Enhancement millage lacks plan to make schools stronger in long run
There are not many issues that people are more passionate about than public education, and without question, our schools are at risk.
The way we fund schools in Michigan is broken, and although this is a statewide problem, Lansing has failed to fix it.
Thus, we see smaller, struggling districts like Ypsilanti and Willow Run tumbling into insolvency, and more affluent communities with stellar schools, such as Ann Arbor and Saline, being battered by a storm of funding cuts that will only get more severe.
|
Related Stories • District spending a hot topic in Washtenaw County enhancement millage debate
|
The answer, local school districts hope, is a request on the Nov. 3 ballot for a countywide school enhancement millage that would generate $30 million a year over the next five years.
But this request, rather than galvanizing the community around our schools, has divided people, and even advocates acknowledge a big tax increase is a tough sell.
This much we all should be able to agree on: Quality education is essential to our future, and given the high level of student achievement in many of our local districts, it would be tragic to let our schools deteriorate into something mediocre or worse.
Given what’s at stake, we wish we could join those who support this ballot proposal, but we can’t endorse it in its current form. We think it asks too much money for too many years, without an accompanying plan for structural changes needed to make our schools stronger, more efficient and more successful in the long run.
This is, ultimately, not a “enhancement’’ millage. It’s a status quo millage that would help shelter districts from the funding cuts that are buffeting them.
We see why that is attractive to millage supporters at a time when a district like Ann Arbor projects that it could lose more than $16 million in funding over this school year and next.
We don’t want to see the financial rug pulled out from under our schools. And we understand that it’s going to take more than a year or two for schools to transform themselves into 21st Century educational institutions that can thrive in the economic realities that all industries face today.
A more modest request, over a shorter period, would be a reasonable way to help schools through a transition that they need to make.
But that’s not what’s on the ballot. Instead, taxpayers are being asked for a hefty millage increase that seems more aimed at propping local districts up in their current form.
This request for another 2 mills - which would add $250 a year to the tax bill of someone who owns a $250,000 home - is more than many Washtenaw County residents can afford in these hard economic times.
Ann Arbor, in particular, has a history of strong support for schools, and there may be enough votes in the city to carry this proposal, regardless of how the vote goes elsewhere across the county.
If so, schools will be spared the brunt of the budget trauma that’s coming otherwise. But they also may be spared hard decisions on such issues as pension and health care costs, or a hard look at levels of spending not going directly to instruction, or a healthy examination of districts elsewhere that are getting good results at lower spending levels, or the urgency of finding more savings by consolidating services.
This millage request would help public schools to get by for another five years - only, we suspect, to find themselves back in the same predicament when the millage money runs out. That’s a steep price to ask of taxpayers for what feels like a short-term solution at best.
(Editor’s note: This editorial was published in today's newspaper and reflects the opinion of the AnnArbor.com Editorial Board. Albert Berriz, a community member who joined on our Editorial Board in September, has become a vocal opponent of the school enhancement millage, and agreed last week to resign from our board. He was not involved in our deliberations on this issue.)
Comments
Mr. Underhill
Sat, Oct 31, 2009 : 5:58 a.m.
"... we cant endorse it in its current form. We think it asks too much money for too many years, without an accompanying plan for structural changes needed to make our schools stronger, more efficient and more successful in the long run. This is, ultimately, not a enhancement millage. Its a status quo millage that would help shelter districts from the funding cuts that are buffeting them." I find this reasoning maddening. With regard to structural changes, rather than oppose the millage, you and all of Michigan's opinion leaders should endorse efforts in Lansing like Speaker Andy Dillon's plan to pool public school employees' health insurance and the Business Leaders for Michigan recommendations to consolidate local government and school services and to convert Michigan's tax structure into one that is more aligned with a shift toward a services-based economy. To suggest this is not an enhancement because it will only keep the status quo is trivial. Ann Arbor has three schools that won 2009 medals from US News and World Report and School Evaluation Services. Most Washtenaw County schools routinely perform well on the Michigan School Report Card. Most importantly, Ann Arbor and Washtenaw County continue to be highly attractive areas in the state to locate due, in no small part, to the schools. As with any money I invest, I want positive results. I would say, by any measure, the Ann Arbor schools have produced and the status quo is very much worth supporting. Finally, a response to one of the claims from the Citizens for Responsible School Spending. The first bullet point on their home page says that the intermediate district millage is an attempt to circumvent Proposal A. This is patently false. The ability to raise up to 3 operational mills for the intermediate district was part of Proposal A when it passed (MCL 380.1211c).
localyolk
Thu, Oct 29, 2009 : 8:43 a.m.
Is it true that Mr. Satchwell, the President of the Teachers' Union, is barely voting for the millage? (see post--"I'm almost to the point of believing that we deserve everything we won't get if the millage fails.") This seems like proof enough that the millage is not what we need to get the job done to improve our schools. As if we needed more reason to vote no.
Jimmy Olsen
Mon, Oct 26, 2009 : 6:57 p.m.
Thank you Jason, those are very good ideas. I'll add some health care ideas. Health Savings Accounts attached to a high deductible plan. The plans cover preventative services, etc. You can add money to your account to cover up to the deductible based on family, single, etc. The money in the account is yours to keep, just like an IRA. These plans make you think about how you are spending your health care dollars. All plans should carry premium sharing. Any young professional should jump on an HSA. The districts need health care reform - not the same old high cost plans from MESSA. MESSA prides itself on service - they should be offering consumer driven products. The 401k option for new hires should also be mandatory. How about contract language that spells out a formula for year-end bonus (or not). If everyone is efficient and the funding stays good - everyone could enjoy something at the end. If the MEA turned its resources on Lansing, instead of pounding individual districts every year I think the change could come, but until the MEA leadership stops takings 300K plus salaries from their members, I guess the status quo works.
Jason
Mon, Oct 26, 2009 : 3:15 p.m.
In response to "Your repetition of the "waste, fraud and abuse" mantra, with no specifics, and total disregard for employee rights, adds nothing useful to the debate." Here are some specifics that I require before voting for an increased millage: - Elimination of union's tenure based system in favor of pay for performance (as determined by test scores, student feedback, parental feedback, and administration feedback). Too many quality teachers lose their jobs or can't get jobs because ineffective tenured teachers have first dibs on jobs. -Eliminate the high barrier to entry to becoming a teacher. Teach for America provides a great example of how effective this idea can be. -Differentiated pay - Math and Science teachers should be paid more as there is a bigger need. Again the tenured system makes no sense, in the business world if there is a shortage of a particular skill set, wages rise thus attracting more people to learn that particular skill set. The same should go for teaching. I have nothing against earning a "decent" wage as long as it is indeed earned. There are too many teachers simply getting a decent wage and not enough getting paid what they earn. I look forward to any responses and engaging in a useful debate.
Tony Dearing
Mon, Oct 26, 2009 : 7:59 a.m.
Ann Arbor City Council did have some discussion about a possible city income tax, but decided not to put the issue on the November ballot. However, the city government and city schools are two completely separate entities, and they don't share revenue. An income tax could support city government, but it wouldn't benefit the schools. For more about the city income tax proposal, see this story: http://www.annarbor.com/news/government/city-income-tax-proposal-not-likely-to-come-before-ann-arbor-voters-this-fall/
peihaha
Sun, Oct 25, 2009 : 10 p.m.
Please educate me why Ann Arbor city can not charge the city income tax to those workers who come to Ann Arbor every day to work using our streets, lights, facility, etc.? Won't the city income tax also help with the school district somehow?
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Sun, Oct 25, 2009 : 1:47 p.m.
If the Ann Arbor Public School's 5 Year Plan (like the rest of those in the county) does not address the #1 hindrance to achieving a quality education for children of all income levels would you think it was a good plan? 21-23% of Americans are not functionally literate because the public education system fails them. (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_the_United_States) "This government study showed that 21% to 23% of adult Americans were not 'able to locate information in text', could not 'make low-level inferences using printed materials', and were unable to 'integrate easily identifiable pieces of information.'" To me, this millage is an attempt to put band-aids on problems when the patient is dying. Leaving 21-23% of kids to fend for themselves in the modern economy without functional literacy is a horrific social justice issue and ultimately the whole society pays the cost! I wouldn't mind paying more in taxes if the system were structurally set up to produce optimum results. Even President Obama and the Secretary of Education have come out in support of eliminating the traditional summer vacation at schools (see http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_more_school) because it is now well documented that the long summer break is detrimental to the education of our youth. Talk to any teacher and you'll find out that they generally spend the first half of each school year reviewing what the students were taught the prior year. Malcolm Gladwell's current best-seller "Outliers: The Story of Success" has a chapter devoted to some of this research - it's an excellent read and I highly recommend it! His conclusion is that 100% of the achievement gap in school, based on income levels, is driven by the traditional school Summer vacation. So, what I'd like to know is WHY the leaders of our schools feel it is acceptable to go with the status quo rather than stepping up to the plate to fix the school year now that we know that it is the #1 cause that hinders childhood education? Why would the voters add more money to the system until the leaders of our schools present the voters with a solid strategic plan detailing what resources it will take to fix this fundamental problem and the political will to implement these changes? Imagine how great our schools and MEAP scores would be if we were among the first to bite the bullet and step up to fix this problem? Imagine the positive impact on attracting jobs to our community and increases in home values if we had the strongest K-12 schools in the region on top of some of the best public universities? P.S. The "AAPS 5 Year Plan" states at the bottom of page 1, "We will make all decisions and take all actions based strictly on the best interests of the student."
Tom Wieder
Sun, Oct 25, 2009 : 1:23 p.m.
Plubius says: "The waste in our schools is rampant - with proper management, elimination of the union, and other changes, costs could be dramatically cut while quality is significantly increased." It's so easy to say that better management will lead to great savings and better results, but where are the specifics? What do you consider to be all the waste, what cuts would you make? Oh, I forgot, you do make one suggestion - "elimination fo the union." I assume that you mean the teachers union (there are others). Never mind that teachers, like all employees, have a legal right to form a union. Never mind that teachers, unlike employees in the private sector, are not allowed to strike, so teachers unions aren't really all that powerful. I don't deny that there are inefficiencies and waste in the schools; there are in every large institution. Your repetition of the "waste, fraud and abuse" mantra, with no specifics, and total disregard for employee rights, adds nothing useful to the debate.
Brit Satchwell
Sun, Oct 25, 2009 : 11:30 a.m.
KLMClark, Thanks for posting with your name. Too few people do. I guess it's all about how you read the plan, and I hope others will click the link you provided. If you are predisposed to the opinion that the schools are not operating efficiently, then you may well read their plans for current and future efficiencies as waste. If you are looking only for raw dollars that have or will be cut (ie, only half of the "bang for the buck" equation that equals true efficiency) then you will see no efficiency. The delivery of instruction and services is the other half of that equation, amply described in the plan. In terms of just cost reductions and containment, I would like to point you and other readers to the nearly $20 million cut over the last five years... part of the ongoing plan. The past is hard to miss unless you want to. It can can be found in the district's audited annual statements and the presentations the district has been making in public all over town, both this year and last. If you do not want to absorb and weigh those additional details, then use the restructuring of the middle schools two years ago as a prime example among many others... it's sole purpose was to cut $2.3 million... mission accomplished. In that cut alone, financial "efficiency" led to educational inefficiency. Let's keep our eyes on the purpose of education as we discuss the dollars. This is a good time to ask those who are decrying the lack of a plan they choose to ignore... What is your plan other than NO and LESS? NO is not a plan. LESS is less, not more. Our students are not financial abstractions despite this debate's obsession on dollars at the expense of other considerations. Students don't get "do over" years no matter how much the adults argue about dollars. I hope that they will get more than you and others would deny them next year and well beyond.
KJMClark
Sun, Oct 25, 2009 : 10:22 a.m.
"I would like to refer everyone to Ann Arbor Public School's 5 Year Strategic Plan, now several successful years into its implementation. Please read it and pay attention to its focus on efficiency and cost containment." I found the plan at http://www.aaps.k12.mi.us/aaps.about/files/stategicplan.pdf. None of the objectives involve efficiency or cost containment. None of the strategies involve efficiency or cost containment. The last of the strategies is "We will ensure resources adequate to accomplish our mission and objectives." In the "Action Plan Overview", there is little about efficiency and nothing about cost containment, though they do have, "Renewal of key millages and passage of an enhancement millage.", "Leverage resources and technology so that the AAPS can make optimal use of its resources to achieve its goals.", and "Commit staff and resources to lobby more effectively at the state level." I agree that "leveraging resources to make optimal use of resources" could be read as a verbose way to say "be more efficient.", but it doesn't look, in context, to be what was meant. This really doesn't look like a strategic plan for hard times. It looks like a plan for expansion, written during a housing bubble, that did not envision the situation we're in. With the third round of cuts of state funds in two weeks, I'm more inclined to support the millage now, but let's not pretend the strategic plan is appropriate for the situation. The editorial is right. The millage is a desperate attempt to buy time to deal with current and future funding cuts. It would be a lot easier to support the millage if it came with a concrete plan to bring costs into line with reality. That strategic plan looks like a wistful dream now, not a serious plan for difficult times.
Brit Satchwell
Sun, Oct 25, 2009 : 9:22 a.m.
I would like to refer everyone to Ann Arbor Public School's 5 Year Strategic Plan, now several successful years into its implementation. Please read it and pay attention to its focus on efficiency and cost containment. While I do not agree with every part of that plan - public input was and is invited - it is blatant nonsense to imply that AAPS has no plan. It is nonsense to the second degree when such ignorance leads to the conclusion that because some people don't know of the plan, it must therefore not exist. That ignorance then exponentiates to the third degree when it leads to the crippling of the very plan whose existence they just denied in their so-called desire for that plan. Perhaps the truth is that they do not agree with the plan, so they deny its existence as an excuse to cripple it closer to THEIR plan? I am seeing a lot of correlation between being a barber and an educator these days... there will always be more hair AND more ignorance to cut. Cutting the schools further, after five consecutive years of huge cuts, won't cut the ignorance. As an educator, I have my work cut out for me. I'm almost to the point of believing that we deserve everything we won't get if the millage fails. But not quite... I'm voting YES on the millage.
Plubius
Sun, Oct 25, 2009 : 8:25 a.m.
K Thompson - you are so wrong! Money does not equal education. The waste in our schools is rampant - with proper management, elimination of the union, and other changes, costs could be dramatically cut while quality is significantly increased. This editorial is spot on - no more money until a real plan is provided.
K Thompson
Sun, Oct 25, 2009 : 7:31 a.m.
"This much we all should be able to agree on: Quality education is essential to our future, and given the high level of student achievement in many of our local districts, it would be tragic to let our schools deteriorate into something mediocre or worse." You get what you pay for. Quality schools cost money, and now just running schools cost money. You either want public education or you don't. Americans say they want quality, and complain our economy, as they head to Walmart for bargains from China in cars and most manufactured items that come from out of U.S. Connect the dots, people.