An idea worth considering

It looks like Washington, DC, of all places, may be getting ready to implement a useful idea in regards to teacher retention:

D.C. Schools Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee is proposing a contract that would give mid-level teachers who are paid $62,000 yearly the opportunity to earn more than $100,000 -- but they would have to give up seniority and tenure rights, two union members familiar with the negotiations said yesterday.

Under the proposal, the school system would establish two pay tiers, red and green, said the union members, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the talks are confidential. Teachers in the red tier would receive traditional raises and would maintain tenure. Those who voluntarily go into the green tier would receive thousands of dollars in bonuses and raises, funded with foundation grants, for relinquishing tenure.

Teachers in the green tier would be reviewed yearly and would be allowed to continue in their jobs only if they passed an evaluation and boosted students' test scores, the union members said.

Rhee's idea is a breath of fresh air in an area that seems to have little movement over the last decade. The fact of the matter is that in order to truly be able to reinvigorate public schools, we have to find better ways to tie pay to teacher performance, and better ways to ensure that tenure does not stagnant the educational growth of our students. But the Teacher's Union, as always, stands in the way of common sense reforms designed to improve the classroom. Rhee's idea is a compromise that allows teachers to opt out of the current system if they desire, and gives teachers the opportunity to prove themselves and earn incentives.

This is exactly the kind of debate that we need here in our public schools. Unfortunately, in Anne Arundel County, we're not going to get to have that debate because Governor O'Malley appointed two Maxwell apologists to the Board of Education. And it's not like anybody is going to ask unregistered Democratic lobbyist Teresa Milio Berge her position on this proposed tenure reform during a retention election....

Puff Piece

The Sun today ran a pretty irritating puff piece about the new members to the Anne Arundel County Board of Education. Not irritating because a piece ran, but irritating because reporter Susan Gvozdas manged to go the entire article without actually calling unregistered Democratic lobbyist Teresa Milio Birge an unregistered Democratic lobbyist.

Sure Gvozdas talked about all of Birge's service as a Democratic committee staffer in Annapolis, serving as the lobbyist of the Maryland Municipal League, and her "part time as a government relations consultant and as special assistant to the director of state relations for the University System of Maryland" all without actually mentioning that Birge was working as a lobbyist.

Of course, what little things of substance that Birge talked about in the article are pretty irritating too:

Birge, 36, who has two children, said she hopes to use her background working with the House of Delegates' Appropriation Committee to help demystify the budget process for her constituents in West County. After watching the county executive and the superintendent battle over budget items, she wants to find a way to tone down the rhetoric and work together.

"That was very difficult for everyone," Birge said. "I would hope in the future we could avoid that."

Read as: "I am going to stand for the status quo and support whatever Superintendent Maxwell wants me to support. I would hope in the future we can tone down the rhetoric by having the County Council and County Executive roll over and die and do whatever the Superintendent asks."

As expected, it looks like the Sun will be in the bag for the retention of Birge and the continuation of this cockamamie "retention election" farce...

The Brian Griffiths Minute: 06-27-2008

Job Losses Highlight lack of Options

It's official: 80 jobs have been slashed from the Anne Arundel County Public School System:

Schools are starting to feel the pinch from this year's budget battle.

Eighty jobs - none of them teaching positions - were eliminated last week while the schools brace for another year without new science labs, kindergarten classrooms, playground equipment and other things officials said they badly need.

"It is severely going to impact how we help the media specialists and the children," said Linda Williams, head of the library department, which is losing 11 of 21 employees. "I'm still overwhelmed by all of this."

Now it's true that the positions eliminated are not the 150 teaching positions that Kevin Maxwell proposed be axed from the budget. But is there a clearer sign of financial mismanagement in the school system than this? In a nearly $1 billion budget, Kevin Maxwell and the majority of the Board of Education could not save 80 positions that have a positive impact on the education of our students. Is Maxwell and the Board saying that the high dollar bureaucratic jobs on Riva Road have a greater importance than jobs that directly impact the lives of students?

The problem with this, naturally, is the fact that parents, teachers, and taxpayers all still have no voice in this process. They do not get to cast a vote that will decide who will get the opportunity to vote on the School System Budget, voice their opinions on staffing, or hire the next superintendent. Instead of getting that choice in a competitive election, the voters will only decide if retread appointee Tricia Johnson and unregistered Democratic lobbyist Teresa Milio Birge stay on the job or not.

Sadly, we already know, through their appointment and selection by Governor O'Malley and his cronies on the School Board Nominating Commission, Johnson and Birge are going to do little more than uphold Maxwell's status quo and fail to make the tough decisions that are required in order to provide students with a high quality education. And that is of no benefit to our students, our school employees, or taxpayers.

O'Malley did appoint an Unregistered Democratic Lobbyist to the Board of Education

Yesterday, we talked about the fact that Governor O'Malley appointed an unregistered Democratic lobbyist to the Board of Education. And I got an email from Ms. Birge this morning confirming that very fact:

I'd like to introduce myself. I'm Teresa Milio Birge, and I'm the new District 32 appointee to the Board of Education. One of my friends recently put me on google alerts, and gave me a call this morning that I was the topic of your most recent blog. I thought I'd help you out and nip this in the bud for you. In 2005, after I gave birth to my second child, I stopped working. But I didn't want to lose touch with everyone I had known in my 10 years of nonpartisan work for and with the legislature. So, my mother, who at the time was a senior center director, knew that the Association of Senior Centers needed some help with the legislature. And I was bored. It was a perfect fit. We signed a $1500 yearly contract from July 1 2005 to June 30 2006 which we renewed through June 30 2007. I've been busier this year with my accounting work and knew that I would not be able to put in as many hours (charging them a ridiculously low rate of $25 an hour), so we agreed to just charge hourly. I haven't yet billed them for the year, but it will fall in far below the $1500 mark this year.

Would love it if you could clarify on your post. I even made sure when I forwarded my CV to the governor's office I explained this, because I certainly don't want anyone mistakenly assuming that I'm not registered when I should be.

If you have any questions, please call me or email me back - I'd be more than happy to answer them! My cell is [redacted].

Teresa Milio Birge

So, to recap, she is an unregistered Democratic Lobbyists, but falling within the guidelines of the ethics laws.

But man, does that message sound like backtracking or what? Between that and the comments made on the original post, the message I get from this is 1) I'm a lobbyist, but it's OK, an 2) God I don't want to make Governor O'Malley look bad.

Here's what we need to take from this. Whether or not any ethics laws were broken is really inconsequential to the larger problem. The problem is the fact that Governor O'Malley appointed an individual to represent District 32 who has spent the majority of her professional career as a Professional Lobbyist, either for the State of Maryland or for private companies such as this one. Birge has no professional experience with education issues, which of course flies in the face of the concept that this School Board Nominating Commission was going to give us qualified people to speak on issues surrounding education. And again, the Governor and the Commissioners he appointed tried to slip an unregistered Democratic lobbyist onto the Board of Education and hoped that nobody noticed.

Well, somebody did notice. And I don't find the Governor appointing Annapolis insiders to the Board of Education to be particularly humorous at all. We need people who are serious about Education. Not rubber stamps for the Governor's policies.

134 days until Election Day...

As Expected, the System Fails

Yesterday, Governor O'Malley reappointed Tricia Johnson and appointed Terese Milio Berge to the Anne Arundel County Board of Education, moving us further along the circle of failure that is the current School Board Nominating Commission Process.

Johnson and Berge bring nothing new to the Board of Education. Johnson, whom was appointed in 2003 when I was a candidate for the open seat, is the current President of the Board. Ostensibly a Republican (though her most recent political donations have all been to Democrats), Johnson has stood for little more than the status quo during her tenure on the Board. She has failed to stand up for common sense Republican ideas, has failed to stand up for fiscal responsibility and accountability, and has failed to move schools from its current state of stagnation. She's been nothing more than a rubber stamp for both Kevin Maxwell and Eric Smith before him. Tricia Johnson has proven that she is not an agent of change, and should not have been rewarded with a second term. Particularly when you consider this:

Mrs. Johnson said she didn't have any specific plans for her second term.

"I hope that I can serve the people of Anne Arundel County to the best of my ability," she said.

If she has no plans, why did O'Malley give her five more years?

The appointment of Berge is just as problematic. A Democrat, Berge's professional experience has surrounded working with the legislature on noticeably non-education issues. While she may be currently working as an accountant, her career seems to have had more professional dealings in state government and politics than anything related to schools. I see little in Berge's experience that makes her more qualified to represent District 32 than Sam Georgiou, former Chairman of the Citizens Advisory Council and a longtime advocate for public schools. Berge appears, on the outset, to be more of an Annapolis insider than somebody who is going to put common sense school reforms on their agenda. In fact, it seems like Berge is going to give a free ride to Kevin Maxwell if you believe her candidate statement:

I believe that a board member's proper role is that of policymaker, and an idea generator. I think that a board member needs to allow the Superintendent and his or her staff to do their job and make the administrative decisions that have been clearly delegated to them.

Which means that you are going to get more of the same from Berge: no legitimate oversight of the job that Kevin Maxwell is doing, and probably a continued acquiescence to Maxwell's desires on policy and budget without a vigorous watchdog role.

Now, we move on to the final phase. Voters will have to make what will likely be an uninformed decision on whether or not Johnson and Berge should serve the remainder of these five year terms. Instead of competitive elections, in which Johnson and Berge could be challenged on their ideas and vision, we will likely see these two members hand-picked by the O'Malley/Leopold Commission rubber stamped into office. And that is bad news for the people of Anne Arundel County. As I have said before, the people of Anne Arundel County have had this shell game foisted upon them by John Leopold and the General Assembly delegation. What is it going to take to prove the unfeasibility of such a system, and the need for these candidates to compete in competitive elections based on ideas?

True, an elected school board is not going to be the answer to all of our problems. And there is nothing to say that an elected school board is going to provide more qualified candidates than this cockamamie Nominating Commission will. But I certainly would put more faith in the choices of voters than I do the choices of individuals hand selected by Martin O'Malley and John Leopold.

I'm voting no. How many others will?

The Capital is for accountability?

A funny thing happened on the way to the forum. The Capital finally decided that somebody should be accountable for the school funding row:

Pity the poor parent in Anne Arundel County who is looking for someone - anyone - to lobby for more education funding. As our Sunday story illustrated, the county refers callers to the school system and the school system refers them to the county. Welcome to the budget merry-go-round....

....Who's in charge here? No one person, but an appointed school superintendent and an elected county executive - and that's the problem.

The local delegation would be wise to at least study the relationship between the school system - which spends our taxes - and county government, which raises our taxes.

That's funny. Because the same folks on the Capital editorial board who are in favor of holding somebody accountable for school system funding are the same people against allowing the Board of Education to be held accountable by being elected directly by our county voters.

So I have to ask this: why is accountability good in this sense, but not good in another?

It's Over.....for now

Well, the School Board Nominating Commission process is mercifully over for this year:

For the new District 32 seat, the commission chose candidates Teresa Milio Birge and Sam Georgiou. For the at-large seat, they chose Walter Chitwood, Kevin Jackson, Evelyn Gray-Mason and Tricia Johnson, the current board president who's up for re-appointment.

Of course, nobody has actually convinced anybody that the new process is any better than the old process. Particularly when you have attempts at stunts like this:

Tim Mennuti, a commissioner who represents the local teachers' union, asked for the vote to also happen behind closed doors, but not enough commissioners agreed.

That's right. The teachers union wants to conduct business behind closed doors. Shameful.

Of course, not as shameful as this entire cockamamie process in general. Once again, the O'Malley/Leopold Commission structure still does not address basic questions, such as why voters should not get the final say as opposed to unelected special interests.

We'll see how this all plays out with the Governor's appointment, and the silly "vote" on the ballot in November. Because I have a funny feeling that we haven't seen how this is going to play out in the end just quite yet...

Maxwell Can't Fool Everybody

It looks like Kevin Maxwell's campaign for more school money clearly isn't fooling everybody.

First, Eric Hartley in yesterday's Capital:

Money isn't the only answer. But the thing about government bureaucracies is they don't know any other answers. They're not equipped to come up with new ways of doing things that take account of reality; they just demand more money. Nice work if you can get it.

For all the rhetoric about how this money is needed for children and teachers, it helps to remember there were at last count 213 school employees making six figures. It goes without saying that not one of them is a teacher. Some of these folks have been getting bonuses or generous raises despite the tough times. Even Dr. Maxwell got a $6,000 bonus last year on top of his $231,000 salary. ("Personally, I would love to give you a bigger bonus," the school board president said at the time.)

By the way, Montgomery and Howard counties, with their vaunted schools, spend just over $12,500 per student. That's not much more than Anne Arundel and less than Baltimore. Money isn't the only answer.

A parent of two kids in the school system writes the Post and doesn't have much positive to say about Maxwell, either:

This is nothing new. Mr. Maxwell has a well-established pattern of engaging in thinly veiled public relations stunts and maintaining an antagonistic stance year-round with elected officials and parents. That route is much easier for him than engaging in constructive dialogue with all stakeholders to develop a realistic, comprehensive long-term plan to improve county schools. Since his appointment, he and the Board of Education have done nothing to foster positive relations with elected officials, parents and the community at large.

Mr. Maxwell consistently expands the size of the school's administrative bureaucracy, ignores recommendations for greater efficiency and uses the threat of cuts in the classroom to instill fear and anger in parents toward the council and executive. His long-term plan for school achievement lacks any accountability, which is apparent in both the current performance of the system and how he conducts himself in office.

It's easy to see that Maxwell's whining about funding issues, his refusal to actually prioritize school spending, and his refusal to cut the fat from Riva Road are not winning him many fans, either inside or outside of the County Government. I have documented for some time Maxwell's largesse directed at the sustainment of the overbloated, unnecessary school system bureaucracy. By reducing some of the redundancy and by reducing the high paying non-teaching positions located at school system headquarters Maxwell would be able to direct more money towards the classroom without raising anyone's taxes.

But as we have seen with other lifelong educrats, Kevin Maxwell cares more about feeding the beast, more about sustaining the overbloated school system bureaucracy, than he does with teaching kids and paying teachers. Maxwell, unfortunately, is one of a line line of administrators throughout our state and nation who puts the agenda first, and the kids second. Until we break that cycle, it's never going to change...

More SBNC Shenanigans

The School Board Nominating Commission process is so screwed up that they are now changing the rules as they go:

County Executive John R. Leopold's appointee to the School Board Nominating Commission successfully pushed through a rule change that limits the power of the governor's five appointees. Each candidate, even the five appointed by the governor, now needs approval from eight of the 11 commissioners to have their name sent to the governor, who appoints new school board members from among those names.

Before the commission changed the rule last night, candidates had needed only six votes - easy to get if Gov. Martin O'Malley's five appointees voted as a bloc.

Of course, the change is likely cosmetic as the O'Malley/Leopold/Union liberal block is pretty likely to be in line on candidates. But does this not serve as a wonderful display of the absurdity of this kangaroo court system?

And speaking of the absurdity of this system, the same School Board Nominating Commission doesn't think the Board of Education should be involved in school system operations. So explain this:

The county Board of Education plans to discuss raising school lunch prices at its meeting tomorrow.

Meal prices haven't gone up for four years, said Jodi Risse, supervisor of the school system's Food and Nutrition Services.

She said the combination of federal and state money and revenue from the lunches isn't enough to cover expenses of the county's school lunch program.

Superintendent Kevin M. Maxwell is recommending the board raise school lunch prices by the following amounts:

Milk, ½ pint, up 5 cents from 45 to 50 cents

Breakfast up 25 cents from $1 to $1.25

Elementary school lunch up 25 cents from $1.75 to $2

Secondary school lunch up 25 cents from $2 to $2.25

This isn't a knock on the decision to raise prices, because if you gotta do it, you gotta do it. But isn't this the kind of thing that the Commission believes School Board nominees should not be vetted for (i.e., their thoughts on operations) before the Commission passes the buck on to the Governor's office?

The school lunch price decision, no matter how minor, just goes to show out of touch and poorly planned the Nominating Commission concept is....

Shorter Paul Foer: "Kids don't need to learn, they need to recreate the '60's!"

Paul Foer over on his blog and at FSP is horrified that students who disrupted the school day at Annapolis High School were suspended.

Here is what the Capital story tells us:

Three students were arrested at Annapolis High Thursday afternoon for staging a sit-in to protest the Iraq war, according to county police.

Kit Whitacre, 17, was among the students arrested. He said they had only been sitting on the floor for about 10 or 15 minutes when administrators began threatening them, and the police officer stationed in the school called for backup, flashing sets of plastic handcuffs.

"We just sat down in front of the main office," Kit said. "We didn't want to go to class, because we felt it's unfair other people our age are in Iraq."

County police said yesterday they charged the three students with disorderly and disruption of school activity. They would not give names of those arrested because the report has not yet been filed, and because those arrested are juveniles.

Bob Mosier, a spokesman for the school system, said "appropriate disciplinary action" was taken against the protesting students. He would not specify what disciplinary action was taken.

"You can't disturb the instructional day," Mr. Mosier said. "That's in the code of student conduct."

Now, I will say that arresting the students was probably a little over the top. But I don't see a real big problem with suspending the students for their actions. Their actions are no different than any other stunt pulled to intentionally disrupt learning in their school. The students made a choice to make a spectacle of themselves and they got suspended for it. It's not like they were suspended specifically for protesting the war.

Paul Foer then takes it completely off the tracks:

Contrast this to the Vietnam era when we had a draft and for most purposes, had to pay for the war. The young people went nuts, and their protests eventually brought about an end to the war. And our country seems to have collective amnesia about every lesson we should have learned from that folly. So, after all these years in Iraq, trillions squandered and many thousands dead,we seem to forget all the lies foisted upon us by Bush and Cheney Incorporated. Instead, we take a few students who sat down peacefully and suspend them for ten days.

If Foer wants to argue the war, he can go ahead and do so and spill his offbeat, fringe opinions about the war to his hearts content. But to say that the kids should not be suspended because the war is still going and that's what we are doing "instead" of "learning the lessons" so to speak about the war is foolhardy.

Then, Foer seemingly encourages students to shut down the school day:

Perhaps, yes perhaps, if cooler heads prevail, we'll get a massive student protest going and maybe we'll shut the whole school down for ten days. That might make a point. As the parent of an Annapolis HS student, I'm all for it. It might make the lessons my son is learning about US government and history all the more meaningful. And if he gets suspended for ten days, we'll go visit all the war memorials in Washington, stroll among the gardens of stones at Arlington, visit our Senators and Congressman to protest. He might learn more than he does in school.

Apparently, Foer thinks that nonviolent protest of a war is more important for his son than actually receiving instruction that will prepare him for the rest of his life. And as a parent, Foer has that right. However, he does not have the right to take opportunities for learning away from the other students at Annapolis High School. He doesn't have the right to encourage protest of a war in lieu of learning about science, about history, and about math. For some of these students who go to Annapolis High, education is the only way out of their socioeconomic situation. They may only have the opportunity to go to college through what they learn during the school day. Why should they be denied that right when some of the uppity Annapolis-area bourgeoisie want to relive the Sixties vicariously through their children.

Ironically, Foer's idea to shut down Annapolis High will take educational opportunities away from the lower and middle classes who attend Annapolis. It may also keep kids out of college who then, ironically, may feel like they need to enlist and wind up fighting in the war that Foer so passionately opposes. Funny, I thought liberals were for education and against sending our kids to war.

Foer's assertions that this kind of nonviolent protest should be encouraged are disturbing. We should be encouraging students to go to school to get an education, not do the bidding of their parents by protesting a war. Education is everything, and nobody on the right or the left should be encouraging its disruption for any reason.

Why School Board Elections are important

Two stories are quickly coalescing together in a way that was altogether too predictable.

First, let's hear about how much of an issue the school curricula are here in Anne Arundel County:

The recent decision by Anne Arundel County schools Superintendent Kevin M. Maxwell to turn social studies and science into semester-long courses in middle schools has sparked fierce criticism among parents, students and some teachers who accuse the district of robbing students of a well-rounded curriculum.

The roiling debate in Anne Arundel County reflects a trend in which a fifth of middle schools surveyed in a recent national study say they have sharply cut science, social studies, art, music and physical education in order to double up on math and reading.

All of which is a very important policy discussion that has a tremendous impact on the life of students, and should engage all citizens, teachers, parents, and taxpayers as part of this discussion.

At the same time, the names and resumes for candidates who have applied for the two vacancies on the Anne Arundel County School Board have been put on the School Board Nomination Commission website which also got its own write-up in the Sun, which talks a little bit about this goofy process:

The commission will hold a public hearing Monday night, where the public can meet the candidates and the commissioners can formally question them. Two weeks later, the commission will hear public testimony on the qualifications of the candidates.

The fact that these stories come together like this is fortuitous because it once again highlights how ridiculous and absurd the new nominating process is. The School Board Nominating Commission is going to hold a meet the candidates night, yet the public has absolutely no real input on who is going to serve on the School Board. The Commission, made up of Martin O'Malley and John Leopold's liberal donors and friends, are going to nominate to the Governor whomever they damn well please, regardless of the public input. One the candidates go to a retention election in the fall, they will likely remain unchallenged on their records or their qualifications since the voters will not have a true voice in the process and cannot replace them with somebody who better represents their views on education and public spending.

The story about the curricula questions are even further damning of the new and convoluted process. The candidates will not have to defend or promulgate their stances on the curricula issue, or any other issue for that matter, to the public. Under the old process, despite its flaws, candidates still were questioned by the public before a vote was taking of Nominating Convention delegates. Candidates were questioned directly. Under the new process, parents, teachers, and taxpayers may not be able to know or understand the positions of these candidates or their implications for School Board policy until well after they are already serving on the Board of Ed. it is even more of a hopeless situation when you remember the fact that even if a candidate is nominated who is out of touch with their constituents (a likelihood given the O'Malley/Leopold team in place) and turned out by the voters, the liberal Nominating Commission will merely appoint another out of touch replacement.

Issues regarding school curricula are critically important for the future of Anne Arundel County and its children. Unfortunately, what this story really does is highlight merely the seriousness and gravity of our newfangled, highly undemocratic School Board selection process in Anne Arundel County.

Alonso gets it: will Maxwell?

It's a sad day when Baltimore City Schools outpace Anne Arundel's in responsible educational spending:

The proposed budget that Baltimore schools chief Andres Alonso will present to the Board of Education tonight would cut $110 million from the central office, redistributing $70 million to schools and using $40 million to help close a budget shortfall.

More than 300 central office jobs would be eliminated under the proposal, cutting the number of full-time positions at system headquarters from 1,531 to 1,222, according to a draft copy of Alonso's board presentation. Alonso has said that administrators with a background in instruction would have the opportunity to be transferred back to schools as teachers or principals, likely taking a pay cut. While that would avoid the need for large-scale layoffs, it appears that some layoffs of noninstructional personnel would be necessary.

It's good to see that Alonso is serious about lowering the cost of education and redistributing money from centralized offices and the administration back towards the classroom, where it is needed. In Anne Arundel County, this is something that superintendent Kevin Maxwell has refused to considered, instead arguing for higher taxes and refusing to cut spending.

I hope that just this once, Anne Arundel County can learn from our neighbors up in Baltimore City and realize that our education dollars are not being spent to their fullest potential....

School Board Commission becoming an Embarrassment

The Anne Arundel County School Board Nominating Commission is continuing to beclown itself before it ever really does it job:

The new committee that will select county school board members is placing no limit on the number of candidates it can send to the governor.

Three of the 11 members of the School Board Nominating Commission voted last night against the plan, under which any applicant that garners a simple majority of commissioners' votes - six out of the 11 - will be sent as a candidate to the governor.

So the commission that was allegedly designed to vet candidates now is not going to realistically vet any candidates, merely sending forth as many candidates as they desire with or without whittling the pool to a manageable number.

Is this a joke? Is this designed to allow the Governor political cover to pick a "qualified" candidate? Is there really a reason to create an environment where every candidate could, potentially, be sent forth to the Governor? Is the Commission just going to punt on the heavy lifting and declare that every political acceptable (i.e.: liberal) candidate for the Board is good enough for the Governor's consideration?

I dare any representative from the County Executive's office or any legislator who voted for this legislation to come forth and defend how this legislation is good for the people of Anne Arundel County. Somebody needs to tell me how a commission with a convoluted, fly by the seat of their pants attitude is an improvement over the old process that, at the very least, limited the number of candidates set forth and allowed for a greater ability for the public to participate.

This Commission and the entire process supported by the O'Malley/Leopold faction is an embarrassment to good government and is going to become a greater hindrance to improving public education and allowing for more accountability in education. Once again this just proves how this alleged improvement is making it more and more difficult for taxpayers, parents, and educators to have input on our schools, and how hard it is going to be to keep our School Board accountable.

BREAKING: O'Malley to begin transfer of authority from the Department of Education

It looks like O'Malley's kissing and making up with Nancy Grasmick was step one in an elongated process.

Sources are telling me that the Anne Arundel Community College Arundel Mills campus will be hosting a 12 Noon Press Conference for Governor O'Malley tomorrow in which the Governor will announce that the administration is proposing legislation transfer the responsibilities for adult education out of the Department of Education to the Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation.

I wonder what other tricks O'Malley has up his sleeve, but this is an amazingly frightening step. Taking something out of the Department of Education and putting it in a Department with no Educational background? And furthermore, does this mean that O'Malley's Labor Union backers are now going to have undue influence over our Adult Education process?

More as we hear it...

The Writing on the Wall

Somebody got to Governor O'Malley, because something sensical happened:

Gov. Martin O'Malley today urged General Assembly leaders not to pursue legislation that would force out Maryland schools chief Nancy S. Grasmick, and later in the day, held a public appearance with the superintendent in which he pledged to cooperate on education policy.

The unexpected announcement capped months of acrimony between the governor and Grasmick, who has served as state superintendent under four governors.

O'Malley had indicated that he wanted to oust Grasmick from her post in favor of a superintendent of his choosing. Grasmick had insisted that she would not go, and in December, the state school board -- still controlled by appointees of O'Malley's predecessor -- offered her a new four-year term....

....Today, O'Malley said that over the course of several conversations with Grasmick, he had decided to try to work cooperatively with her.

"Over the course of the last year, we have all heard the words 'consensus' and 'coming together,' and phrases like 'putting the divisions of the past behind us,'" O'Malley said during an afternoon State House news conference. "In that spirit, Dr. Grasmick and I have had a very good talk and a very direct talk about the need to come together."

Of course, maybe he realized how completely ridiculous he sounded when talking about 'consensus' and 'coming together,' and phrases like 'putting the divisions of the past behind us,' when he was talking about the lack of consensus, dividing the people of Maryland, and living in the past through blaming Governor Ehrlich for all of his shortcomings. But maybe O'Malley saw the writing on the wall that told him this was never going to fly with the public, given all of the positive press in recent weeks regarding Maryland schools.

Now I'm not exactly the biggest Nancy Grasmick fan, but once again she proves that she has the political wherewithal to get out of the tough spots. But I am still amazed that O'Malley backed down. Because usually the Governor is hellbent on getting his way past the point of common sense and the common good. For once, O'Malley couldn't take the heat. I wonder what he'll cave on next...

Good Money After Bad

I get criticized for calling for better controls on spending at public schools and universities before we throw more money at existing problems. But here is one good reason why we must do this:

The director of design and construction management at Morgan State University has resigned amid findings by a legislative auditor that the college violated state regulations in multimillion-dollar deals with a private contractor, officials said yesterday.

In a statement, campus officials acknowledged that university staff had failed to follow Maryland procurement rules. The university has acknowledged adding a $3.1 million allowance into its bid for a 2005 contract and then using $2.6 million of the surplus funds to pay Whiting Turner Contracting for cost overruns on four other campus projects without getting state approval.

The fact of the matter is that such rules violations are probably extremely common throughout state government. The question leads us to this: how much money has the state wasted through paying of higher than necessary fees for services because some employees could not be bothered to follow the rules?

This story further proves the problem with throwing good money after bad when it comes to education. We have seen, both in secondary and higher public education, no desire to account for the money that is being spent in these schools. Union officials and administrators would prefer to kvetch about the need for more money before, not after, proving that the money they currently have is being efficiently and effectively spent. I bet that if it were not for this legislative audit, the inappropriate use of of funds here at Morgan State would have gone unnoticed due to the lack of proper accounting procedures in place in the University hierarchy.

In education, as like all other government programs, leaders need to be sure that the first step is to ensure money is being spent properly. Only after such assurances can be made should we ever consider the allocation of additional public resources.

Stating the Obvious

Gee, who would have ever thought that Thornton money might be inefficiently spent?

Money sent to school systems under a landmark funding law is not being used for specific programs that help low-performing students, according to a new report by a child welfare advocacy group that wants lawmakers to tell school systems exactly how to spend the funds.

State and local education officials criticized the report, saying it was agenda-driven and failed to take into account across-the-board gains in student performance.

The analysis by Advocates for Children and Youth found that despite the 2002 law known as Thornton -- which was intended address inequities in education with a $1.3 billion increase in state aid to public schools -- two of Maryland's three largest school systems are spending less money on programs for low-performing students than they did before the law was passed.

Now, I will give you that Thornton is a very unusual issue, when you consider that it was a large, statewide money redistribution system phased in without a revenue source.

But this speaks also to the concept of funding public education in a general sense. I for one have been very critical about the ever increasing demand for funding for public schools. Not because we shouldn't be funding public education, but because we have no idea whether or not existing public education funds are being spent responsibly or efficiently. One of my longstanding criticisms of Anne Arundel Superintendent Kevin Maxwell is the fact that Maxwell insists that only more money can fix our county schools. He rarely, if ever, talks about the need to evaluate existing programs and existing programmed funds in order to see if we are getting the best bang for the buck.

While the story may not provide the best picture regarding the efficiency of Thornton dollars, it does show how much objective and subjective research can be to determine the utility of education dollars already spent. Our leaders owe it to us to study current spending patterns, determine their success, and determine their value to the taxpayer before they commit to throwing good money after bad just to score political points with the MSTA...

Surprise!

It's bad enough that the new Anne Arundel School Board Nominating Commission is taking power away from the parents and taxpayers of Anne Arundel County. But now, the start of their work has snuck up on everybody:

The county's new School Board Nominating Commission will hold its first organizational meeting tomorrow.

The 11-member commission, which was created last year, is charged with submitting nominees for the county school board to the governor. The governor must then appoint new school board members from that list.

The commission was the legislature's answer to calls for a more democratic school board. Under the previous system, the governor was under no obligation to appoint candidates named by the local nominating convention.

The meeting is open to the public and is set for 6:30 p.m. in the Anne Arundel County Delegation Room in the House Office Building at 6 Bladen St.

I can't wait to see how the liberal Commission members implement the O'Malley/Leopold vision of public education.

I also take great umbrage to the third paragraph of the blurb, because there is nothing democratic about a process designed to shut the people out of a voice in the selection process, allowing only politically connected insiders to have a voice as to how our public schools will be operated.

It's a shame that this sham has been foisted by Martin O'Malley and John Leopold upon the residents of Anne Arundel County...

Maxwell still doesn't get it

School Superintendent Kevin Maxwell still doesn't understand that you can't just spend your way to better schools:

Claiming he did everything possible to pare down school spending, Superintendent Kevin M. Maxwell proposed another budget hike for county schools last night.

It's an increase smaller than the one he proposed last year, which led to months of squabbling between county and school officials, and ended up not being fully funded.

"We have scrimped. We have saved," Dr. Maxwell told the county Board of Education in his operating and capital budget presentation. "We have looked at every program and position - every single one - and made some painful decisions that will impact our students."

In a budget presentation punctuated with recognitions and applause for groups of students and schools staff, the superintendent asked for $99.9 million more in his operating budget than he received from the state and county last year. The fiscal 2008 budget was about an 8 percent increase from the previous year.

If this year's spending plan is fully funded, it will bring the total schools operating budget to $968.8 million.

Yes, we have nearly Billion-Dollar Babies in our public schools according to Maxwell's proposed budget, which is available online here and I'll be reviewing that in the near future to see where Maxwell continues to insist on wasting money.

Two things make Maxwell's yearly beg-a-thon disheartening to myself and many other Anne Arundel County residents.

First, Maxwell refuses to reconsider the course of actions before spending any money. Every year, Maxwell requests gigantic spending increases without either proving the demonstrable need for such increases, or whether or not the programs he wishes to continue funding are being effective. We get higher and higher spending requests every year without any consideration as to if what our schools are doing is actually working to educate our students better. I would also be willing to bet that the high administrative overhead also remains in this year's budget as well, much as it did last year's.

Second, this once again reinforces the need for an elected School Board in Anne Arundel County. John Leopold likes to complain about the Superintendent and this Board's lack of fiscal reality, yet he continues to wish that the population has no input on the School Board selection process. Leopold's beloved School Board appointment plan that he helped shepherd through the General Assembly is going to make an existing problem worse, as the majority of new members appointed by Governor O'Malley will share O'Malley's "politics first, unions second, education last" philosophy of school board administration. And we already have that problem when you consider some of the knuckleheaded things Eugene Peterson says:

Board member Eugene Peterson called the superintendent's plan "bare-bones."

"We must honor our contracts," he said. "If we don't, we'll lose all credibility and our competitive edge, and we can't do that. Good education costs money."

Our school system selection process lost credibility when the public had it's right to participate taken away by a Governor and a County Executive who want to remove parents and taxpayers from having influence on who sits on our board. But furthermore, having credibility and a competitive edge when it comes to public schools has nothing to do with money and everything to do with curriculum and methods. If this oft-repeated adage about buying our way to better schools were true, why do politicians and muckity-mucks in the District of Columbia ( tops in per pupil spending) always send their kids to private schools?

These issues regarding spending, spending priorities, curriculum issues, and teaching methods all come back down to who selects the school board. With the current O'Malley/Leopold system in place, we know that future members of the School Board will place educational achievement at the lowest level of priority, choosing to protect the teacher's union and protecting liberal teaching methods and political causes first and foremost. Because O'Malley and Leopold have insisted that parents, teachers, and taxpayers should not have the right to vote for a School Board of their own choosing, this kind of nonsense will continue to be all to common in the future.

School Board tells O'Malley to pack sand

Karma always comes back to get ya:

State Schools Superintendent Nancy S. Grasmick was appointed to a new four-year term today by the State Board of Education, a move that could prompt the General Assembly to consider changing the laws that govern how Maryland's education czar is chosen.

Board President Dunbar Brooks announced the board's decision after a closed session that lasted about three hours. He declined to say how the board voted or why it chose to retain Grasmick, and he said board members were aware that the action might lead to legislation.

"We recognize that that's a possibility," said Brooks, who added that the board discussed "the pros and cons and risk" of making a decision about Grasmick's future.

Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller, who had urged the board to delay a vote until Gov. Martin O'Malley had the opportunity to appoint three new members, called the action "a terrible mistake" and "a direct slap in the face of the governor."

O'Malley tried to run roughshod over the State School Board much like he has tried to run Maryland, by dictating instead of attempting to achieve consensus and work with people. By trying to bully the School Board, O'Malley forced the School Board to take decisive action to maintain its independence as the system is current set up in statute. For his bullying efforts, O'Malley got it shoved right back in his face. Maybe this will teach him some humility....but I doubt it.

(And that's not to say O'Malley doesn't have a point he is trying to make about the selection of the State Superintendent. Because if the Superintendent of Schools is a member of the Governor's cabinet, why are they not appointed by the Governor?)

Stupid Educrat Tricks

This was from the Capital today, and it ties into a lot of problems with Anne Arundel County schools:

As the dollar falls and America is challenged by the growing economic power of foreign countries like India and China, some county school board members are prepared to valiantly defend our nation against threats to our civic pride.

Like the school system's new strategic plan.

A line in the plan, which the school board approved Wednesday, said county schools should prepare students to be "productive young citizens of the world."

An attack on allegiance to our nation!

Board member Vic Bernson, a veteran and White House attorney, leapt to America's defense.

"I didn't sign up to be a citizen of the world, I signed up to be a citizen of the United States," Mr. Bernson said. "It is not just semantics - names are very important."

But other board members allied themselves with the rest of the planet.

"We live in a global economy, we're in a world without borders," said board member Eugene Peterson. "That's what we're trying to say."

Another board member, Michael Leahy, countered, "There are a set of ideals that this country was founded on. To say we all happen to exist on the same planet does a disservice to those ideals," he said.

The battle - ahem, discussion - went on for about 15 minutes.

In the end the board voted 6 to 2 with Mr. Bernson and student board member Sage Snider dissenting, to change the line. Now county students will become "productive young citizens of the United States as it resides in an increasingly global community."

There are a ton of problems with the above:

• Are the majority of the members of the Board of Education so politically correct that they think that being a citizen of the world is more important than learning the basics such as reading, writing, math, science, history, etc? I mean seriously, why is such an ill-conceived line in the strategic plan anyway? Shouldn't we be just producing productive citizens and call it a job. If the schools are doing what they are supposed to be doing, shouldn't that take care of itself?
  
  
• If such silliness is in one line of the strategic plan, don't you wonder what else is in the Strategic Plan that has not hit the papers? The approved document is not on-line yet, but the 11/26 version that was introduced and discussed at the meeting is. It's 174 pages long, so I am not going to read it at this second, but it's there for your perusal. Did you know that the values of the Anne Arundel County Public Schools are the following?:
• Collaboration
• Results Orientation
• Shared Ownership of Every Student’s Success
• Continuous Learning
• High Expectations
• Supportive Relationships
• Equity and Cultural Proficiency
• Innovation and Creativity
  
  
• Incidentally, why was the public only notified via the web about the previous availability and comment period on the Strategic Plan

The biggest problem with the boondoggle over this language regarding "World Citizen" is the fact that these jokers cannot be replaced through truly public participation. No, the only way these folks will be replaced is through appointment by the O'Malley/Leopold Politically Connected Wunderkids that make up the newfangled School Board Nominating Commission.

O'Malley, and particularly John Leopold, don't want you to have the necessary input to make sure that members of the School Board are elected don't focus on crap like this. Leopold doesn't want you to have the chance to support candidates who care more about education than political correctness. It's more important for O'Malley and Leopold to get their cronies on the Board than it is to actually educate students. And that continues and will continue to be a sad state of affairs for students, teachers, parents, and taxpayers in Anne Arundel County.

Misfiring on all cylinders

University of Baltimore Law Professor Kenneth Lasson goes on a predictably leftist, completely unscholarly tirade about the 2nd Amendment in the Sun this morning. And after this complete reinterpretation of the concept of precedent, he drops this gem:

The justices should recognize that law professors are not always straight shooters.

I couldn't have said it better myself. Because Lasson drapes his warped views on the subject around nothing but his own background as a hack masquerading as a law professor.

The main problem I have with Lasson's arguments is the fact that he only gives one side of the story. He wishes to talk about the financial backing of the NRA without adequately exploring the financial backing of gun grabber groups like the Brady Campaign. What about Michael Bloomberg's illegal campaign to fight firearms? Yeah, no mention of that.

Nor did Lasson mention his work as an "Expert" for the Second Amendment Research Center. That outfit is supported by The Joyce Foundation, an outfit with a notorious anti-gun bias, and whose grant list includes grants to both the Bloombergers, Handgun-Free America, and the Violence Policy Center, which of course supports the outright ban on handgun ownership amongst other out there policies. Lasson's cover-up of his affiliations (and the Sun letting him get away with it) is appalling.

Lasson also completely whiffs on the concept or precedence. Under Lasson's worldview, the Supreme Court's decision in 1939's United States v. Miller is sacrosanct on the issue and cannot be challenged. Of course, there are a number of fallacies with the concept of precedence. Why should a decision be continued to upheld when it is wrong? Under Lasson's warped logic that means that Brown vs. Board should never have been issued as it stood due to the precedent of Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896. And under the same logic, Tileston v. Ullman and Poe v. Ullman would have precluded the decision in 1965's Griswold v. Connecticut...and that case paved the way for Roe v. Wade . I don't hear Lasson arguing the concept of precedence in those cases because the decisions do not match with his leftist worldviews.

I am thankful only that Lasson's concluding statement lets me know that Lasson himself realizes he is a hack and should not be taken seriously. My concern is that my taxpayer dollars pay for a a professor to be this intellectually dishonest...

To read something educational about the Second Amendment, check out the source list put out by überblogger, UCLA law professor (and good lord willing future Supreme Court Justice) Eugene Volokh.

Furthering the Sham

To continue to show how much of a sham the new Anne Arundel County School Board nominating scheme is, take a look at the appointed members of the Commission as announced so far:

O'Malley Appointees:

• Chairman Joshua C. Greene, attorney from Crofton
• Christine Davenport, retired Teacher from Glen Burnie
• Lee Roy Payne, retired Guidance Counselor from Millersville
• Matthew Tedesco, attorney from Odenton
• Konrad Wayson, former School Board member from Harwood

Leopold Appointee:

• Yevola S. Peters, Special Assistant to the County Executive for Minority Affairs, from Annapolis

The appointees are a cross-section of everything that is wrong with the commission. It's a political commission that does not represent that interests of the parents, students, teachers and taxpayers of Anne Arundel County in mind. Only Konrad Wayson has the type of background in education and finance that even gives me anything close to the vibe of qualification to serve on this panel. Peters presence on the commission is merely to serve as John Leopold's mouthpiece. The teacher Davenport represents District 31 on the Anne Arundel County Democratic Central Committee. Tedesco is 29 and has no experience in education issues whatsoever, but works at a politically connected law firm. Greene also works at a politically connected law firm and seems to have no ties to local education whatsoever, but did donate extensively to Democratic candidates in 2006 (and, strangely, Delegate James King and Councilman Ed Reilly).

What we will be stuck with will be decisions on the future of Anne Arundel County school leadership being based on political ties. This is unsurprising, but also infuriating. We all saw how the old process worked. And we all agreed that the process was flawed. But the fact of the matter is that the recommendations were made by parents, by teachers, and by taxpayers to the Governor. This process seems be nothing more than politically connected yes-men and yes-women designed to ensure that the current educational model is continued by all means necessary. This is not a model that will engender chance, but will merely continue to reinforce the status quo. Only when we have a competitively elected school board, and not an yes or no vote on politically connected choices, we will truly get the kind of School Board we need to move education in Anne Arundel County forward.

I have noted several times the chutzpah of those who called this cockamamie scheme an elected school board. Instead of public participation, this is the politically-tainted garbage that John Leopold has shoved down our throats....

Leopold's School Board lies continue

John Leopold continues to shamelessly lie about the new School Board nominating scheme:

"For the first time in Anne Arundel County, the public has the chance to provide direct input into the selection of school board members," Leopold said. "It's a compromise solution that was elusive for more than two decades."

Once again, John Leopold can't be honest about his school board selection plan. If the plan truly were to provide direct input into the selection of school board members as Leopold attests, then the voters would be provided with a choice of candidates in a general election. Merely voting up or down nominees put forth by a nominating commission of the intelligentsia has the same legitimacy as one-party elections do in Cuba.

Once again, Leopold cannot admit the sham that he foisted upon the people of Anne Arundel County.