Children & Educators First

We often talk of charter versus public.  We’ve never even once talked about new charter schools wiping out existing charter schools.   It would be one thing if the new charter conglomerate were to do so, with the expense of loan repayments at least evening out the playing field for the small school competing with it.  But to give the big megalithic charter a free building, free start up costs, all out of taxpayers dollars when there are banks lined up to loan money,… is simply unfair.
The referee (Markell, Rodel, DOE, charter lobbyists, Jacques) in the match, is blowing the whistle for only one side…
This though unfair, happens a lot in government.  Quite often laws are put in place by who you know, and how much you get for your vote.  The only way justice gets done, is when those with a backbone of courage, step up and say “no”…
9 did in the House and 31 didn’t.  But we know far less about the damage this bill would do then, than we do now.
It is a terrible state of affairs when a legislator will give a corporate megalith the  unfair advantage  over a religious or non-profit organization.  It is sickening … really.

FITNESS CENTERS COMING TO 3 DELAWARE SCHOOLS

The gyms will be different for each school. At Bancroft, students will have traditional cardio equipment but also Nintendo Wiis and “Dance Dance Revolution” consoles, video games where students move their bodies to play. At A.I and McCullough, the gyms will include cardio machines, such as stationary bikes, and weightlifting equipment.
To earn the gyms, schools had to submit applications to the foundations detailing their fitness and nutrition efforts. A panel then determined which campuses should receive the gyms.
The group rewards schools in four states every year, putting gyms in three schools in each state.    More here: www.delawareonline.com/article/20130616/NEWS/306160028/Fitness-centers-coming-3-Delaware-schools

What will be the legacies of the Markell administration in Delaware?

Wow, there are so many to choose from:

The tax dollars invested squandered on Fisker and Bloom Energy.

The new hospital to be built after Markell did not like the decision of the regulatory board and simply replaced it with new toadies who would do what he wanted.

The "not a public body" charter school work group that created HB 165 (with Pistol Pete Schwarzkopf following instructions to the letter and not even allowing comment on the illegalities during legislative debate).

Race to the Top and all the massive advances in Delaware public education, especially for children in Wilmington.  Not.

Removing SROs from the budget while simultaneously ballooning the budget of the Office of the Secretary of Safety and Homeland Security.

Never proposing a raise for state employees.

$80 million of last-minute regressive taxes proposed in the last three weeks of a General Assembly session after cutting taxes on the wealthy a few months earlier.

I'm sure you have your favorite Markell moment that I've omitted (there have been so many). http://delawarelibertarian.blogspot.com/2013/06/governor-markell-creates-private.html

Democratic caucus?  There's a real laugher these days.

Meanwhile, Governor Markell's secret work group on excess puppies has reported (and his private council has agreed) that it would improve his chances of becoming US Secretary of Education to be seen executing strays on WDDE. 
http://delawarelibertarian.blogspot.com/2013/06/governor-markell-creates-private.html

Everyone is tired, myself included, so briefly here it goes….
A)  We learned we are right.  You say “How?  We lost”.  Yes for now, but we now erase the doubt we might have had that we couldn’t make any difference. We did. We did not lose 21 to 0 as we did in the Senate on SB 51. We gained 6 converts in the House since SB 51 passed there   There is  far more fired up opposition than before… Here is what is important. Everyone… whether its been on blogs, through emails, or one on ones, whom we’ve engaged has come around to our way of thinking.   The other side knows this. That’s the reason for the rush, That’s the reason for the secrecy. That’s the reason there was no debate on any education bill, until we parents pushed it!..  Bottom line is we are gaining numbers; they are losing numbers.  Something of which we should all be extremely proud!

Based on the information you provided and our review, the Working Group may be a “public body” within the meaning of FOIA.  29 Del. C. § 10002.  If that is the case, the Working Group was (and, if still active, remains) subject to the “open meeting” provisions of the Act.  See generally 29 Del. C. § 10004.  Thus, any prior meetings conducted without adequate public notice or compliance with other open meeting requirements may have been held in violation of the Act.  We note however that, as a practical matter, there may be no effective way to remediate any such violations.  According to your email below, the Working Group has already made its recommendation to legislators.  http://transparentchristina.wordpress.com/2013/06/10/hb-165-foia-bomb-rep-williams-gets-her-foia-answer-rep-jaques-d-rodel-are-you-paying-attention-rep-darryl-scott-d-rodel-what-do-you-think-of-them-apples-netde/

My message, Earl, is that as these reforms are brought forth in Dover, as attempts are made to even the playing field between charters and traditional public schools, safeguards must remain in place.  I implore you to reconsider some of the legislation as proposed and provide amendments to protect education funding:

1. Any new streams of funding or methods of obtaining capital funding should be restricted to charters that own their own facilities or lease facilities that are state or school district owned.   This will compel charters that are establishing themselves or growing to consider the state's excess property list for their facility plans.  It will ultimately help address a growing problem:  a future glut of under-populated district school buildings by encouraging districts and charters to work together to serve the same student populations.  You see, as more students leave traditional schools, we are creating capacity in these buildings, yet our operation costs will not decrease.  It will cost the same to operate a building with 500 students as it will to operate that same school with 300 students. The facility operational needs will not change - water, electricity, sewer, those will remain the same.  But, the funds won't be there b/c they will follow the 200 who have left for charter.

In reality, if CSD were to close a traditional high school today, we would have capacity to serve the affected students in our other two high schools.  Reality. The flip side - CSD will never be permitted to close a neighborhood school - our neighborhood schools are the result of a failed attempt to close schools in the City of Wilmington under Lillian Lowery's leadership years ago.  Lowery went to court and lost. This legal precedent will hurt any traditional school district that attempts to close a school regardless of the population serve.

It is these future considerations that need to be addressed along with parity for charter funding in today's legislation.  And I am sad that I don't see this happening. We simply cannot afford to paralyze districts in order to create parity w/o safeguards. 

2. Somewhere in the glut of bills and amendments, there must be a transparency bill.  It is paramount that all schools adopt transparency and accountability best practices - this means recording their school board/board of directors meetings and making that content available on their websites.  If a slush fund is to be established, let it be required that a charter must first utilize funds from this new pot to establish these absolute best practices before it can tap these funds for other expenses/projects. 

In the absence of this best practice - are you willing to attend every charter board meeting of every charter board that wishes to utilize these funds and provide a report back to your constituents on a consistent basis regarding the fund usage?  I'll hazard to guess that you haven't the time.  Nor do the majority of your constituents - myself included.  There is a bridge to overcoming this capacity gap - mandatory recordings and publication.  And this new fund now provides charters with access to new funding to achieve this safeguard.

In closing, I sincerely hope that you will consider my email, my thoughts as a parent in two different worlds, both designed to prepare my children for a successful future. You sir are charged with a very precarious task - balancing the needs of students with the demands of the tax payers. Find the balance, re-establish the safeguards.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth Scheinberg
tax payer

 -----Original Message-----
From: Jaques, Jr, Earl (LegHall), Earl (LegHall) <Earl.Jaques@state.de.us>
To: montagnebeau <montagnebeau@aol.com>
Sent: Thu, Jun 6, 2013 10:18 am
Subject: RE: Charter Thoughts

Elizabeth,

First the fund you are referring to is not a "slush" fund.  If you attended yesterday's public meeting you would know that it is not used for capital projects.  It is connected to the Charter Performance framework, which will ensure that is used for education issues for either high-performing or high-need students. The money allocated came from the last budget numbers - NOT from the Department of Education.  So this isn't a case of taking money away from our public schools.  In fact, the number one priority, according to the testimony from the School Superintendents to the Joint Finance Committee was money for technology.  That money is in the budget!  The Charter's number one priority was money for this Strategic Performance Fund, which again the Joint Finance Committee granted and is in the budget based on whether the legislation passes.  Since it doesn't apply, I shouldn't comment.  However, the points you make in the first few paragraphs are done each and every year for our Colleges and Universities.  We give them capital money and we don't own the buildings.  If you took the time to read House Bill 165 you would see loads of transparency and accountability throughout.  I hope you are not listen to the nay Sayers who just like to yell at the top of their voice, but most of the time don't know what they are talking about!   HB 165 has been properly vetted and has loads of support throughout the education community.

                                                            Earl

Earl,

I'm surprised by your tone.  I spoke generally of charter reform and the longitudinal impact that necessitates thoughtful approach.  I did not cite any bill by number, but did reference the slush fund.  I'm pleased that you noted my absence from yesterday's hearing.  As a legislator whose district encompasses parts of CSD, I am certain that you are reticent that you have missed all three comprehensive CSD graduations.  While the hearing was being conducted in Dover, I was caring for my severely disabled daughter while preparing for my third graduation ceremony of the week - Christiana High School.  Let me use this opportunity to invite you to the remaining graduations: 

Delaware Autism Program today at 4 pm, Kirk Middle School
Delaware School for the Deaf today at 7 pm, DSD on Rt 4
Groves Adult High School Graduation, Friday at 7:30 pm at Glasgow High School

I will share that is relief to hear that this is new-found funding. I do wonder of course, how do we sustain one-time new-found funding in subsequent years? However, I am relieved to hear that you will be advocating across the board for the restoration of funds previously hi-jacked by our Gov and re-allocated to our General Fund by our legislators.

Specifically to HB 165, the well-vetted bill, the following clause concerns me greatly:

(m) The Department of Education shall administer a performance fund for charter schools, to be known as the “Charter School Performance Fund”.  The Department of Education shall establish threshold eligibility requirements for applicants desiring to apply for funding, which shall include but not be limited to a proven track record of success, as measured by a Performance Framework established by the charter school’s authorizer or comparable measures as defined by the Department. The Department of Education shall also establish criteria to evaluate applications for funding, which shall include but not be limited to the availability of supplemental funding from non-State sources at a ratio to be determined by the Department.  The Department of Education shall prioritize those applications from applicants that have (a) developed high-quality plans for start-up or expansion or (b) serve high-need students, as defined by the Department.  The fund shall be subject to appropriation and shall not exceed $5 million annually.

The statement is a generality at best. It does not provide clarity around what can or cannot be funded, nor offer any precision of the eligibility of schools.  If applicants must have a proven track record of success, then the bill precludes any new or young schools from eligibility.  "Measures as defined by the Department" is very obscure, as is the "availability of supplemental funding from non-State sources."  Nor does this bill define a "high quality plan for start-up or expansion." 

I don't see the accountability or transparency pertaining to these funds.  The fact is that plans are wonderful things, they provide direction.  But, if the leadership is incompetent, and we often don't know that until the plans begin to fall apart, then the plan is just a piece a paper. 

For me, this portion of the bill is simply too weak, too easy to take advantage of, and too susceptible to political persuasion.

And I no, I don't tend to listen to the nay-sayers.  If anything, I'm in the political middle where charters are concerned.  However, that does not mean that I will abdicate my responsibilities as an education advocate.

I'm just saddened that you don't seem to value my contributions.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth

“If we had the funding level we had in 2008, these cuts would not be necessary. Period,” Ackerman said. “If I were sitting where you are, I’d be very angry about what the state is spending money on right now.”

William D. Budinger

Founding Director, The Rodel Foundations
Bill Budinger is an inventor and the holder of more than three dozen patents. He is also the founder of Rodel, Inc., where he served for 33 years as its CEO and Chairman. Bill has served on the boards of other companies as well as community and cultural organizations. He has been honored as the SBA Small Business Person of the Year, the Eastern Technology Council’s Legendary CEO, and was awarded the Henry Crown Leadership Award. Bill serves on several corporate and nonprofit boards, including the Aspen Institute. He was an elected delegate and chair of the White House Conference on Small Business, a panelist for Mikhail Gorbachev’s first State of the World Forum, and has been a guest lecturer at several universities including MIT and Harvard. His writings have appeared in various law journals as well as trade and public policy magazines. He drafted part of the 1998 patent reform legislation and has testified on patent, trade, and labor law reform before several committees of the U.S. House and Senate. Most of Bill’s time is spent helping the Rodel Foundations [link to FAQs page] in their mission to improve public education.

William (Bill) D. Budinger

Bill Budinger is the founder of Rodel, Inc., where he served for 33 years as its chairman and chief executive officer. Bill is an inventor and holder of more than three dozen patents including key processing technologies that enabled the return of semiconductor manufacturing to the U.S. in the 1990s. Rodel is currently the global leader in high-precision planarization technology for semiconductors, silicon wafers and storage media substrates.
Bill is also a founder of the Rodel Foundations. He continues to serve on various non-profit boards including the several Rodel Foundations, the Grand Canyon Trust, the Aspen Institute Executive Committee (where he chairs both the Seminars and Socrates Programs), Third Way and the Brookings Institute Governance Studies. Bill served as a founding trustee for the Democratic Leadership Council, the Democracy Alliance, and as a board member of Third Way, the Progressive Policy Institute and is a mentor to The Truman Project.
Bill served as a panelist on Talk of the Nation and as a guest lecturer at several universities including MIT and Harvard. His writings have appeared in various law journals as well as trade and public policy magazines. He drafted much of the 1998 patent reform law and has testified on patent, trade and labor law reform before various committees of the House and Senate.
Bill has won numerous awards including Legendary CEO and the Henry Crown Leadership award. Bill also founded and chairs the Aspen Institute’s Rodel Fellowships in Public Leadership which provides two year fellowships for top-level Democratic and Republican state elected officials to help them transition from politicians to statesmen.
Most of Bill’s time now is spent on public policy issues and helping lead the Rodel Foundations in their mission to improve pre-K through grade 12 public education. The Rodel Foundation’s work in Delaware helped that state win the Federal Education Department’s Race to the Top competition.