Our local districts have had their fair share of controversy surrounding them over the years. From Millcreek's clandestine transfer of $5 million from the capitol fund to general funds in 2013, to the dumbfounding single year shortfall of $10 million in the ESD this fiscal year. There is much cause for concern among parents, local officials, and taxpayers alike. The conversation on the matter has shifted to one of "inequitable funding" between Erie and more "affluent" districts. True that there exists a disproportionate burden on Erie property owners relative to their semi annual tax bill in part, I would argue, due to the glut of non taxable land owned by a variety of non profit groups in the city. Also, due to the archaic concept of property valuation being tied directly to the revenue generated to educate our children. Both of which are problems for the legislative body to address, or not. Aside from those issues beyond the local sphere of influence, a realistic appraisal is needed to identify the root cause of this seemingly sudden and massive lack of funding. What do we pay? What is the result?
A local goerie article by Ed Palattella making its rounds through social and conventional media outlets, highlights the anger and frustration of a concerned mother on the east side of Pittsburg avenue. Much like so many others currently in circulation, it seems to avoid the bottom line. Simple analysis of budgets and enrollments identify there is indeed an inequity in funding, but not how its being made to out to be.
The Erie School District receives approximately $14,500 per student, per year
$1900 more per student, than the aforementioned Millcreek Township School District.
$2000 more than Fairview.
$2100 more than Fort Lebouf.
$4500 more than Girard.
More per student than any other district in the county.
How can this be? Hoe can a district provide less with more? Again simple. They are not allocating it in a responsible, objective manner and haven't been for decades. This shortfall didn't happen overnight. Neither did the crumbling ceilings, peeling paint and broken lockers. This was a long time coming and if those in charge weren't aware of it is because they are complacent or willfully negligent. Before I graduated high school from McDowell in 2007, Central was visibly downtrodden, I was 17 and I could see the neglect. That was over a decade ago. I digress..
Lets look at some statistics that may shed light on how a district can do less with proportionately more funding.
-Under 3:1 teacher to administrator ratio. Pa average is 24:1
-Administrators receive on average 30% more pay than teachers
-Administrators receive 50% more benefits than teachers
-18 school buildings are owned and maintained by ESD
-66% single year line item increase for "other employee benefits" (whatever that is)
-15% (delta) increase in pension costs
-Teacher aides with a bachelors make less than $10/hr
Clearly there is room for improvement.
The overarching theme of "inequity" seems to be misleading at best, however not entirely untrue. Some districts in the commonwealth enjoy almost twice the budget per student as Erie's, such as Sullivan County boasting over $22,600 per student spending. Perhaps the "inequity" referenced is in regards to proportionate state funding? After all, state funding accounts for just shy of 54% of ESD's annual budget. Nope. Yet again this is pale in comparison to other local districts such as Fairview, which receives just over 26% of its budget from the state, or the "affluent" Millcreek at 27%. Worse yet is the simple fact that in total, PA school districts have a combined $7 billion in the bank right now, over and above this years annual budgets.
So if they receive more per student, and proportionately more from the state, then why cant they seem to manage to provide adequate education to our kids without crumbling facilities, endless property tax increases and emotional pandering to the state? My bet is on the grossly disproportionate, glut of administration and the large number of beautiful, yet antiquated buildings they are responsible for maintaining. Yet when talk of cuts stirs the administration speaks of teachers and students who will suffer as a result, they should look in the mirror. The most important individuals in the educational process are the teachers and the students. Why are they consistently the first to be led to the chopping block? Well, it is effective in directing public attention away from the root problem and producing the desired result of a increased budget.
This begs the question what do we get for $14,500 per student these days? Surely the extra money results in a better quality of education, no? Well, according to The United Way of Erie 45% of ESD students entering fourth grade cannot read and write proficiently. Apparently not.
The runaround these district officials give the firms who audit them should have been a red flag to citizens. The school districts needs more integrity, not capitol. These people have been robbing our children and our teachers of the resources they need to perform and flourish.
The district just promoted the Chief Financial Officer, whom presided over a single year budgetary shortfall of $10 million, to superintendent. The same individual who refers to charter school students as "these kids" and public school students as "our kids", while suggesting bussing cuts for the local charter students to help offset this shortfall. Perhaps Mr. Polito forgot the ESD both pockets money allocated for each charter student, is responsible for a fair number of them and more important that they are all our kids! Erie kids, and they don't need to be divided by their parents choice of educational institution.
Finding the fallacies of the districts argument is simple, review data from the census bureau and the districts own budget reports. Solutions to these problems aren't near as easy to find. Solutions will come from the community as a whole, individuals, parents, teachers, and businesses. The tax rate and the uncertainty surrounding the schools future are major contributors to the decline of our city in both population and general sentiment. Its is imperative we as citizens be critical of the way we move forward from here.
Luckily there are groups leading from the front on this. Take PACA, a small local non profit arts collective, who recently announced it will pay its property tax bill in full, even though they are classified a 501c and are under no obligation to do such. If a relatively tiny group of artists and performers offering affordable space to the community can pay their share, it casts serious doubt to the claim of the massive nonprofit organizations that they cannot. The hotel with a grand sky bridge on the Bayfront comes to mind.
Only a crisis, actual or perceived, produces real change. The ideas present at the time of a crisis will dictate actions taken. The districts collectivist approach has failed time and again and yet most of the solutions from within are pointing toward even more centralization. We cannot allow the emotional nature of the situation evoke rash decision making. We must be wary of any methodology or institution that further removes individual citizens from the process.
We need to take back Erie, at all levels and the facts would seem to suggest the school districts are a fine place to start.
A place for review of relevant local matters and those citizens imparting impactful change in our county and city.
Friday, March 17, 2017
Perspective in Politics; Abstract Overview
Erie has long been marked by poor representation at the local level. Individuals within our local government have weaved themselves into a birds nest of conflicting interests, wholly disconnected from the average person and the challenges we face. Only by increased awareness and involvement of average citizens, can we truly identify and begin to rectify this. Perspective is best attained through experience, and experience is best garnered through involvement. For too long we have looked for credentials of prospective candidates which are not rooted in the areas most people reside. Candidates tout their involvement in non profits, development boards, or previous public "service". Never considering that the frame in which they view the world, and potential solutions was molded and inherently limited by that same involvement. This is not unique to Erie, it is a systemic byproduct of subsidized industry as well as political elections process throughout our country.
This provides an avenue from which most professional politicians develop. In lockstep with those of similar ideologies, incapable of validating, let alone, understanding outside viewpoints and new solutions. Reactionary in nature, the professional politician employs a defense mechanism originating in self preservation. Validation or adoption of a policy not originating of their own party would harm their "side" and is thusly unacceptable and must be resisted, even if public sentiment requires a parsed lip-service to save face. This breeds the excluded middle fallacy of argument; rampant throughout local, state and federal political rhetoric. In which, the most extreme voices on both sides of a specific argument place an "all or nothing", "us vs them" mentality, denying that any room exists for a position to be taken in between. This inherently prohibits reasoned alternatives from being put forth by the vast majority of folks, whom see elements of reason in both sides and seek to satisfy the legitimate concerns raised by different points of view, while staying focused on the ultimate goals of the effort.
There seems to be an enormity of people out there that have adopted this mentality of political segregation because those voices speak the loudest. We have all seen it before. Everyone who has a "D" at the end of there name is a socialist, everyone with an "R" is a fascist. Neither of which is even remotely true. I'm here to say that if you vote straight party, you are doing yourself and your community a grave disservice as neither major party wholly represents any individual. Examination of the individual is much more important to assessing how they will impact the office they seek. What is their perspective? Is it representative of your own? Or, perhaps more relevant in todays climate; does their perspective even allow room for yours to exist?
This attack on the individual is what inspires me to write today, as I believe in fighting for the right of another to freely speak his or her mind, regardless of whether I agree. An astute reader would immediately identify this as a tenant of classic liberalism and also, a tenant of conservative constitutionalism. In modern day politic these two terms are not synonymous, as the conversation over the decades has eroded and altered the definition of these terms. Instead, tying them directly to a respective party as a divisor, a identifying title. Contrary to this notion, I would remain that the vast majority of self identifying Republicans and Democrats support these principles. Furthermore, I'd be so bold as to claim that the majority of Americans would agree on ninety percent of relevant debatable issues, were the arguments stripped down to one of the individual.
We must remember that government is simply a means, an instrument, through which individuals and their compatriots can impart change in our society. Also, that centralization and concentration of power is a threat to individual freedom, especially when the powers at hand are of "your" party, as its only a matter of time before popular sentiment sways the other way. Sound familiar? It should. Only a balanced approach will solve the issues we face in a comprehensive and effective manner. For too long we have been led from a perspective not conducive with that of the individuals whom make up the vast majority of Erie county. We must stave off the urge to be apathetic toward local politics, it is apathy that has allowed the system to degrade to this point. Also, we must resist the urge to begin a argument with a conclusion already made that satisfies our own predisposition. Its the only way forward.
Increased involvement. Balanced debate. Perspective in Politics.
Thank you for reading
This provides an avenue from which most professional politicians develop. In lockstep with those of similar ideologies, incapable of validating, let alone, understanding outside viewpoints and new solutions. Reactionary in nature, the professional politician employs a defense mechanism originating in self preservation. Validation or adoption of a policy not originating of their own party would harm their "side" and is thusly unacceptable and must be resisted, even if public sentiment requires a parsed lip-service to save face. This breeds the excluded middle fallacy of argument; rampant throughout local, state and federal political rhetoric. In which, the most extreme voices on both sides of a specific argument place an "all or nothing", "us vs them" mentality, denying that any room exists for a position to be taken in between. This inherently prohibits reasoned alternatives from being put forth by the vast majority of folks, whom see elements of reason in both sides and seek to satisfy the legitimate concerns raised by different points of view, while staying focused on the ultimate goals of the effort.
There seems to be an enormity of people out there that have adopted this mentality of political segregation because those voices speak the loudest. We have all seen it before. Everyone who has a "D" at the end of there name is a socialist, everyone with an "R" is a fascist. Neither of which is even remotely true. I'm here to say that if you vote straight party, you are doing yourself and your community a grave disservice as neither major party wholly represents any individual. Examination of the individual is much more important to assessing how they will impact the office they seek. What is their perspective? Is it representative of your own? Or, perhaps more relevant in todays climate; does their perspective even allow room for yours to exist?
This attack on the individual is what inspires me to write today, as I believe in fighting for the right of another to freely speak his or her mind, regardless of whether I agree. An astute reader would immediately identify this as a tenant of classic liberalism and also, a tenant of conservative constitutionalism. In modern day politic these two terms are not synonymous, as the conversation over the decades has eroded and altered the definition of these terms. Instead, tying them directly to a respective party as a divisor, a identifying title. Contrary to this notion, I would remain that the vast majority of self identifying Republicans and Democrats support these principles. Furthermore, I'd be so bold as to claim that the majority of Americans would agree on ninety percent of relevant debatable issues, were the arguments stripped down to one of the individual.
We must remember that government is simply a means, an instrument, through which individuals and their compatriots can impart change in our society. Also, that centralization and concentration of power is a threat to individual freedom, especially when the powers at hand are of "your" party, as its only a matter of time before popular sentiment sways the other way. Sound familiar? It should. Only a balanced approach will solve the issues we face in a comprehensive and effective manner. For too long we have been led from a perspective not conducive with that of the individuals whom make up the vast majority of Erie county. We must stave off the urge to be apathetic toward local politics, it is apathy that has allowed the system to degrade to this point. Also, we must resist the urge to begin a argument with a conclusion already made that satisfies our own predisposition. Its the only way forward.
Increased involvement. Balanced debate. Perspective in Politics.
Thank you for reading
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)