best chance of sustaining them would be by keeping the school open.
§ The alternative programs will no longer be paying rent; Space owned by the district will be used more fully.
I don’t think consolidation was the only way to make this happen, but it is hard to deny that this is a good thing. The consensus I’m hearing is that it is a good space for these programs and the potential benefits of having them together outweigh the potential problems. We shall see.
§ For the most part, the Board members were conscientious and respectful.
That “for the most part” is one of the things I’ll probably write about later. For now, I think that the preparation displayed in many of the questions the Board members asked, the obvious concern for their understanding of what was best for the students and the district, and the respect they (mostly) showed each other and administrative staff should be noted with pride.
§ Board members used the Strategic Plan and the work of the Equity Task Force to guide their decisions.
That is what they are there for and they are good. Read them, you will find it rewarding. Some might be upset that these were employed to further conflicting positions, but I’m OK with that. The point isn’t that these documents make the right decision easy or obvious. Their function is to identify the kinds of things people associated with the district should be thinking about and to give them some guidance on how to think about them. I know the Equity Task Force didn’t think there were any easy answers.
§ For the most part the administrative staff was thorough and professional.
There are some places where I think the information and analyses volunteered and given in response to queries were lacking, but overall the knowledge and talents of the staff were very impressive. I also think their dedication to our children and our community was on display.
§ Some locally funded class size reductions will remain in place.
The benefits of reduced class sizes in the early grades are as well established as almost any educational practice. Preserving a portion of this in lower poverty schools is particularly important because all our schools have children who are poor or are “at risk” for one or more reasons. Low poverty schools get less help from both the federal government and the state (and to declining degree from the district). A poor child in a “rich” school does not have it easy and this will help. Additionally, this should help bolster the faith of middle class families in our schools.
§ There is a growing realization that the primary sources of MMSD’s budget problems are at the state and federal level.
Almost all the Board members and staff described almost all the cuts, fee increases or means of saving as difficult or seeking to do the least harm. This can only help energize the growing activism for reform in Madison and around the state. Lots of local action, please join us, join the ABC Madison list and watch this space for more opportunities.
§ The deeply offensive and patently absurd tactic of painting those who point to state and federal policies as the primary sources of our budget problems as somehow unwilling or unable to govern and budget responsibly is waning.
Ruth Robarts departure has something to do with this, but last night’s budget meeting (like many before) is evidence of the speciousness of this slander. Good riddance.
§ A referendum on the ballot in February of 2008 seems certain.
As long as we have to function under the current state finance system, referenda are the only tools we have to meet the needs and expectations of our community. Madison is a high needs district with high expectations for our schools. Due to this combination we are and will be a “high spending” district. I think we should be proud of this, that we as a community have made education a priority. A referendum will give the electorate a chance to provide the funds to meet these needs and expectations and reaffirm our commitment to education. We are going to need lots of help to make this happen. I’ll be posting updates here.
§ Almost all the good things about our district will continue.
I’ve been thinking about posting something longer on an essay by the educational historian David Tyack called the “A Conservationist Ethic in Education Reform.” Tyack’s point is that in search of the new and better, reformers often lose track of the need to preserve what is good and working. Tyack has certainly informed my unwillingness to embrace “innovation for the sake of innovation.” At this time I also think it serves as a reminder that despite the losses many in our community are feeling, there is much good that remains in place.
I’m sure there is more we should be thankful for (please add your thoughts to the comments). As I said at the top, I’m not at all happy with many of the things that happened, but I’m trying to temper my anger and disappointment and looking for things to be thankful for seemed like a good way to start.
Thomas J. Mertz
Filed under AMPS, Best Practices, Budget, Equity, Local News, Referenda, School Finance, Take Action
Susan Troller’s story on the MTI/MMSD negotiations and the health care issue is timely and informative. It is a good story, except one thing is missing and that is any mention of the Qualified Economic Offer law (and one thing seems to me to be misrepresented and that is Madison’s competitiveness for starting teacher salaries — I’m saving this for another post, but see here, scroll down to “News Flash,” thanks Robert).
I know that the impasse agreement (reproduced here) negotiated earlier this year moves the parties away from the QEO, but it remains part of the context and should be discussed.
The QEO requires districts that wish to avoid arbitration to offer each year a total package that is at least 3.8% larger than the previous contract. Total package means salary and benefits combined. With health care costs rising that has meant very small salary increases for Madison’s teachers. Last year the total package went up 3.97% (compared to the State average of 4.29%; I think that in Madison .8% of that was salary and the rest benefits, statewide I think the salary figure is a little over 3% and that the increase in health costs has been above 7% – correct me if I’m wrong — info here and here). This mix or balance has been their choice, how they have wished to “spend” their 3.8%. The state says this is their money and that health care is part of collective bargaining.
The lack of any discussion of the QEO leads to the misconception that money saved on health care could be used to avoid staff and programmatic cuts. I have heard a figure of $2 million, but I don’t see where that would come from (I may be missing something and am open to being informed, corrected or educated).
Robert Butler of the Wisconsin Association of School Boards (and part of MMSD’s negotiating team) identifies a number of reasons that districts should seek to lower health care costs, some of these are good and some not so good but I don’t see any that will have a significant impact on programmatic cuts. The first is that teachers having higher (and higher cost) benefits than many in their communities is bad for public relations. In Madison, we know this is true but I would guess that much of this has to do with ignorance about the total compensation aspects of the QEO (ignorance that is reinforced with every story or discussion of teacher health care that does not include a discussion of the QEO). The second is the undeniable effect on teacher salaries. As I said above, that is their choice; our teachers know that higher benefit packages in lean times and under the QEO mean lower salaries. Butler also points out that many districts are moving away from work shares, part time positions and increasing the workload of employees. He attributes this to a wish to avoid insuring additional people. I’m sure that is part of the picture, but common sense tells me that this is a manifestation of the quixotic quest for efficiency inspired more by the broken state finance system than by health care costs. Butler’s last reason is the only one that I see (again, correct me if I’m wrong) as having the potential to increase the amount of money a district has to maintain programs (or keep schools open):
The cost of health insurance has driven up school districts’ post-employment benefit costs dramatically. Post-employment costs are not part of the total compensation calculation used for a qualified economic offer (QEO). This has three major implications. First, it constitutes a significant drag on district budgets. Second, it doesn’t allow the school district to assess this cost within the parameters of a QEO. Third, it means that money saved on insurance modifications for retirees can be accrued to the district.
If I understand correctly, savings achieved through lower cost health care for retirees would not have to be converted to another part of the total package calculation and therefore would represent money that could be spent elsewhere. This might be the source of the $2 million dollar figure. If it is, I’d like to see the calculations because the post-employment health care benefits aren’t very big and anecdotally I’ve heard that many (most?) Madison teachers switch to the HMO option upon retirement (leaving WPS with the higher cost individuals and further driving up rates).
It may seem like I’m defending the choices MTI has made. I’m not. That discussion is best left to their membership. I am (indirectly) defending collective bargaining.
Since this is a public matter, I do think that actions on both sides of the bargaining table need to be presented to the public in their full context. In this case that means placeing front and center the way the QEO functions to limit the potential impact of one aspect of the contract (health care) on the district’s budgetary choices. What I am really interested in defending and furthering is informed discussion.
Thomas J. Mertz
Filed under AMPS, Budget, Gimme Some Truth, Local News, School Finance
Citizens gathered to lobby their representatives for school funding reform on April 25th at the Capital.
Robert Godfrey
Filed under AMPS, School Finance, Take Action
Mike Ivey in today’s Cap Times on Wal-mart’s Wisconsin operations:
The next time you make the not-so-scenic drive on U.S. 151 past the giant new Wal-Mart warehouse near Beaver Dam, keep this in mind: Wisconsin’s largest employer draws more in corporate welfare than it pays in state taxes.
But according to a report from the Milwaukee-based Institute for Wisconsin’s Future that somehow fell through the cracks on Tax Day, Wal-Mart has used a variety of completely legal tax avoidance schemes to cut millions from its state tax bill.
Using public records, the group determined that Wal-Mart pocketed $852 million in net profits in Wisconsin off value-hungry consumers between 2000 and 2003.
Over that same period, Wal-Mart paid only $3 million in corporate income tax here. That’s a tax rate of 0.35 percent, a fraction of the 7.9 percent rate corporations doing business in our fair state are supposed to pay.
Pardon my West High math, but if Wal-Mart paid the going tax rate here it would have owed closer to $67 million.
At the same time, Wal-Mart has been feeding at the public trough like nobody else in state history. The Arkansas-based retailer has benefited from more than $20 million in public economic benefits in Wisconsin, according to one national study. Good Jobs First reported in 2004 that Wal-Mart stores and distribution centers in Baraboo, Beaver Dam, Menomonie, Milwaukee and Tomah received at least $21.75 million in local tax subsidies, the report says.
And in a related story:
The death of Helen Walton, a major Wal-Mart stockholder and widow of its founder, may well trigger one of history’s biggest charitable donations, with a potentially dramatic impact on U.S. public education reform.
Helen Walton’s stake in Wal-Mart is worth about $16.4 billion, which ranked her No. 29 on the most recent Forbes list of the world’s richest. She had long planned to shift her Wal-Mart stock to the Walton Family Foundation upon her death, the family has said. That foundation is overseen by her children and advisers. It has become a major backer of public education reform, including charter schools and private-school vouchers. A donation that big would significantly expand the foundation’s reach.
Charters and vouchers. $16,400,000,000. It makes the mind reel. This isn’t money for “public education reform,” it is money for public education destruction. It is bad enough to avoid paying a fair share and to exploit corporate welfare, but to turn around and then use those ill gotten gains to destroy our public schools is unconscionable. Better if she had left all to her cat.
Thomas J. Mertz
Filed under AMPS, Local News, National News, School Finance
Fund a Classroom Project in Madison
AMPS 