Will It or Won’t It?
I don’t even have to say what this is about, do I? 6PM tonight, and at least one School Board member is still taking your questions/comments.
I don’t even have to say what this is about, do I? 6PM tonight, and at least one School Board member is still taking your questions/comments.
The contract has been brought before the board. Mrs. Mimms, Mrs. Smith, and Mrs. Wilson have recused themselves and have left the room.
The Patrick Henry Initiative’s contract was amended to require a diversity plan. The contract as amended passed 5-0. Braxton, Dawson, West, Carr and Wolf voted in the affirmative.
The Patrick Henry Charter School Initiative proponents have Jonathan Mallard and Paul Goldman to thank for tonight’s vote to authorize the charter school.
Their persistent and persuasive efforts on behalf of the Patrick Henry Initiative were compelling and convinced me that PHI proposal deserved a chance to make this charter school succeed or fail on its own merits.
In lieu of a proper “thank-you note,” I am certain that both Mallard and Goldman would appreciate your vote on Nov. 4th.
I would like to thank Jonathan Mallard and Paul Goldman for convincing you, Mrs. Wolf, that the PHI proposal “deserved a chance to make this charter school succeed or fail on its own merits.”
I would think, however, that the many other people who have called you, emailed you, and spoken with you prior to that about this issue would have had a similar effect. Perhaps Mr. Goldman and Mr. Mallard were uniquely gifted to articulate the essential merits of the proposal. In any event, thank you for your support.
I would like to thank the board members that approved the contract. I hope that everyone that is passionate about the school opening should do the same. Though Mr. Mallard and Mr. Goldman are honorable men, and have my respect, it is the dedicated team that stuck to this process that deserve the bulk of the credit for NEVER GIVING UP. They include Bonnie Brown, Debbie Butterworth, Susan Martin, Kelly Bulbulkaya, Shennell Lewis, Gina Wojtyziak (for founding the intitiative), and I could just go on and on. But you all know who you are.
Special thanks also to our attorney Darrel Mason for forming a clear understanding of what we were truly up against. Finally, two individuals who deserve individual recognition. Not for the ongoing work they did, but for the certain acts that were held up to the microscope by many detractors that steadfastly held the belief that this school had some kind of secret unsavory agenda. Those individuals are Rev. Louis Collins from the Berryman Center and Church (you should check him out any Sunday…he is worth the listen no matter your faith), and Antoine Greene, president of the Crusade for Voters. Both of these men stepped up at the right time to support what they recognized as a significant opportunity for children in this fair city. Please reach out to them as well.
Now, if you all really want to see this school succeed, we need lots of volunteers, or it will not. Go to the website and sign up to be on a committee.
We appreciate the continued support.
Richard Day, President, Patrick Henry Initiative.
Hello everyone! Thanks for your support and enthusiasm which has brought PHSSA to this point! As you might expect we are now stepping up our fundraising efforts for PHSSA. There will be significant start up expenses & beyond that, RPS only funds around 80% of per pupil expenses once PHSSA opens. RPS does not fund any of the start up expenses. Please consider monetary contributions for the start up effort. We have a ‘pay pal’ link at the website – http://www.patrickhenrycharter.org; or you can send checks to PO box 2459, Richmond, VA 23218. Contributions are tax deductible. Additionally, we are planning a BIG volunteer rally for (tentatively) Sat. November 8, where interested volunteers can sign up for specific committees and receive specific task assignments. There will be more to come on this event!
Patrick Henry School
ALERT!!!!
There appear to be additional challenges to the Patrick Henry Charter School proposition despite its contract’s recent approval. Although she voted to accept the
contract, Carol Wolf is now publicly saying that she opposes the school’s expense.
http://www.richmondfreepress.com/news/currentPageA.pdf
If you are in support of the school, please email or call Carol Wolf and let her know. Ask her to help the school succeed rather than complicate its opening.
email: cwolf@richmond.k12.va.us
phone: 804.780-7716
Let’s give the school a chance! Stop throwing bogus blockades in its path!
PAGALINA,
There is no polite way to say this — You are so wrong. I absolutely AM NOT OPPOSING the PHI Initiative.
In fact, I met for two hours this past Wednesday with Antione Green (president of the Crusade for Voters and a PHI board member)to discuss ways we could work together to help PHI fast-track a “diversity plan” that would help PHI, Richmond Public Schools and the City of Richmond.
I sent two e-mails this past week to my colleagues, Supt. Yvonne Brandon and to our attorney, Brad King, asking for financial details as to what the PHI will cost. The mere act of ASKING A QUESTION and STATING OF A CONCERN however, does not mean that I am opposed to the Charter School. It does mean that I am doing my duty as an elected member of the School Board.
Given the uncertainty surrounding the Wall Street bailout and what it means (and may mean) to city, state and federal governments, it is incumbent upon us — the statutorily charged fiscal stewards of RPS — to determine what this Bailout will mean to our budget (and those of RPS’ primary stakeholders) and to plan accordingly.”
I noted in my FIRST e-mail that ” … Several insiders at City Hall have shared that city governments across the nation are downsizing and bracing for the future and that they anticipate we will be asked to begin making serious cutbacks in the very near future. It is my hope that Ms. Bragga and Mr. Damm will be able to assure us that we can indeed afford not only the PHI, but scores of other projects that we believe necessary to help transform our schools into models of a 21st Century Education.”
“…. I hope that this is needless worry on my part, but until we have some facts and figures at the ready, we must be prepared to realign our priorities as necessary. I suggest we meet as soon as possible to discuss this issue.
“Ironically, PHI may come through this financial storm in better shape that we will, given their ability to raise money from private donors. I ask for your support in emphasizing the importance of this concern and for your professional guidance.”
AND, from my SECOND e-mail:
“In addition to my concerns about the lack of financial information and the dire forecasts coming from both the state and federal governments at this time, I am at a loss to explain to the public why it is that only three members of our board had the power to decide for the entire district that our board would refuse to accept an agreement offer from the founders of the PHI that would have secured 50 percent of the seats available (150) in the school for children who qualify for free and reduced lunches in exchange for granting to the 21 children of the founders pre-lottery status in the school.
“Such a decision seems based entirely on the whims of politics and is both financially and morally irresponsible.
“Given that we have already experienced the positive effects of socio-economic integration at Holton Elementary and know from a considerable body of research that all children benefit in such settings, I ask for a reconsideration of this question. If the board members who voted in the majority on this question refuse to reconsider this issue, I am (along with other concerned parties) prepared to ask for a public explanation and justification for this decision.
The board members who made this decision need to understand that they had an opportunity to ensure for 150 of our children who qualify for free and reduced lunches, a chance to experience a more hands-on learning experience emphasizing the sciences and arts, and they refused to act in the best interests of these children.
“It is to the credit and professionalism of the individuals involved in bringing forward the PHI effort, that they have been acting in the best interests of all the children throughout this frustrating process. Their willingness to even entertain this offer proves that the previous accusations of racial preferences have no basis whatsoever and calls into question the integrity of the individuals who have labored to do this board’s business behind closed doors and away from public scrutiny.
“The refusal of these three board members to act in the best interests of the children of the city of Richmond and to secure for these children options available to other children, is more than disappointing. This decision calls into question their dedication to the children they claim to care so much about.
“These same three board members were also instrumental in voting to close Whitcomb Court Elementary School and deciding to “dominoe” them instead of utilizing the rounds at MLK as was recommended by our own task force. This decision that has resulted in unacceptable overcrowding in the EastEnd elementary schools. These three board members are, it should be noted, now proposing that we place trailers behind the overcrowded schools as a solution for their previous bad decision. This is unacceptable.
“Our children, who through no fault of their own have been born into poverty, deserve every opportunity we can provide. It is unfortunate that some board members would place personal or political gain above the welfare of these children. They need to be held accountable.”
Bottomline: We need to understand the FISCAL IMPACT and work together to achieve a diversity plan that will result in a win-win-win for all parties.
There is nothing “bogus” about this. The whole world is worrying about what the Wall Street Meltdown will mean. Virginia is dealing with budget shortfalls as well. We need to determine the actual costs and plan accordingly.
Here’s my spreadsheet with all the details of the current budget. You can change any line item and see it’s effects in the overall system.
Keep in mind that there are other questionable financial practices that might yield additional funding sources.
I’ll think about it some more, and invite everyone to do the same. I’ll put up some suggestions as soon as I have them.
I think in the case of Wolfe’s comments the RFP took things out of context, however, I think Wolfe would do well to stick to the “less is more” principle to prevent further controversial use of her words.
It’s time for celebrating the fact that Patrick Henry Charter School IS a reality and will continue to persevere against the odds.
Am I reading correctly that this was a part of the negotiations over the last few weeks? If so, I am absolutely behind whoever refused to endorse it. The only fair way to do this is through a lottery for everyone. Period.
Please note that the proposed 50%/150 number of seats for children who qualify for free or reduced lunch referenced above, was for discussion purposes only.
Obviously, it could not be “formally” presented to the PHI group without first being discussed and approved by the school board. I am not alone in the belief that such a plan could help the PHI be more economically feasible and simultaneously could be a tremendous opportunity for positive cooperation that would benefit all children.
Research shows that in socio-economic integration, 50% is the “tipping point,” and that the optimum balance is somewhere between 33.3% – 40% low-income and 66.6% to 60% to middle or upper income.
The following is excerpted from an article written by Richard Kahlenberg, which appeared in the American School Board Journal in 2007.
*******
“After the influence of the family, researcher James Coleman concluded 40 years ago, the single most important factor determining student achievement is the socioeconomic status of the school a child attends. In a large-scale government-sponsored study, Coleman found that all children do better in middle-class schools—whatever the schools’ racial makeup.
“Numerous studies subsequently confirmed Coleman’s findings that concentrations of poverty tend to defeat good education programs. And yet, until recently, most school districts consciously ignored the research, worried that “busing” to mix rich and poor kids would be politically toxic.
“Now, that’s beginning to change. Spurred in part by increased state and federal pressure to raise overall student achievement and to reduce the achievement gap between groups, a growing number of districts are pursuing policies of socioeconomic school integration. The list includes Wake County, N.C.; San Francisco; La Crosse, Wis.; Cambridge, Mass.; St. Lucie County, Fla.; Rochester, N.Y.; San Jose, Calif.; and several others.
“Most of these districts rely primarily on a system of magnet schools and public school choice, rather than compulsory busing, to achieve their goal of socioeconomic integration. In Wake County, for example, an extensive system of magnet schools in the city of Raleigh helps the district reach toward its goal that no school have more than 40 percent of students eligible for free and reduced-price lunch or more than 25 percent reading below grade level.
“While most of these programs are fairly new, the early signs are promising. In Wake, for example, low-income and minority students perform better than low-income and minority students in other North Carolina districts that fail to break up concentrations of poverty. In 2005, on the state’s High School End-of-Course exams, 63.7 percent of low-income students in Wake passed, compared with 48.7 percent in Durham County, 47.8 percent in Guilford County, and 47.8 percent in Mecklenburg County….”
******
To learn more about the idea of socio-economic integration, check out these links.
http://www.tcf.org/Publications/Education/kahlenberg_separaterc.pdf
http://www.tcf.org/publications/education/Kahlenberg_dj.pdf
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B01E6DC173EF93AA15755C0A9619C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2
Thank you Common Sense Mom!
Point taken. Ssshhhh…………
Thank yo,u CSM, for that point.
But, Ms. Wolfe, I still find it disingenuous to vote in support of a contract and then to shoot it full of holes. Shouldn’t those questions have been asked up front during contract discussions? It just seems odd, too, that your statements would appear in print rather than remaining internal communications.
Darn comma.
pagalina,
jeez louise, lady …. you need to get in contact with Vanna White and tell her you need to buy a clue.
If you have followed any of the Richmond School Board stories in the news, you would know there is nothing disingenuous about Wolf. Wolf is the only board member that can be counted on to CONSISTENTLY ask the hard questions and she is the only one who speaks up about MONEY — as in — where is it? how are we spending it? what are we spending it on?
Don’t you think it is awfully weird that WOLF is the only one who ever tries to hold people accountable? WHAT ARE THOSE OTHER PEOPLE DOING?
Don’t single her out because she is trying to do her job — ask some hard questions of those other board members and ask them why they are not doing their jobs!
What were the ones who got up and walked out of the meeting thinking? What was up with that drama queen demonstration?
And, why is it that those who remained would approve a contract that contained NO NUMBERS?
Do you think that the PHI people are entitled to a blank check? For your information, pagalina, I used to attend School Board meetings [part of my job] and have watched Wolf ask questions and NOT get straight answers. It is only when she gets totally fed up with double-talk and nonsense from other board members that she speaks out.
Regarding this post by Ms. Wolf…
posted by Carol A.O. Wolf at October 10, 2008 10:41 pm :
Who was the other PHI board member that you met with? I was not aware of this meeting.
On a different note, I have responded to the Richmond Free Press article, and am awaiting thier response to clear up some either innaccurate or vague information.
Please keep an eye out for a post on the PHI Volunteer Rally being planned for sometime in November.
Cheers.
Has the contract been executed?
If not, then the whole thing is still subject to the review of the School Board as indicated by the Free Press article.
Once the contract is executed, the status changes, and PHSSA is afforded a different legal status – and different legal protections.
The contract is executed. Unless there is something else out there that we have not been told about, it is a done deal. I signed the contract and so has school board chairman, George Braxton. We are now (finally) moving forward to build our volunteer teams, and start all the really hard work of opening the school.
All folks interested in helping make the charter school a real success, should go to the website and sign up to volunteer. We are planning a volunteer rally for sometime after the election.
Thanks to everyone that supported the charter initiative. This would not have happened without public involvement.
Re: Post #18
“Who was the other PHI board member that you met with? I was not aware of this meeting.”
Bonnie Brown and Antione Green.
Here’s what I want to know —
WHY is this School Board asking for a “diversity plan” and ignoring Wolf’s push for accepting the 21 children of the founder’s into the school?
Seems to me that the “diversity plan” is way overdue (wasn’t that promised back in May?) and I have yet to hear an actual REASON why the School Board refuses to let the founders’ children have a guaranteed placement in the school. Wolf is right on with wanting BOTH!
WHAT GIVES? Why can’t there be a DIVERSITY PLAN that includes the founders’ children?
Can someone please post a link to the actual executed charter document? I’ve been unable to attend the recent meetings and am extremely curious how anyone proposed to reserve any slots for anyone, given that it appears to violate the state code. At least, that’s what was said when it was just the 20-odd founders’ kids that were involved.
I can’t find anything in the state code that speaks to that. This will be the only charter school in the nation that doesn’t allow seats for founders’ kids. Other charter schools in Virginia have allowed it. Someone on the school board must be jerking the charter founders around on this. As I understand it, Wolf tried to get the board to agree to give the 21 seats for founder’s kids. She and Keith West voted for it — Lisa Dawson, Betsy Carr and George Braxton voted against it. If it violated state code, wouldn’t the school board lawyer would have said so when it came up for a vote?
This is really not a complicated issue. I believe the political calculus was made by some members that allowing seats for founders’ kids would be problematic politically. If I remember correctly, early in the process there was a proposal to have some level of preference for children within a mile or two of the school, but that went by the wayside also.
The reference in the revised contract from September (p12) is to Section 22.1-3. There’s a quote in there that looks pretty clear to me – I’d look it up in context, but my children are winning the bedtime war tonight and I’m just not gonna do it.
As for the SB lawyer piping up: it’s been amply demonstrated in the last couple of years that decisions in this city are made, by lawyers. at the very highest level, with minimal regard to the law. I’m not the only one that thinks so, either.
See, Ben, that’s why I’m so tweaked by the idea being floated at all. Both those options were declared against the rules early on, then here at the end it’s suddenly okay with members of the SB to reserve HALF the slots for a particular group? Goose, gander, etc.
What really burns me up here is the way the School Board — with the exception of Wolf and West — has jerked the Patrick Henry families around.
Wolf tried to link the 21 founders children with a socio-economic diversity plan. She and West really tried to get both in the same motion and only separated the two when it became obvious that Braxton, Dawson and Carr were dead set against letting the founders kids in.
Looks like whoever declared those options against the rules didn’t tell Wolf, West or the School Board lawyer.
Maybe its a good thing this has happened because now we can get to the bottom of this…. because you are right, Jennifer, it can’t be right for one and not the other …. and Ben, I think you are right, too …. sounds like Dawson, Carr and Braxton can’t keep their story straight …. how can they vote FOR a diversity plan and AGAINST the founders kids if both ideas were declared against the rules early on?
Wolf & West (to their credit) voted “yes” for the founders kids and “yes” for the diversity plan.
Something isn’t right here.
I think it’s great that we have Jonathan Mallard to look at the details for us. But I’m not sure he needs to be on the school board to do that. I started my academic career planning to be an engineer, but I found that I have a “big picture” mind and cannot be satisfied only dealing with details. So, although it was very traumatic for me at the time, it was really a great thing that I flunked out of engineering school.
I will bring to the school board something none of the other candidates has—twenty five years working in the area of government accountability with the federal GAO. I have spent a great deal of time trying to keep the Pentagon honest and they are real masters of hiding things. On one audit I participated in saving the taxpayers $650 million that DOD was hiding in their books to avoid congressional oversight. On the school board I will insist that everybody in RPS, from the superintendent down, understands that it is the taxpayer’s dollar that they are spending and that we will hold them accountable for its proper use.
As to party affiliation, elections for mayor and city council, as well as for school board, were intended to be nonpartisan. The idea was that local government would work better divorced from state-wide or national issues. So, we are all running as independents. For those of you who must know, since I first started voting, I have cried the next morning after voting for Hubert Humphrey, George McGovern, Jimmy Carter for reelection, Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis, Al Gore and John Kerry.
I disagree that we should have someone dispassionate on the school board. We need more passion like that exhibited by Carol Wolf. As you know, I am a Micah volunteer, which means that my passion is faith-based. My religious upbringing taught me that when there is injustice in the world I have an obligation to try to fix it. So, when I interact with children whose academic success is threatened by multigenerational poverty, I get passionate about fixing things. When another neighbor of mine puts their house on the market (which happened again this week) because they believe they can get a better education for their children in the counties, I get passionate about changing things. The major difference between Carol’s passion and mine is that I know how to compromise to get things done.
I too have noticed that Adria and John are all slogans with no plans. I know what I will do when I am elected. I will work to empower parents to make neighborhood schools work. Having seen what a dedicated group of parents can do to make PHI a reality, I know that dedicated parents can make their neighborhood school work. Look at Munford and Fox and Fisher and Holton. I intend to make Westover Hills the next Richmond elementary school success story and I will also do the same for Southampton.
I will work to bring an International Baccalaureate Primary Years Program to one of the elementary schools in the fourth district. For more information about the program, see http://jamesrivermaven.blogspot.com/2008/09/international-baccalaureate-revisited.html
I will also involve the entire Richmond community in fixing our schools. I know how to work with people and get things done. Take a look at the wide backgrounds of the people who have endorsed my candidacy. The only major players that I have not reached out to yet are the three universities in town. But, I will do that after the election.
As to everybody’s favorite subject, unlike Jonathan, I am not a knee-jerk supporter of charter schools. I do not think they are the panacea for all that ails RPS as true-believers think. And, it is no secret that I started out opposing Patrick Henry when it was merely an attempt to restore a neighborhood school for the Forest Hill/Semmes area. But Patrick Henry changed and I reached out to Richard Day to help me overcome my objections. He did and I have become a great supporter of PHI. I put my actions where my words are, and after the first contract was voted down last month, I used my influence with George Braxton to make sure that PHI didn’t end up stillborn in a personality conflict on the board.
So, to me the choice in the school board election is clear. I intend to vote for me!
Re: Big Picture vs Small Picture.
I had this conversation with a former supervisor of mine. Ideally, one could boil everything down to two words on a sheet of paper for any project: “Build Bridge” or “Build Road” and whomever was hired would be able to deliver just that. That’s the mentality I think of when I hear the words Big Picture tossed about.
Whereas a small picture or a nuts and bolts type mentality would go away for a while, and come back with a set of plans detailing exactly how to accomplish the task at hand.
I’d be curious as to what the details are behind your plans to
as well as bring an IB program to one of the 4th district elementary schools.
What will these cost? Will they require additional personnel? Will they come from hiring additional folks, or transfer from other schools? What other schools will be potentially impacted?
As you indicate on your blog, without additional funding forthcoming from the state and possibly the city as well, it may well be a lean year for RPS.
While I agree that this is a big picture, and merits discussion, the implementation is in the details. And I’m curious as to how you foresee all of them working out.
School Board candidates,
What specific changes in the 4th district would you like to see by the end of your four year term on School Board?
Re: “empower parents to make neighborhood schools work”
I too was thinking this sounded a lot like the empty slogans that Mr. Berlin derides.
“derides” or “rides” ?
I have seen quite a few of those empty slogans that Mr. Berlin loves to dismiss and discount when coming from others, riddled throughout his writings on his blog.
I want to thank Mallard for all his hard work in producing the RPS spreadsheet. Now, if only we can get some people in administration to pay attention.
Okay let’s talk about my empowerment plan. You might want to go to my website, bertberlin.com, click on the issues and then read the ones toward the bottom entitled “Am I obsessed with Middle Class Parents” and “The first time I wrote to School Board Chair…” As I have been trying to tell people in this city for quite a long time, the continued bleeding of our middle class families to the counties in search of better educational options is very unhealthy for the city and must be stopped.
Unfortunately, many middle class parents who have chosen to live in the city while their children are four years old or younger already have it in their minds to move out when it’s time for their kids to go to school. They “have been told” that the public schools in the city are inferior and that there is no point in even considering them. Most of them have never even walked inside a city school; they just “know” they are inferior. In certain school neighborhoods, however, the parents have joined together, working with their neighborhood or civic associations to make their neighborhood school work. I refer to Mumford, Fox, Fisher and, more recently, Holton. Those schools have become better and their neighborhoods have improved because of the schools. It is a symbiotic relationship.
My plan, which would already have been in implementation but for the Westover Hills Neighborhood Association asking me to put it off until after the election, will work like this. We will do a census of the pre-schools kids in Westover Hills. We will set up groups of parents of children who will enter school in 2009, 2010, 2011, etc. We will meet with Sally Pitts, principal of Westover Hills School, to let her know that our children are coming and give her the opportunity to plan for their arrival. We will join the PTA, en masse, and start working to make the school our neighborhood school, just as parents in other schools have done before.
I attended the recent Westover Hills neighborhood picnic and there had to be at least 30 or 40 preschool kids running around. I am convinced there will be enough children entering Westover Hills School in the coming years so that no parents have to feel that their child will be alone or different.
Jonathan, the cost to RPS will be negative, because for every child that enters RPS who would have otherwise gone to school in Hanover or Henrico or Chesterfield, we will increase Richmond’s per-child allocation under the state’s funding formula. Take a look at “Middle Class Obsession Revisited” on my blog, jamesrivermaven.blogspot.com, July 20, 2008.
I am sure that there are naysayers out there who say that it will never work. But, then, who ever thought that a dozen or so dedicated people would bring the Patrick Henry School into existence. If you will it, it will happen!
To Gray:
Your question came up at the first Fourth District candidate forum in July, although it was not limited to accomplishments in the district. I remember one of my answers: I said that after my four years on the board the concept of accountability for taxpayer money would be so ingrained in RPS that the City Auditor wouldn’t even bother wasting his time doing an audit. My 25 years experience with government accountability convinces me that an organization’s attitude must be set at the top. I believe that people perform up to the expectations that are placed on them. If we on the board make it clear (and also choose a superintendent who makes it clear) that we will not tolerate mismanagement, then every RPS employee will be converted to an awareness of accountability.
I also expect that after four years I will make significant progress in convincing the various sectors of our community—businesses, the universities, the PTAs, faith-based groups, civic groups, parents and those without children that they have a stake in making sure that all the children in the city receive a first-class education. We must mobilize the whole city to get this job done.
In four years we will have moved away from a curriculum and teaching philosophy that has us concentrating on passing the SOLs. It is not enough to teach our children facts. We must teach them the skills they will need to fulfill their dreams when they leave RPS. Our children need to be prepared to compete on a global scale. We need to give them the critical thinking skills they need to succeed. Most of the content of what we teach our children today will be just a historic curiosity in fifteen or twenty years. So we have to teach our children how to think, how to gather information, how to make decisions, how to understand that everything is related, how to communicate, and how to relate to a world of different people from different cultures.
As for the Fourth District, in four years I expect that we will have gone a long way toward stemming the departure of our middle class families. I expect that I will have helped parents to take ownership of our neighborhood schools. I hope that I won’t have to deal with the sadness when the home of another good neighbor has a “sale” sign in front of it.
I also expect that we will have a successfully functioning International Baccalaureate Primary Years Program operating at one of the elementary schools in the Fourth District. I am convinced that the Primary Years Program will give the children in that school the critical thinking skills they will need to succeed in their lives.
I hope we will have discussed and begun experimenting with some of the things I suggested in my recent “outside the box” blog posting. I am sure that other Board members or our new superintendent will also have ideas on new (for Richmond) approaches to educating our children that we can discuss and experiment with.
Most of all I expect that at the end of four years we on the School Board will have won the confidence of 1- the taxpayers of Richmond that we can manage their money properly and efficiently, and of 2- the parents of Richmond that we can provide all our children with a first-class education.
Mr. Berlin,
Where will the money the put a SECOND IB program South of the River come from?
Northside is still waiting for the long-promised Middle Years program at Henderson. The current Middle Years program at Brown is “landlocked,” i.e. it can’t grow because the school is already bursting at the seams. Henderson has ample room to allow the Middle Years program and could accept the 150 (or so) children who annually qualify but are turned away because Brown is too crowded.
Shouldn’t we make the Middle Years program(s) function properly so we are using the Upper Years program at Thomas Jefferson HS more effectively?
Lastly, wouldn’t placing an IB at Westover Hills work against the success of Patrick Henry?
I wondered this, too, but there really are *that many* preschool-aged kids running around the neighborhood. We could fill up both easily if everyone stayed in the system.
GetRealRichmond
#17
It’s a shame that you hide behind a fake name. Must make it easy for you to state gross assumptions about others. You seemed to have decided that you know everything about me from the 5 sentences I wrote on this comment thread. And there’s no need to be patronizing and nasty. It’s unbecoming a solid citizen like yourself.
“We could fill up both easily if everyone stayed in the system.”
I think with more choices such as the charter and an IB at Westover Hills, more people will stay in the system. One of the reasons I supported the charter was to spur RPS to create innovative programs across the board and to create a desperately needed economic mix in all the schools.
I agree with Wolf, that another IB program is needed at the middle school level even more so than at the elementary level. Most of the flight from RPS occurs when children reach middle school age. Right now, Richmond only has two middle schools people are scrambling to get their kids in -Albert Hill and the very small IB program at Lucille Brown.
note: I’ve heard a good number of complaints from parents disappointed in the way RPS has it’s paws all over the IB program at Lucille Brown and one parent said that the school treats the program like an unwanted step-child.
oh, another thing i meant to mention in my comment to “getRealRichmond”… I never argued with Ms. Wolfe’s right to question the budget, I objected to the timing and method. I think it’s great you feel the need to come one to someone’s defense, i just think you jumped a little to hard.
pagalina,
I am sorry I jumped too hard on you. It made me mad to see you unfairly criticizing Wolf when she has been the only School Board member who has consistently battled for the parents and children of this city. She and West have been the only ones who haven’t sat around acting like it is their job to protect the administrators and do whatever George Braxton or Deborah Jewell-Sherman told them to do.
I think this is working around the edges of an interesting point: what is the role of the SB? Is it to be a liaison to the community from the Administration? Is it the reverse, to be a liaison from the district to the Administration? Should the role be policy, regulatory or administrative? In the Fourth District, Bert Berlin and Adria Scott have keyed in on the policy role, and the debate has been useful.
Ron:
It probably behooves us all to examine what the role of the school board is, rather than search our navels about what it should be.
I am no expert on Virginia law regarding the powers of a school board, particularly in Richmond where the board has to go to the city for the money. Where I served on a school board, we had taxing authority, which made board work a whole different kettle of fish. In a nutshell, our role was to #1. hire and fire the superintendent, #2. oversee the performance of the system in order to make decisions with respect to #1, and #3. tax the hell out of our citizens to pay for it all. (In Richmond, I understand the Board directly hires a few additional folks (auditor, clerk. etc)). Beyond that, we approved expenditures over a certain amount and “set policy”, whatever that means. (I had to live with another board member who thought it her policy prerogative to decide that school personnel would pick up the trash from school grounds every Friday morning.)
As a practical matter, setting “policy” usually works as follows: the board says what it would like to have done. If that means, e.g., expanding the teaching staff, then it is left to the superintendent to decide a.) whether it will be done at all, and b.) who gets hired. I don’t know anywhere that the board directly hires teachers, but a board could decide to fire a superintendent for refusing to expand the staff. Such a decision by the board is fundamentally a political decision, taken after consultation within the board.
There is always a give and take in this process:
A. The board does not act through individual members. It only acts through the vote of all present.
B. A member must convince a majority of other members that the superintendent should go, whatever the “offense” committed by the superintendent. A board member commits a grievous mistake going public with his/her complaints about the superintendent.
C. There is always what an economist would call a “reinvestment” problem if you fire the superintendent. You have to find someone else! This is never an easy proposition with urban school superintendents. Yet, in spite of this difficulty, firings of urban superintendents are somewhat endemic in this country. The average life expectancy of an urban school superintendent is not more than 18 months, if that.
So does the board “set policy” with respect to expanding the teaching staff? You decide. I think… not really.
The real action in policy is in the budget. Boards usually set the budget, including line items, in consultation with the superintendent, and “policy” with respect to the expenditure level at which staff must get board approval. I understand that amount is $10,000 in Richmond.
I’m told RSB has a curious kind of shoebox accounting when it comes to where the money is held and how it is doled out. Combine that with the way that Virginia permits such things as sinking funds, and it gets complicated. I’m guessing Mr. Mallard has a better feel for this than I do or than any of the other candidates since he’s done so much work understanding the budget.
Bottom line: the actual role of the school board is complicated enough without speculating about what it SHOULD be. So policy? Almost certainly, whatever that means. Administrative? Hardly. Regulatory? I don’t know what that means in this context.
When Mr. Berlin pooh-poohs the bits and bytes for the “big picture”, I think he misses where the action really is: the money and the budget. If you don’t really understand these, you might as well be whistling in the wind as a board member. You certainly will miss the signals indicating you should fire the superintendent.
Good discussion. Too often the role of the board has devolved into supporting the superintendent and answering calls at 6 am about bus routes. I am told rather authoritatively, that the board several years ago told Dr. Sherman that she was responsbile for educational performance above all, and that the board would cover her on budget issues. the result was a deputy who ran the RPS inbto a wall on finances and budgeting, and turned out to be virtually unresponsvie. Jonathan Mallard is a great guy, and has worked hard on the minutiae of the shool finances. Where he lacks a vision, though, is that he is not running for school accountant. They really need one, but whether that is arole for a SB member is a diofferent question.
Ron:
Disagree totally. You need at least one school board member who is willing and able to run oversight on the accounting aspect, who has a sense of cost and benefit, who can examine books and ledgers and confirm or refute what the school’s accountants are saying. You don’t have that, you don’t have adequate oversight. If the board had had someone capable of oversight, someone who had some chops, who could look over the shoulder of the deputy, they might not have had the problem. One of the very clear roles of the board is oversight. In this example, the board would have told Sherman “the deputy has to go, or you do”. Obviously the board’s “cover”, as you call it, failed –either because no one looked, or because no one was capable of looking. Most often, board folks are would-be politicians… “vision” people, open minded people etc etc., and they fail to do their job because, as “big picture” people, they are not temperamentally disposed to do so.
There are plenty of “big picture” board people. I’d rather have at least one who is something like Mallard. If you tell me there is already someone like that on the board, then fine.
Be forewarned — the price of accountability:
http://www.styleweekly.com/article.asp?idarticle=16088
http://www.styleweekly.com/article.asp?idarticle=16176
Did you hear?! Mallard was endorsed by the Richmond Voice!
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+coh+22.1-79+405382
Here is what the Virginia Code sets forth as the duties of School Board and School Board members.
§ 22.1-79. Powers and duties.
A school board shall:
1. See that the school laws are properly explained, enforced and observed;
2. Secure, by visitation or otherwise, as full information as possible about the conduct of the public schools in the school division and take care that they are conducted according to law and with the utmost efficiency;
3. Care for, manage and control the property of the school division and provide for the erecting, furnishing, equipping, and noninstructional operating of necessary school buildings and appurtenances and the maintenance thereof by purchase, lease, or other contracts;
4. Provide for the consolidation of schools or redistricting of school boundaries or adopt pupil assignment plans whenever such procedure will contribute to the efficiency of the school division;
5. Insofar as not inconsistent with state statutes and regulations of the Board of Education, operate and maintain the public schools in the school division and determine the length of the school term, the studies to be pursued, the methods of teaching and the government to be employed in the schools;
6. In instances in which no grievance procedure has been adopted prior to January 1, 1991, establish and administer by July 1, 1992, a grievance procedure for all school board employees, except the division superintendent and those employees covered under the provisions of Article 2 (§ 22.1-293 et seq.) and Article 3 (§ 22.1-306 et seq.) of Chapter 15 of this title, who have completed such probationary period as may be required by the school board, not to exceed 18 months. The grievance procedure shall afford a timely and fair method of the resolution of disputes arising between the school board and such employees regarding dismissal, suspension, or other disciplinary actions and shall be consistent with the provisions of the Board of Education’s procedures for adjusting grievances except that there shall be no right to a hearing before a fact-finding panel;
7. Perform such other duties as shall be prescribed by the Board of Education or as are imposed by law;
8. Obtain public comment through a public hearing not less than 10 days after reasonable notice to the public in a newspaper of general circulation in the school division prior to providing (i) for the consolidation of schools; (ii) the transfer from the public school system of the administration of all instructional services for any public school classroom or all noninstructional services in the school division pursuant to a contract with any private entity or organization; or (iii) in school divisions having 15,000 pupils or more in average daily membership, for redistricting of school boundaries or adopting any pupil assignment plan affecting the assignment of 15 percent or more of the pupils in average daily membership in the affected school. Such public hearing may be held at the same time and place as the meeting of the school board at which the proposed action is taken if the public hearing is held before the action is taken. If a public hearing has been held prior to the effective date of this provision on a proposed consolidation, redistricting or pupil assignment plan which is to be implemented after the effective date of this provision, an additional public hearing shall not be required;
9. (Expires July 1, 2010) At least annually, survey the school division to identify critical shortages of teachers and administrative personnel by subject matter, and report such critical shortages to the Superintendent of Public Instruction and to the Virginia Retirement System; however, the school board may request the division superintendent to conduct such survey and submit such report to the school board, the Superintendent, and the Virginia Retirement System; and
10. Ensure that the public schools within the school division are registered with the Department of State Police to receive from the State Police electronic notice of the registration or reregistration of any sex offender within that school division pursuant to § 9.1-914.
(Code 1950, §§ 22-72, 22-97; 1954, cc. 289, 291; 1956, Ex. Sess., c. 60; 1959, Ex. Sess., c. 79, § 1; 1966, c. 691; 1968, c. 501; 1970, c. 71; 1971, Ex. Sess., c. 161; 1972, c. 511; 1975, cc. 308, 328; 1980, c. 559; 1985, c. 8; 1987, c. 402; 1991, cc. 553, 668; 1994, c. 596; 1996, cc. 485, 790, 798; 1997, c. 382; 2004, c. 563; 2006, cc. 857, 914.)
——————————————————————————–
Legislative Information System
Thank you Carol Wolf for sharing that. Boy, looks like some districts have never had a School Board rep, like the f-ing eastend!!!!!
“[The School Board members]determine…the methods of teaching and the government to be employed in the schools….” If this is so, how come five School Board members (four to me personally) acknowledged that the principal, Brenda Phillips, over at Cary is rotten yet they cowered to Jewel-Sherman and decided to keep her in place. Over three years of abuses, bullying, chasing teachers and families away.
“Care for, manage and control the property of the school division” That’s a joke, right?
“Secure, by visitation or otherwise, as full information as possible about the conduct of the public schools in the school division and take care that they are conducted according to law and with the utmost efficiency” LOL…I was once told by a district rep that he didn’t have the power to do anything and that a phone call wouldn’t do any good.
It would seem to me that fiscal and other related details are given rather high charge by the state code:
That’s a pretty big emphasis on the details – the nuts and bolts if you will. They might not generate the level of discussion that other items do, but without a solid, well managed and well maintained foundation, discussion on other items can’t take place.
Since we have all been way off the topic on this thread, I’ll go ahead with my questions.
What percentage of the realestate taxes goes towards public schools? Does that percentage stay within the district it was collected or is it thrown in a central pool then divided between the students and schools citywide?
Mallard, I tried several times to download your spread sheets but they kept dissappearing into my computer or somewhere. So I never got to see them.
This is tougher to answer. But from the information here I think the answer is between 24% and 70%.
Given the various specialty revenue streams, I suspect the answer is closer to 70% than 24%.
The money goes into a central account under the control of the School Board, from which it is dispersed among the students and schools citywide.
Note that I say dispersed, and not divided. I will get to that later in my 10 issues in 10 days series.
Jonathan is slightly wrong on one point. Revenues, from RE taxes or other, come to the city, which then appropriates to the SB, who then assigns it according to the SB budget. SB has no independent taxing authority.
Funding for RPS comes from several sources—the feds, the state and the city being most significant. The percentage of local tax revenue going to the schools is shown in a pie chart in the annual city budget called General Fund Expenditures by Major Category. For the last few fiscal years, the percentage of local funds going to RPS has been:
Fiscal year 2006 25.51%
Fiscal year 2007 24.65%
Fiscal year 2008 24.83%
Fiscal year 2009 24.51%
This compares with local revenue support for schools of 40 or 50% or more in other Virginia jurisdictions. This figure is actually inflated because the city includes sales tax revenue from the state that passes through the city council as local funds. This amount is in excess of $25 million per year and thus the percentage of the city’s General Fund expenditures for RPS is probably actually closer to 22 or 23%. Take a look at the current school budget: richmond.k12.va.us/indexnew/sub/Departments/Budget_Reporting/documents/09BoardsADOPTEDBudgetDETAIL.pdf
The actual money never goes to RPS. Under state law the treasurer for the city is the custodian of school funds. That was how Mayor Doug was able to withhold city funds last year.
As to how it is divided among schools, Carol would know more about that than Jonathan or me. It could be divided equally, that is, a set amount per student in every school in the city. Jonathan says that is not how it is divided. It also could be divided on a basis that puts the most money in the lowest performing schools. I can think of lots of other ways of setting up the priorities. But, despite what Jonathan says this is not a simple matter of showing the facts and suddenly the fourth district will get more money. The school board is a political body and subject to horse trading. The representatives from other districts with higher school funding are not going to simply say, “You’re right! Here take some of our money.”
In the BTW category:
Today the TD endorsed my candidacy, with the observation that John Lloyd would also be a good choice. I’m not sure whether or not I should brag about this, since the same great metropolitan daily endorsed Jim Gilmore for senator.
I wonder if the TD would have listed John Lloyd as their second choice if they knew that John’s campaign worker is driving around the 4th district stealing campaign signs put out by Adria or me. From driving around the 4th district and looking at signs, you’d think that John Lloyd is the only candidate.
For those of you who actually want to see one of my signs, I and my wife are standing by the side of the road holding one every evening at 4:30. Tonight we’ll be at the south side of the Huguenot bridge or the Willey bridge (chippenham). I hope to be back in front of Forest Hill park on Friday, weather permitting.
Bert —
I believe you are distorting Jonathan Mallard’s position.
Mallard has never even implied (to my knowledge) that he is interested in “horse-trading” or that he wants to practice old-school DISTRICT politics as opposed to working for SYSTEMIC policy solutions and equity for ALL schools.
I think Mallard would bring great expertise to the School Board because he in capable of seeing BOTH the big picture and the details that must be in place for any plan to be successful.
Mallard listen twice as much as he talks, a quality I find refreshing in an elected official and worthy of emulation.
Thank you to everybody who has participated in the Richmond Public Schools debate. This has been a great school board race mostly because the candidates have raised significant issues and you in the community have joined in the debate. I congratulate Adria Graham Scott, John Lloyd and Jonathan Mallard for keeping this campaign on the issues.
As you know, I did not win the campaign sign battle. Almost all my signs are down and John Lloyd’s signs flood the district. But I thank the John Lloyd campaign worker who removed all my signs because he forced me into the strategy of standing with my signs throughout the district and waving at you, my neighbors. Although we only looked in each other’s eyes briefly, or waved as you drove by, I think I connected with more of you than I ever could have knocking on doors and leaving my card. Thanks also to my wife Rena who joined my sign vigil on several nights.
I am not so thankful about John’s campaign worker who told some of my supporters to vote for John Lloyd instead of me because I favored legalizing drugs. I understand that he even tried to “sell” this story to the local media. This was the “dirty trick” in this campaign that really upset me. If you want to steal my signs, okay, but don’t steal my reputation.
Don’t forget to vote tomorrow and don’t forget to vote all the way to the end of the ballot. For the children of Richmond, this school board race is as important as the contest between McCain and Obama.
Bert,
Is this your way of telling us that you are a Republican like McCain?
Or, ahem, that you think you are Obama?
Whatever. My vote goes to Mallard. I have never heard him blame his opponents ot try to build himself up by making others look bad.
MALLARD. He’s smart. He’s capable. He’s a real grown-up.