June 25 West Chester
Area School District Board Meeting – all members in attendance
Superintendent’s Report
District PSSA results
should be available late July and we are reminded of the District’s commitment
to “student achievement”: we strive to
get our students not just “proficient”
but “advanced” in their PSSA scores. On
that note, Newsweek's
Top 1000 High Schools included East
(#863) and Henderson (#925). Report continues with end of year summaries
on professional development goals, parent survey results, reminders of new
revenue from activity fees, before/after care, etc. – basically, a nice
synopsis of positive accomplishments throughout the school year.
More
good news: West Chester Area School District
received the Association of School Business Officials International’s
(ASBO) Certificate of Excellence (COE) award in Financial Reporting award for having met or exceeded the program’s high
standards for financial reporting and accountability. Recognition through
the COE program can help strengthen a district’s presentation for bond issuance
statements and promotes a high level of financial reporting. Congratulations and gratitude to Dr. Moore,
Beth Butch and John Scully for bringing this honor to WCASD!
Public Comment on Agenda Items:
Parent spoke passionately of her frustration in attempting to secure afternoon placement for her child with Tot Time, the district's new before/after care provider. Parent had to return to YMCA for care and is now paying close to $1500 for her 2 children. She finds it "professionally irresponsible" of the District to end one contract (with YMCA) before starting the other with Tot Time. We hope and trust her valid concerns were addressed by appropriate individuals after the meeting.
Comment on First
reading of Policy DFF, Grants from External Sources – speaker references
Keystone to Opportunity grant, and questions language in policy.
Board business:
Approval
of contract with Tot Time (referred to
as “A Child’s Place” in schools) to provide before/ after care services at
elementary schools for the 2012-13 school year.
Approval
of the following policies for “first reading”:
Policy JCDAC:Drug and Alcohol Abuse -revised to reflect changes in
terminology.
Policy
DJF (new):Food & Beverage Expenditure Guidelines – written as result of
Attorney General’s report concerning food expenses in Reading School District.
Policy
DFF: Grants from External Sources – revised to include guidelines for
pre-approval of grant funding by the school board.
Policy
KDC: Flyer Distribution – revised to include pre-approval for distribution of
flyers and prohibit distribution of political information on school
property.
Approved
and now in effect is Policy GAO (new): Intellectual Property –establishes
guidelines for ownership of materials developed while employed by the District.
One item pulled from Property & Finance consent agenda
section: Approval of contract with School Media pulled due to concerns
expressed at June
Property & Finance Committee meeting
Board approved a resolution recognizing that three collective
bargaining unit agreements will expire on June 30th and in the event there is
no settlement, the current language will remain as ‘status quo’ until an
agreement is reached. In effect,
negotiations continue and agreements are valid beyond expiration date of June
30.
Chair of Property & Finance Committee Sean Carpenter
addressed “status quo” and other issues when he and Board President
Vince Murphy visited WCHE
on June 22 to update the community
on negotiations. Both men presented themselves as calm, professional
representatives of the Board, but had no
“new” news, holding steady to the facts and figures posted on District
website. At the beginning of the
interview, WCHE made it clear that representatives from West Chester Area Education
Association had been invited to the interview.
A few interview “highlights”:
In discussing contract negotiations in general, WCHE uses
the term “laborers”. Now, one assumes
the commentator was referring to unionized teachers in his theoretical example.
However, “laborers” unionize in many
different fields due to specific concerns of their profession, and perhaps a
more respectful word choice was in order.
Or better yet, since the discussion concerned school employees/teachers,
why not refer to them as such? Admittedly,
one gets lost debating the connotation of “laborers” so let us affirm it as a “positive”. Teachers, support staff, building
custodians are indeed “laborers”, for
they build and strengthen the foundation of any decent society, which is a quality and equitable public education
system. Over the top? Maybe, but look
where the interview goes from here and my need for positive affirmations becomes clearer.
WCHE asks Mr. Carpenter and Mr. Murphy how much is in the
District fund balance. After response, WCHE commentator proclaims
“the union” must be “licking
their chops” looking at that
number.
In discussing the District’s proposal of a 5% surcharge to collect West Chester Area
Education Association (“union” )
dues, WCHE commentator remarks that “if it were the other way around, you can be
sure the union would want to collect the surcharge”. Sadly, that comment is followed by
appreciative chuckles but with no video, we remain uncertain who emitted them. We hope and trust that neither member of the
Board would have shown such a lack of decorum in discussing sensitive
negotiation proposals.
The interview wraps up with ending thanks to all and a final
comment by WCHE that teachers are “not looking good by not coming to the mic(rophone)”.
The microphone? The microphone
that labels all unionized work force
members as “laborers”? The
microphone that portrays teachers
as salivating animals hungry for more money and benefits? THAT microphone? One could argue the teachers looked just
fine not coming to THAT microphone.
Board Reports:
Intermediate Unit by
Mr. Coyle – reports that goals were set for IU
Charter/Alternative Schools by Mrs. Tiernan – cites recent Auditor General report on charter/cyber
funding, recounting that charter/cyber funding reform could save $365 million
per year. School visits have stopped for
summer recess, but she looks forward to
reporting again in September
Communication and Outreach by Ms. Raileanu – Board outreach has also stopped for summer
recess. However, we are promised a Board Connections summer newsletter.
Mrs. Snook
noted there “may” be increase to Educational Improvement Tax Credit (EITC)
which she tells us “will benefit WCASD
Education Foundation”. Remember,
tax credit programs such as EITC were publicly championed by Mrs. Snook at a
local church last month, but not because they would help WCASD Education Foundation.
Let’s give her a break, move forward and hope this remark is evidence that she
realized the faux pas of her “pulpit speech” and really does care equally about
all schools in WCASD.
Final budget did increase EITC by $25 million, to $100
million, making available $60 million for private scholarships, $10 million for
pre-kindergarten scholarships, and $30 million for public
education improvement programs (WCASD
Education Foundation appears to fall under this category). The WCASD Education Foundation “benefits”
from EITC when a private-sector business makes a contribution to the Foundation, which
funds mini-grants and internships that support the District’s educational
mission. In return, the business enjoys
the gratification of strengthening the
community by investing in education and also receives a generous tax credit
from the state. In addition to EITC, the
PA budget includes a new program, the Education Opportunity Scholarship
Tax Credit/ Voucher
Lite, making available
$50 million in tax credits to businesses who contribute to scholarship
organizations for the purposes of providing school vouchers to students in
low-achieving public schools. Everybody’s a winner with tax
credits, yes?
It is estimated that since its
inception in 2001, EITC has cost $586 million in taxpayer subsidies:
”… the EITC
is actually quite expensive. Because it reduces
available revenue that can fund public schools or human services, the EITC
is counted, much like an expenditure, as a cost in the budget. In 2011-12, the
cost of the EITC is $75 million, up from $60 million in 2010-11. Through the
EITC, businesses are able to obtain a credit against their Pennsylvania taxes
in return for making a contribution of cash, personal property (cars, real
estate, or stocks) or services to scholarship or educational improvement
organizations. After the business is approved for a tax credit, it then makes
the contribution to the approved organization. When the contribution is
confirmed, the business receives the tax credit to apply against its business tax
liability for that year. This reduces the state revenue collected by the same amount as the credit." http://pennbpc.org/sites/pennbpc.org/files/PBPC-EITC-Analysis-6-25-2012-Final.pdf
So, if state revenue collections
are “reduced” by the amount of the tax credits, then it is “true” that we have less money to spend on
education. So it makes perfect sense for
the state to invite the private sector to invest in education and reward their philanthropy with generous tax
credits, that reduce the state revenue collections…wait, is this really a sustainable, not to mention
ethical, way to “fund” a critical social
need such as public education?
Maybe I overreacted and the future of funding public education in PA really is this simple: create new and increase existing tax credit
programs, turning “funding” into a competition between private sector
investors scrambling for those credits
before the program’s “cap” for the year is reached. Such a system in turn increases competition - not
to mention animosity and increased misunderstanding - between all types of schools now forced to
prove themselves worthy recipients of philanthropic funds. No more handouts, greedy Public Education,
for “funding” is evolving into a competitive venture.
At the risk of sounding ungrateful
to private-sector investors, such “funding" is especially concerning in the area of public education. Yet in a strange, admittedly despairing way,
I could almost be at peace with this
trend if only the legislators/lobbyists responsible for such initiatives would own up to the fact that “spending” tax
credits to “fund” education promotes the
slow but steady privatization of a truly public education system. Yes –privatization -because the private sector
ultimately decides the beneficiary of
the “funding”. No formula, “flawed” or “fair”,
exists with tax credit “funding”, just a
subjective decision to write a check to a particular educational entity in
exchange for a tax credit. In most
cases, no real guarantee of where or how the funds are spent either. And how long do corporate tax credits alone
suffice as “reward” for private sector philanthropists? Many of them may want or even expect
something more, perhaps a school named after them or a particular curriculum taught/ideology espoused
as a condition of their “funding”. In
those cases, the benefactors will seek
out institutions who will accommodate their wishes, placing at a disadvantage “traditional” public
schools who will continue to accept and educate all children.
Ok, everyone out of the abyss. Time to finish Mrs. Snook’s report and our favorite
part of school board meetings, non-agenda public comment.
Mrs. Snook again mentions need for
pension and prevailing wage “relief” and reminds us of the Board’s resolutions
in support of Representative Kampf’s prevailing wage bill and also his pension
reform bill . Also mentioned is a bill that would
allow students to wear military uniforms at graduation. With no bill number
referenced, one believes Mrs. Snook is referring to Representative Duane
Milne’s HB 1307, amending the Public
School Code and covering everything from wearing military uniforms at
graduation to “financial recovery” of “distressed” districts. This
bill was signed in the House and Senate, and
expect to hear more on its contents during forthcoming charter/cyber
reform discussions.
Public comment,
non-agenda items:
Two names are called and we find that one of the speakers
called is “yielding” her 2-minute
time limit to a friend, who will now
enjoy 4 full minutes of public comment.
Apparently that is perfectly
legal, my friends. Lengthy diatribe
against teachers, administrators, Board members? No problem.
Find a friend to sign up and “yield” their time to you, but act quickly
for we trust it won’t take long for a policy “revision” to take care of this
public comment loophole. Our “yieldee”
speaks sweetly as a former educator who has taught in both public and private
systems. She is a senior citizen who values education and has participated in
the District’s Bus to the Future, an event
that offers tours of a District high, middle and elementary school to see
“students at work”. She has witnessed
firsthand the great things going on in District schools. And here it comes, the proverbial “other shoe” drops, hard. Our speaker is “appalled” at the “unconscionable demands” of the teachers, for they are “brazenly out of line. As the 4 minutes
tick on, she continues, suggesting to the Board that NO taxpayer money be used
to collect union dues because it is
common knowledge that those dues “support political campaigns” (Unsure of implication of that comment: with Citizens
United recently upheld in Montana case, political campaigns have
been for sale to the highest bidder since 2010). She wraps up her 4 minutes with a caution: if current teachers are unhappy, there are “young enthusiastic teachers” who would “jump at the chance” for a job in
this District.
A lovely senior citizen approaches the podium informing us
that teachers “should not be immune to recession” and if they are unhappy with
Board proposals, she offers a simple solution for all of them: “leave and find a job in the private
sector”. In reality, her solution may
not be so far-fetched. With the above
mentioned tax credits and pending
charter/cyber reform legislation, public education may be the “private sector”
sooner than we think.
A gentleman who had served for 30 years as an Easttown Township supervisor has fair and
valid questions: is West Chester teacher pay commensurate with other districts
in area? He kindly commends teachers for service but also feels the District
should not collect “union” dues.
A Republican Committeewoman informs us that she received a $230 “increase” this year and she is happy
with that. She would be agreeable to give teachers a $230 increase also.
Two comments on
“disappointment” with District and Board communications concerning teacher negotiations, one male one female.
Female states that upon analysis, she finds the information posted on District
website does not match the information posted on the West Chester Area
Education Association website.
Male deserves quoting:
“The issues being negotiated are highly emotional and complex.
Additionally, because the collective bargaining process involves people with
pride, dignity and unfortunately, at times, egos, it can get frustrating.” He goes on to urge Property & Finance Chair
Mr. Carpenter and Board President Mr. Murphy to cease the “abridged, news
clipping type stories until the contract is finalized”. He continues by encouraging WCAEA President
to “persevere to remain above the fray and continue to negotiate in good faith
toward contract resolution.”
A teacher reminds us that association dues are collected by
employers even in the private sector.
Woman reminds Board of agreement to address charter/cyber reform
“resolution”.
President of WCAEA states that the Board’s “assertion of
18.3% increase proves the Board is only interested in misleading”. She
asserts that the WCAEA shares in the Board’s vision of “achievement and
affordability” and seeks only COLA increases, no percentages.
Woman spoke as “teacher, parent and homeowner”, advising the
Board and all in attendance to “beware” of the image they portray of
teachers. She hopes and suggests that
communication on all fronts remains “positive and truthful”.
WCASD support staffer recounts something her mother always
told her to the effect of “get all the facts” before you make a final decision
about anything. ALL THE FACTS, then
“you will know the truth”. While I agree that “truth” ideally does correspond to “facts”, my
experience during this Board meeting leads me to the sad realization that, regardless of facts, there are competing “truths” concerning current
negotiations. So I close by respectfully offering a complement to
our speaker’s maternal advice, and share something my father always told me: Consider the source.
