Saturday, June 17, 2006

Budget hearings next week

The city council will review the budget at two public hearings next week. The hearings will be held at City Hall and will be broadcast live on Channel 10.

Monday, June 19, 5:00 pm
Wednesday, June 21, 4:00 pm

The school budget of $132 million is a line item in the city budget of $281 million.

The city budget is finally (thanks to Councilor Donaghue) available on line at http://www.lowellma.gov/newsitems/20060607-budget07

Friday, June 16, 2006

Big Picture on Small Things

Congratulations to UMass Lowell on landing a $35 million appropriation to proceed with its nanotechnology center. The enthusiasm of our local representatives for this project was clear from the related newspaper article which also offered a sharp contrast to the acute lack of enthusiasm they expressed for the prospects of the Lowell schools receiving the more generous amount of Chapter 70 aid proposed by the Senate. Unfortunately, no one has pointed out how inconsistent these positions are. UML is not interested in nanotechnology inventions, but in nanotechnology manufacturing. People and institutions around the world are finding new uses for nano products, but few are learning how to mass produce such products. That’s where UML comes in. And a major part of the UML initiative is workforce training by influencing the curriculum of the Lowell schools (current home of future nano-workers). But without adequate funding, the kind of intensive math, science and technology instruction needed to prepare the workers of tomorrow will lag in Lowell’s schools.

Wednesday, June 14, 2006

School budget dance continues

The school budget process is always tricky, particularly because Lowell relies so heavily on state aid, and the school committee has to submit a budget before the amount of state aid, known as Chapter 70 funds, is revealed. The conference committee is currently meeting to forge a compromise between the House and Senate budgets, and for Lowell, the difference between the two numbers is huge (the House allocated an $800,000 increase for Lowell, compared to the Senate's $3.4 million).

In yesterday's Lowell Sun, Rep.s Golden and Nangle criticized the school commitee for using the Senate number. Golden claimed to be "confused about why they (the school committee) would go with that number in the budget." Nangle warned, "The aid isn't going to be what they expect it to be." Have they even looked at the school budget? Have they made an effort to convince their House colleagues who are on the committee that the Senate number and formula should be supported? If they aren't going to help the schools, perhaps they could at least forego the negative comments.

This kind of posturing on the part of the legislators is exactly what happens at the city council level every year. Certain councilors start saying that the schools better not expect any more money and pretty soon the voters and the school committee start believing it. Even this year, the school committee started cutting before submitting the budget and the schools managed, through painful trade-offs at every school, to absorb the almost $2 million shortage in Federal money.

As we've said before, it is not the school committee's job to think exclusively about the budget picture, beyond being reasonable and fiscally responsible (which they have been); the school committee's job is to think about the students and to protect their interests. It is the job of the legislators and councilors to choose and fund priorities. And, it is the job of voters to communicate their priorities to the elected officials.

Monday, June 12, 2006

Extended Day RIP

Today's Sun reports that the state funded extended day program that would have lengthened the day at five Lowell schools next year (at the Commonwealth's expense) is dead. It's dead because the school department and the teachers' union could not reach an agreement on how it was to be implemented. In a time of tight budgets and near flat line MCAS scores, missing this opportunity to improve student learning borders on the tragic. Once again, it's all about the adults and not about the kids.

Saturday, June 10, 2006

New Bedford Says No Non-MCAS Diplomas

A month ago, the New Bedford School Committee made news by announcing it would award diplomas to New Bedford High School students who had met all of the district's graduation requirements except for passing the MCAS test. State education officials and our absentee governor reacted with outrage and threatened to withhold the more than $100 million in state aid that New Bedford receives annually for its schools. Understandably, the folks in New Bedford relented and something like 60 students who would otherwise be graduating will only receive certificates of attendance. The state finds it easy to hold individual students - undoubtedly ones who don't have a lot of effective advocates fighting for them - to the letter of the law on MCAS requirements, but all we ever hear about holding schools and entire districts accountable is a lot of bluster and empty threats. Has the state ever taken over a school? If it has, what's been the result? If the answer to the first question is yes, I suspect the answer to the second quetion is "The same result" because there's no magic formula and the sooner everyone jettisons the political rhetoric and seriously addresses the root causes of poor academic performance, the faster we'll see real improvement.

Thursday, June 08, 2006

Teacher salaries

I've been mulling over some arguments I heard on the radio yesterday. A caller seemed to think that Lowell teachers should not be highly paid because the average income in the city is $30,000 (this is according to the caller; some quick internet research indicates that it is actually $42,000, according to CNNMoney's 2005 profile. Wikipedia has census data from 2000 that shows a median income for households of $39,000 and for families of $46,000. As usual, pick your own statistics to back your argument.)

The point is: must teacher salaries reflect those of the community? (I might add that teachers are professionals. Would the caller want his doctor's salary to be commensurate with that of his neighbors?) Ed Reform increased state aid to cities and towns in an attempt to level the playing field, so that children from poorer communities would have a chance at the same quality education that their peers in other towns receive.

If we don't believe in the ideals of Ed Reform, then let's say so, but let's not take it out on teachers. I think our students need and deserve the same quality teachers that children in Acton and Chelmsford have. The fact that Lowell can now compete for the best teachers is a cause for celebration. In any case, the Lowell taxpayer is certainly not footing the bill for the increased school budget since 1993, and again, that was the whole point of Ed Reform.

Thursday, June 01, 2006

School budget, the continuing saga

Well, I missed the public hearing last night due to a schedule conflict, but from what I've heard the School Committee is asking for an increase of $3.5 million over last year. On a budget of $128 million that is a little less than 3%. While this does not begin to restore the programs and services that were lost in 2003, it does cover the fixed cost increases for this year of $2.5 million along with $490,000 to make essential improvements to Special Education services (without this money the district will be out of compliance with Special Education regulations which will cost more money in out-of-district placements and transportation). In addition, every principal has been asked to make sacrifices at the school level to try to absorb some of the lost federal funding, making the budget even leaner.

The mayor indicated that he would support this budget, as long as the Senate number comes in at at least $3 million. Need I say more? Please call to voice your support for the Senate proposal!