Skip to main content

President's Corner

Go Search
Home
President's Corner
UNISERV Views
Member Blog
Minutes
Politics
ROEA Scholarship
Links
About Us
  

Other Blogs
There are no items in this list.
The Royal Oak Education Association > President's Corner
 
Perspectives on our profession,
Arguments for quality education. . . .
 
From Sid Kardon, ROEA President
  
Duncan Should Rescind Praise for Fired Teachers

March 8th, 2010

 

Arne Duncan, Secretary of Education

U.S. Department of Education

400 Maryland Avenue, SW

Washington, DC  20202

 

Dear Secretary Duncan:

 

As a member of the National Education Association, I was taken aback by your support of Central Falls Superintendent Frances Gallo who recently fired 93 public school teachers.  The summary termination of 93 individuals without due process rights is anathema to the American justice system and its reverence for individual rights.  The Superintendent’s actions were illogical as well as untenable.  Surely there must be one good, if not great, teacher amongst the ninety-three.  Yet, in the current and fashionable zeal to convert true public schools to privately run charter schools, the merits of any individual teacher are rendered meaningless in what passes as educational policy- the unnecessary firing of teachers and other public employees who are now unprotected under Race To The Top from the vicissitudes of an administrator’s decree. 

 

Ultimately, poor educational performance most often bespeaks poorly funded education.  As such, the mass termination of teachers (by a superintendent who blithely removes herself from responsibility for the underperformance of Central Falls High School), merely masks an underfunded and unequally funded public school system.

 

I am asking that you publicly rescind your support of the arbitrary firing of 93 dedicated educators.

 

Sincerely,

 

 

Sidney Kardon, President, Royal Oak Education Association

To Be Fair to All Schools, Dismantle Proposal A:  Oakland Press Editorial, 4 Nov. 2009
An Oakland Press editorial advised caution before making changes in Proposal A, the primary tax mechanism for generating school revenue.

However, Proposal A has resulted in an underfunded public school system that has been particularly devastating to poorer and inner city districts such as Pontiac.

The reason that Proposal A has resulted in underfunded schools is simple: Proposal A was never meant to help schools; it was designed to reduce taxes. The reason that it underfunds poorer districts is that despite pronouncements by then-Gov. John Engler that Proposal A would equalize funding, the distribution of funding was based on the existing property tax structure, which meant that wealthier districts with a higher property tax base would get a larger per-pupil stipend from the state.

As a result, Pontiac receives $7,491 per pupil, neighboring Bloomfield Hills get $12,443 per pupil. And just as Proposal A’s impact was disproportionately harsh to poorer districts, its implementation was disproportionately benign to wealthier property owners.

Commensurate with Proposal A was Schools of Choice legislation, which allowed students to attend school in another district, taking their Proposal A money with them.

With even less money to utilize for student programs, the deterioration of districts such as Pontiac with poorer students continues unabated.

Proposal A’s damage refused to be contained by race and impoverishment. The better-funded districts began to take money out of their operating budgets in a deliberate decision to put less money into a student’s education and more money into the district’s bank account.

The reason was twofold. First, districts developed an unfounded fear that the state would not pay them their allotment (unfounded because this has never happened) and they would need to have funds available for this contingency. These unused funds have grown to $2 billion statewide and more than $250 million countywide as of June, 2008.

Second, districts are prohibited under Proposal A from improving educational programs with local funds. If local citizens wish to assess their property at a higher rate to benefit their students and community, they are legally enjoined from doing so under Proposal A.

Unfortunately for Michigan students, Proposal A is working as it was intended to. Sold to the public as a mechanism to reduce funding disparity, in combination with schools of choice it has lead to more economic and race-based disparity in educational funding.

Lower operating budgets, artificially created by transferring money into district investments, have been used as a rationale to privatize services. This has eroded the community-based nature of public schools and has harmed local economies and families.

Underfunded districts such as Pontiac are heading into restructuring, a euphemism for the transfer of public tax dollars to private for-profit educational corporations.

The legislature must fund schools based on generating enough revenue to meet the needs of students. Not only do we need Proposal A dismantled; the anti-public weal philosophy that led to its creation must be dismantled as well.

 ‭(Hidden)‬ Admin Links