When Biddeford’s City Council approved the Biddeford School Department budget with $1.4 million worth of cuts, it was inevitable that the citizens would approve it. Without a strong campaign, an education on the impacts of such cuts, and large voter turnout, a vote against the school budget simply wasn’t achievable.
However, the citizens have the opportunity to vote on the school budget for the next three years. The tune from the City Council will sound the same note; “we want a 0% mill rate increase.” For those that didn’t get out to vote this year or overlooked the City of Biddeford’s mishandling of the school budget, not only will you have an opportunity to see a replay of it next year, you have a chance to stop this destruction of public education.
First, we need to hold the City Councilors accountable for being misinformed or deceitful with their words. At the Second Reading of the Budget in 2010, Councilor Rick Lavierre stated that the past two years he was in office, the school budget carried an increase. In the Fiscal Year 2004-2005, the mill rate to allocate for education at the local level in Biddeford was 8.57 according to documents from the Maine Education Department. This figure would decline each year until reaching 6.77 in the Fiscal Year 2007-2008. The increase Lavierre may have been citing was in Fiscal Year 2008-2009 when the mill rate increased to 6.90—a rather minor increase.
“We've always supported [education]. This council supported [education],” said Lavierre at the Second Reading of the Budget. “Past councils have supported it. The city has supported it by virtue of voting for the expansion; 34 million dollars.”
The difference between rhetoric and the numbers appear quite clear. In both the 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 budgets, Biddeford fell well below the state average for per pupil cost according to documents available on the State of Maine Web site. Slashing the school budget year after doesn't express any sense of support for education and certainly shows no investment—even if Councilor Lavierre chooses to say so.
“We have virtually gone unscathed,” Lavierre said at the Second Reading of the Budget.
Councilor Lavierre compared Biddeford's school budget to that of Portland's. He said that he believes Biddeford has done a pretty good job as Portland had to cut approximately 44.5 positions. Of course, the average citizen doesn't recognize that Portland's budget nears $90 million, whereas, Biddeford's budget settles around $30 million. With the loss of 14.4 teaching positions in Biddeford in comparison to Portland's three times as large budget, Biddeford actually saved 1.3 less positions and saved $300,000. Yet, the comparison made and terminology used by Councilor Lavierre was not only unfair and far from the truth, it implemented a great deal of deception.
In addition, both Councilor Lavierre and Councilor Clem Fleurent made reference to the stimulus dollars and government aid that Maine and Biddeford may receive or has already received. While, the allocation of these dollars certainly has provided the school budget with a great deal of aid, they will absolve causing the city to find a way to cover the cost of funds moved into the 'stimulus budget'. If the councilors think that sitting idle for government aid and cutting the budget year after year points to success and support of education, they are mightily mistaken.
“I think we are doing real well,” said Fleurent at the Second Reading of the Budget.
Councilor Fleurent pointed out that City Works Director Guy Casavant requested for $850,000 in road repair, but was only alloted $250,000. The suggestion by Councilor Fleurent that everyone has had to make cuts completely undermines the importance of education. A comparison of tar and pavement to the education of tomorrow's minds is simply outrageous and reason for much distaste in Biddeford's elected officials. Speaking of maintenance, Councilor Jim Emerson cited that the City Facilities Director said the $400,000 lost in the maintenance line of the budget shared no impact to upkeep of the schools. The issue with such a statement is it fails to incorporate the maintenance wounds from budgets past. The loss of maintenance dollars in the 2010-2011 budget only deepens the cuts made year after year; if the council believes the right direction for this city is million dollar renovation bonds then maybe they have this part of the budget right.
Councilor Fleurent later in the meeting referenced the nationwide teacher to student ratio as being 1 to 9. Again, one of the councilors used a general idea or misleading concept to distract from the damage they are costing this district. This calling to the nationwide average exposes Councilor Fleurent's out of touch knowledge of Biddeford's school systems; there exists little to no classes with 1 teacher to 9 students in Biddeford.
“I don't know why we are asking for more money,” Fleurent said at the Second Reading of the Budget. “I think it is the curriculum.”
What most of the city councilors have failed to recognize is the support for education is not a calling of more money, but instead more investment. The city can pave a road one year, and two years later have to pave it again, that is not investment—that is simple spending. Providing an education department with sustainable budgets is investment. It is direct investment in the curriculum that the city has constructed, it is indirect investment in the economy, jobs, growth, and innovation. It is at its purest form an investment in the future.
Councilor Pat Boston took exception to a statement that I made at the Second Reading that suggested the Biddeford City Council has missed the big picture. Maybe Councilor Boston and I have a different definition of “big picture,” it makes no difference. The outcome of lacking investment in education now affects the big picture if defined as one year from now, ten years from now or fifty years from now. As Biddeford slowly moves away from investing in education, measurements such as the Maine Educational Assessment scream out the results. At the high school level in Biddeford, MEA results are despicable especially in the area of math. On a national level, in 1985, the United States ranked first among the world in the share of its population at the age of 25-34 with a high school diploma and also a college degree. In 2005, the United States fell to 9th regarding high school diplomas and tied Belgium for 7th regarding college degrees according to a CBS Report. This is not a generalization, this is applicable to the big picture that Biddeford's officials fail to consider.
Councilor Fleurent said these cuts are going on worldwide, statewide, and nationwide. Yet again, this statement proves invalid. The United States spends 5.7% of Gross Domestic Product on education, this ranks 37th amongst all the countries; Cuba ranks first according to the United Nations 2009 report. The United States ranks 21st in regards to the literacy rate. American 15-year olds score below average for advanced nations on math and science literacy according to National Center for Education Statistics. A depleting investment in education simply is not taking place worldwide, it is happening here in the United States.
According to a Georgetown University report, “a drought of 3 million workers who possess the education training” needed for jobs will take place in 2018 if the current course in education doesn’t change. Biddeford's mishandling of education will cost the development of downtown Biddeford, it will cost the city new jobs, it will spoil property values, it will saturate the welfare system, it will cost the city young minds and new ideas, and it will cost this city its future.
We can stop this educational famine. Biddeford needs to tell state legislators that even a one cent increase of taxes could greatly assist locals. In Kansas, the governor signed into law a temporary one cent sales tax increase that provides the state with an expected $300 million.
The Biddeford City Council needs to end its recommendations to the Biddeford School Committee and allow for a budget to be presented that the Biddeford School Committee sees as best serving education; this would also end the City Council saying they are “accepting the school committee's recommended 0% mill rate increased school budget.”
Schools in Biddeford need to emphasize knowledge production rather than information retention. Integration of technology must develop into a cornerstone of the budget; if students don't have technology, the schools have not adequately prepared them for their future. City Councilors need to visit the schools and speak with youth and teachers about their concerns; muffling freedom of speech or discouraging the voice of those affected by the results creates a prison of regression.
A $175,000 amendment to the 2010-2011 budget would have effectively resulted in a seven cent mill rate increase and could have saved teaching positions and programs such as marching band. The City Councilors must become in touch with the citizens—to say they supported the $1.4 million cuts is not true, they just checked off a box accepting what was presented to them. I personally believe the people of Biddeford would have supported the $175,000 amendment.
Maine has the oldest population according to the Census Bureau. To expect students that find their way out of this state to ever return is irrational. We have left them nothing. A city with schools that have been neglected and not been provided the needed investment will not attract young families. We want to recover from an economic recession, we want to see the mill district revitalized, we want to attract tourists to visit our vibrant waterfronts, we want to create jobs, we want to be the leader of change, we want to discover a balance of young and old, we want to protect our history, we want to create a green environment, we want to avoid another economic crisis, we want to live, well it is time we invest in education now, tomorrow, and in the future.
-Ryan
No comments:
Post a Comment