At issue is the Jefferson School Board's latest decision with respect to allocation of surplus budget funds that have arisen due to a less than ideal projection approach. That approach is one conveying impending gloom & doom as the district repeatedly portrays a deficit or dismal situation when considering budget adoption, yet every year for the past nine years additional surplus funds miraculously appear, adding to the bottom line ending balance of the general fund – almost all of which is unrestricted. The reason for this discrepancy is the district's refusal to realistically project the level of growth that should be obvious to anyone looking around and seeing the enormity of the amount of housing construction occurring within our district.
One remark contained in an otherwise lucid and well-written letter to the editor published Wednesday in response to my wife, Anne's letter of Monday states that no one wished for a pony. While this is true, some wishes may as well have included pony stables, as wish lists included items such as paving parking lots and other such facilities based needs that I argued should not be funded from the general fund, as it is the only source that can be used to fund educational programs. Meanwhile, the fund designated for facilities, with a current balance of millions of dollars over and above that of the general fund is being preserved for future needs. What of the educational needs of today's students? Apparently the standardized test scores are good enough – heck, they're the among the best of any non-charter public schools in the entire area – so, why bother with offering a more well rounded education – despite that being the wish of a large number of district residents.
Which brings us to one of the primary points raised in the letter by my wife. It was the electorate that voted the trustees into office, not the administration and staff, and as such, the board should give large consideration to the wishes of that electorate. However, because few of the district residents show up at the board meetings to voice their opinions/concerns, their wishes are for the most part ignored. Take for example the 550 signatures that reside on a petition for the restoration of the primary music program on the musicforjefferson.org web site. This program consisted of a dedicated music instructor who traveled from classroom to classroom and from school to school providing less than an hour per week of music instruction to students in grades K-3. Also present on the web site are numerous citings of research clearly indicating the academic virtue and advantage of a well-rounded education that includes primary music instruction. The reason given for the discontinuation of funding this program was budget constraints. However – after further review – such constraints were fictitious, as the surplus exceeded any and all constraint levels projected. Once these constraints turned out to be non-existent, if the board were truly representing its constituency, the cut programs should have been re-instated immediately. Instead, much of the surplus was stashed away and accounting techniques were used that concealed its existence.
Another point raised by the response letters was the validity of fund allocation for math and Dyslexia intervention programs. When allocating funds, those programs that directly affect the largest number of students should be among the priorities. With regard to math intervention, a re-visit to our test scores shows that over 80% of our students already perform satisfactorily, with over 50% performing above that level. According to the scant objective statistical information offered regarding the Dyslexia Intervention program, less than 20 students (or <1% of district enrollment) would benefit. Restoration of the primary music program would affect 45.8% of district students, or nearly 1000 children. Furthermore, according to the abundant scientific research available, this program would have a positive impact on proficiency in mathematics, among its several other positives. There is little if any research suggesting the contrary.
I personally am in favor of limited funding for both intervention programs mentioned, however I am of the opinion that proportions of fund allocation should correlate to the proportion of students impacted by those programs funded.
My vote stood alone in dissent of passing the prioritizing decisions of surplus fund allocation to administration and staff of the individual sites and departments. By allowing the site and department administrators to prioritize their own lists, district-wide issues can lose out to site focused needs. Furthermore, oversight of ongoing expenditures versus one-time costs is impeded, possibly setting the district up for future problems funding such on-going costs.
Of particular note in the responses to my wife's letter is the level of personal attacks contained within those responses. Anne's letter referenced no names and dealt with issues and observations. Trustee Michelle Mercer's letter was filled with reaction and innuendo toward the personal character of both my wife and me, while containing very little fact. Apparently, Mrs. Mercer is more content with unity and pulling the cart in the same direction than in tolerating dissenting opinions, even if the cart might be headed in the wrong direction.
To suggest that I alone have been insulting is ludicrous to me, especially when several attendees of school board meetings have conveyed to me their observation of arrogant, demeaning and less than professional or tolerant behavior by other board members when an opinion other than their own is presented by either myself or by attendees. This behavior includes sighs and rolling eyes made by both Debbie [Scott-] Wingo and Mrs. Mercer. Furthermore Mrs. Wingo has emphatically referred to the musicforjefferson.org site as a joke. It's quite sad that Mrs. Wingo apparently finds the will of her constituency funny.
It is true that I have been argumentative. I have attempted a more amicable approach, but it has yielded no better results. I have put forth ideas and suggestions including restoration of the unwarranted discontinuation of educational programs, more accurate and timely budget projections, and pursuing grant funding including that ultimately provided by the Tracy Peaker Plant and PG&E for our safer & cleaner school busses. In an attempt to advance the use of technology, I have offered my company's donation of development and hosting of web sites for the district and each of the schools, not to mention web sites donated to the Parents' Clubs. The district instead offered to pay a consultant several thousand dollars for a web site that was far inferior to those which my business has ultimately provided free of charge. I have suggested additional uses for the web sites to include individual teacher homework pages, a feedback form to enhance the ability of collecting community input, and web casts of the school board meetings to allow additional participation and community involvement with the decision making process. I have also offered to have my company develop the ability of district parents to pay online into their children's lunch accounts, and have again offered that development to the district at no cost. Instead, the district is looking to spend $25,000 or more to upgrade existing software to accomplish this feature. I am at a loss to perceive how such a decision is in the best interests of the district – especially when development provided by my company to date is far superior in quality of design, presentation, usability and performance than that for which was/is to be paid.
I have continually urged the current board members to open their minds and allow and consider thought processes that are innovative, out-of-the-box and other than their own, and to represent those who voted for them to serve as trustees, but as yet have been unable to convince them of the benefits of such an approach. Fortunately, there will be an election for two of the board seats this November, and the candidates campaigning to replace the sitting members are progressive, free thinkers not prohibitively bound to tradition, or merely fitting in. Check out your options at the public school board candidates' forum offered by the Tracy Press and occurring next Monday, October 4 at 7 p.m. at Poet Christian School.