Washington Post Misses the Mark on School Board Endorsements
Once again, the Washington Post has truly missed the mark on Prince George’s County political endorsements. In many cases, they fortunately have little influence as they rarely predict the winners. Even if they do, they are busy about jumping on the bandwagon when (surprise, surprise) that elected official turns out to be self-interested and corrupt.
I cannot see how one could vote for Ms. Epps in District 1 when nobody has ever heard of her. She has not shown any track record of involvement in our public schools. I cannot comment on their choice for District 4, which is also perhaps an alarm bell because I’ve never met or seen Micah Watson at a school-related function. He just seems like a politically-ambitious person who is looking for his next gig as an elected official.
In District 5, I am even more astounded that they have picked the status quo. Why vote for someone who has a deep knowledge of the system, when that system is broken? And shouldn’t we all have a deep knowledge of the system? We don’t because budget documents and board meetings where actual business is conducted are closed or not transparent to the public. Since Jacobs has presided for five terms as the chair, I hold her primarily responsible for this problem. And perhaps the Post should take a closer look at her list of past contributors, such as Ricker Brothers (who are now in prison for bribes given to Jack Johnson). See more here: http://wp.me/p15aII-4m I question Jacobs’ relationship to these individuals and while I certainly can’t conclude “guilt by association” it does seem suspicious.
In District 7, we have a candidate in Henry Armwood who openly rebuffs and bullies any parent who comes to public hearings to express genuine criticism, engages in name-calling of people through his online Twitter feed when he disagrees with their opinion, and demonstrates a condescending attitude toward constituents whom he believes do not have the knowledge or experience he possesses as a grandfather of five (that’s his trademark word for “experience”). How is that commendable, admirable, or in any way electable?
Finally, in District 8, I am stunned at the endorsement of Andre Nottingham. Just two years ago, he conducted a poorly-run, unsuccessful campaign for County Council. Now he is magically interested in the School Board seat. Why? Perhaps he sees it as a stepping stone to higher office rather than an important job that requires serious thought, consideration, and level of visibility in the public schools already before running. Edward Burroughs represents a far better choice. Burroughs was censured for being concerned and responsive, something the rest of the current board seems uninterested in doing. No board members even have children in the school system, which is why perhaps they are pleased with their “hard work” because they are not recipients of a public education deemed nearly the worst in Maryland.
A Review of the PGCPS FY 2013 Budget
With little fanfare, the Prince George’s County School Board recently approved the FY 2013 Budget following the implementation of the new School-Based Budgeting Process. Only about a dozen speakers testified at one of the two public hearings, in stark contrast to last year when more than a hundred showed up to express concerns about the FY 2012 Budget. Part of the reason the community was silenced is because, in large part, the status quo was maintained and no significant cuts were made. The other reason that it was less controversial, I believe, is because the focus of the process was shifted to schools, rather than the Superintendent and central office.
In general, I applaud the shift to School-Based Budgeting. I think that, over time, it will allow each school’s community to collectively decide what they value most, and what is no longer necessary, to provide a high quality education to our children. Next year, principals should solicit the community to become more engaged in the process as it unfolds by holding their own forums and public input sessions. As we ask the community to consider what’s most important to pay for with limited resources, we will develop an army of advocates and engaged parents who are more committed to their responsibilities in educating our children.
As each school prioritizes their individual budgets, there’s a significant opportunity to expand the role of parents, churches, nonprofits, and other community partners. Principals should consider creating line items in their budgets where monetary resources are not available, but the needs could be filled by parent volunteers, tutoring sessions sponsored by nonprofit and community groups, or sports and extracurricular enrichment activities hosted and paid for by local businesses, churches, and other community partners. We are all responsible for educating the next generation, and delineating roles for all to participate could help supply unmet needs.
I still have serious concerns about spending on central office administrative functions. The School Board could potentially have as many as five new members, and this presents a real opportunity for change. I would encourage all candidates to consider how they would approach union negotiations that determine the salary scales for administrative staff versus teachers, and I hope that the School Board will take a more serious look at (1) reducing salaries that are not in line with the market for positions such as secretaries and data entry clerks; and (2) eliminating additional positions in the central office that are not part of the core mission of PGCPS.
The School Board should also request that next year’s budget provide more details about the line item for “Contractual Services” within each division. While some divisions spend only a few thousand dollars on contracted services, others such as the Department of Information Technology will spend $6.5 million in FY 2013. Complete transparency will ensure that (1) the contracted services meet a legitimate need; and (2) that taxpayers have an opportunity to hold PGCPS and School Board members for any questionable contract awards to vendors with whom they may have personal investments or relationships.
In summary, the PGCPS Budget for FY 2013 is a step in the right direction, but only a step. We still have a lot of work ahead of us to ensure transparency and accountability for spending our limited tax dollars wisely on education. However, it will also require personal responsibility from all of us to make sure that our children receive the education they deserve, and that will prepare them to be college and career ready.
New Year, Same Concerns
In case you’re wondering where I have been for the past few weeks, the pace of my real job (the one that pays the bills) has been keeping me unbelievably busy. The blog has taken a backseat to family and work priorities, which I am sure most of you understand. There’s also been little space to say anything “new.” Most of the blog posts from a year ago could be cut and pasted into my 2012 archive. Let’s do a quick review:
- The County’s projected deficit of $126 million for FY 2013 is nearly double from what it was at this time last year, when it was a reported $77 million. Somehow, our County Executive still found a $50 million “surplus” to start an economic development fund. So far, we can’t tell how a dime of it has been spent, as the online tracking system indicates the last update occurred on September 30, 2011. The County Executive’s ”Pledge for Prince George’s County” promised to “deliver a comprehensive job creation, competitive housing market, and economic growth plan within the first 100 days.” I have never seen this plan, and if it exists it surely isn’t delivering the kind of economic growth we need to fix our budgetary woes.
- A year ago today, I attend one of the first Accountability, Compliance, and Integrity Task Force meetings. Part of the County Executive’s plan for ethics reform, the Task Force was asked to come up with recommendations that would help fulfill Baker’s “Pledge” for comprehensive thics reform for all elected officials. One of the Task Force’s key findings was that the County should hire an Inspector General to help identify ethics violations and determine areas where waste, fraud, and abuse were occurring. This would have been very helpful in closing our budget gap too, but since an Inspector General will not be hired, that won’t help us in 2012. We still haven’t received any indication that a comprehensive ethics reform package has been delivered, just a tweak of a couple of laws last year that I’m not sure will deliver genuine reform.
- Speaking of ethics, Jack and Leslie Johnson still walk free today. Thankfully, the wheels of justice move more quickly than the wheels of our County government. Although today it was announced that Jack’s date to report to prison was pushed back to February 18, and Leslie doesn’t report until March 9, at least they are both headed where they belong.
- County Council is not exempt from criticism either. They once again ignored the will of their constituents, who clearly weren’t happy with their lavish retreat spending last year, and headed out of town for “focused work” on the 2012 agenda. Their ”retreat” at a hotel in Baltimore cost taxpayers approximately$11,000, and none of those dollars were even spent in our County. Once again, we learn that our elected officials are not really “just like us” because they enjoy spending on Gucci while they are operating on a Sears budget.
- To our credit, we didn’t kick off 2012 with 12 homicides in 12 days. But that doesn’t mean we are exempt from public safety concerns. Our homicide rate has moving along at a steady clip for the past year, and I haven’t seen any changes to the criminal justice system, that were promised in the “Pledge for Prince George’s County,” that have really helped curb crime.
The good news? After all the time I have spent blogging about the Prince George’s County Schools, it seems that they have taken a step in the right direction with a School-Based Budgeting system. I think it will give schools (and their communities) more input in addressing specific needs. I think it could still use some improvement, but that’s for another blog post, coming soon. In the meantime, what do you think? Has anything promised in Baker’s Pledge for Prince George’s County been delivered? I’d call the County to find out, but I’m not sure where to begin because we’re also still waiting for the all-access number called 311.
Transportation Payments Is No Substitute for Making Actual Improvements
District 9 Councilman Mel Franklin has submitted a letter to the Prince George’s County delegation opposing a bill submitted by Senator Doug Peters that would allow developers to make a payment to a general transportation fund instead of paying for specific infrastructure improvements needed for their projects. I agree with Councilman Franklin’s position, and he has requested that the bill be amended by excluding all of Council District 9 from the “infrastructure payment in lieu of building necessary roads.” We don’t need more clogged roads and traffic due to urban sprawl throughout District 9, and developer payments to a general transportation fund instead of making infrastructure improvements is sure to lead to that outcome. Please support my Councilman’s position on this bill, and make your opinion known to your legislators by contacting them as soon as possible.
25-Year Property Tax Breaks for Developers: Are They Necessary?
Submitted by Tamara Davis Brown; Clinton, MD
Do you want a property tax break? I certainly do, but the County Executive wants to give a property tax break to developers for a period of 25 years! Does this seem fair? It does not seem fair to me, but before I explain my rationale take some time to review the legislation for yourself (PG 418-12): http://www.princegeorgeshousedelegation.com/ (go to Legislation tab).
The Prince George’s County House Delegation Chair, Delegate Melony Griffith, introduced local legislation on behalf of the County Executive to give developers a 25-year property tax break for developers who will: (1) develop transit-oriented development within one-mile of a County Metro Station or 1/2 mile of a MD regional commuter transit station; (2) a revitalized tax credit district; or (3) an urban renewal district designated by the County Council. Sounds good so far, right?
However, did we think about infrastructure costs that usually accompany such developments? The bill is silent on who pays the needed road and other infrastructure improvements surrounding those sites. Prince Georgians and Marylanders will be paying for nice road improvements (exits) around the beltway for National Harbor as part of the Wilson Bridge improvement projects. Shouldn’t the bill specifically require developers to pay the infrastructure costs? Did we think about the schools needed to accommodate the mixed use facilities and multi-family residential units (i.e., code word for “apartments”) that the legislation proposes? What about parking? The bill will give developers the same 25-year property tax break for building an off-street parking facility for 250 spaces. Is a 250-space parking garage large enough near our Metros where you also want to add office and retail? The bill proposes a job requirement for a retail establishment of 100 jobs? Really, why sell us so cheap? We need more than 100 jobs for County residents (I think I personally know about 1/3 of that amount that need a job right now). The County’s ask of the developers is impotent.
Most importantly, consider the fact that the County is losing revenues due to high unemployment and high foreclosures. Do we really want to break the backs of taxpayers (middle class) by supporting a 25-year property tax credit for rich developers solely for the purpose on luring them to the County? Developers will see a return on their investment after about the first five years of development, yet Prince Georgians are asked carry the tax burden for another 20 years. Should we be paying for bond bills into perpetuity to finance the needed infrastructure? So I ask again, is this fair?
I support Mr. Baker’s efforts to bring commercial dollars to our County, but if we don’t see the return in our investment until 20+ years later, long after he will be out of office, it’s a no gain for the County. Is the loss in commercial property tax revenue, which is much higher than residential, worth the County’s investment? The County is now armed with a $50 million economic development fund that should provide some assistance to developers, but the proposed property tax break is too long.
I think it should be shortened to seven years (the balance of Mr. Baker’s time in office, assuming he will have two terms) so as to not tie the hands of future County leaders and to ensure that commercial dollars are coming into the County’s coffers sooner. The incentive would still be present, but have less burden on taxpayers.
If you agree with my assessment, please call, write or email your state Delegate and state Senator to ask that this local bill, PG 418-12, be amended to shorten the tax benefit to developers to seven years and to strengthen the bill with more requirements of developers. The MD General Assembly reconvenes on January 11, 2012 for the 2012 Legislative Session, so there’s no time to waste. Contact your legislators today.
Still in the fight to do what is right.
The Wide Reach of Corruption in Prince George’s County Ties Into PGCPS
With the sentencing of Jack and Leslie Johnson, many believe the final chapter is closed on corruption in Prince George’s County. U.S. Attorney Rod Rosenstein reminded us that those who think they slid under the radar of federal authorities should not rest easy just yet. A quick look at the campaign contributions by Ricker Brothers should tell us all that corruption within Prince George’s County politics didn’t end with Jack Johnson.
Dr. Baig was not the only person handing over cash to Jack in this scandal. For those who might have already forgotten, Daniel Colton and Patrick Ricker, who represent Ricker Brothers, are serving time in federal prison for their roles in bribing public officials, uncovered during the FBI’s investigation of Jack Johnson.
Turns out Daniel Colton and Patrick Ricker are well known to most of the County’s elected officials, even if they are not household names among voters. They gave money to the campaigns of dozens of people who supposedly represent us. Even after their convictions, I’m not aware of any politician who decided to return their “tainted” money.
Although I would love to explore each and every politician’s ties to Ricker Brothers, because I am most concerned about Prince George’s County Public Schools (PGCPS), one political contribution surprised me more than the others. Ricker Brothers was very generous to our PGCPS School Board Chair, Verjeana “Jeana” Jacobs, giving $1,000 to her campaign for the School Board. Statter 911 did an excellent job of reporting Colton and Ricker’s ties to Jacob’s husband, David. So perhaps even though Ricker Brothers has no stake in the quality of our School Board’s elected leaders, they might have had a interest in where the School Board spent their capital money. I’ve not been able to confirm who actually owns Washington Plaza and their sales representative won’t comment, but let me just point out that it sits adjacent to the Westphalia development, which was a major project of Daniel Colton and Patrick Ricker according to an September 28, 2009 article from the Washington Post.
Verjeana Jacobs was one of the fiercest advocates of moving School Board headquarters to Washington Plaza, which eventually was nixed by the General Assembly and wasted millions of taxpayer dollars in the process. A PGCPS Fact Sheet (dated December 15, 2008, just Google it) showcases the benefits of the move. Is it any surprise that her husband was a registered lobbyist for Ricker Brothers around the same time (November 2008-September 2009)? In a further twist, David Jacobs stepped down from that position to become a registered lobbyist for the Prince George’s County Council. You can’t make this stuff up! Perhaps the answer is as simple as Jeana Jacobs’ husband lobbied for the Ricker Brothers, and they were kind enough to make a contribution to her campaign because of that connection. I’m not sure I’d want to be associated with them too closely now that they are in federal prison. I don’t have all the answers, but I’m sure the FBI has the resources to put all the puzzle pieces together, and is hopefully working hard to do so.
I think we should ask Verjeana Jacobs to clear her record by disclosing whether her ties to Ricker Brothers had anything to do with the Washington Plaza deal. The owners of the Plaza aren’t talking. At least, I’ve asked them about it and they declined to comment. I encourage my readers to give them a call too. Then right after you do that, call all of your other elected officials that gladly took Ricker Brother’s money (including our current County Executive), and ask them to return it so we can remove the stain of his corruption from our County for good.
Here’s a list of all the candidates and slates who took money from Ricker Brothers to support their campaign activities:
| ACHIEVEMENT 2000; Prince Georgians For A New Millenuim Slate |
$250.00 |
| ACHIEVEMENT 2000; Prince Georgians For A New Millenuim Slate |
$500.00 |
| ACHIEVEMENT 2000; Prince Georgians For A New Millenuim Slate |
$250.00 |
| Baker, Rushern III Friends Of-Comm For Pol Change (CPC) |
$250.00 |
| Benson, Joanne C. Friends Of |
$200.00 |
| Benson, Joanne C. Friends Of |
$1,000.00 |
| Better Communities Committee Slate |
$100.00 |
| Better Communities Committee Slate |
$500.00 |
| Black, Alonzo (AL), Citizens to Elect |
$100.00 |
| Black, Alonzo (AL), Citizens to Elect |
$100.00 |
| Black, Alonzo (AL), Citizens to Elect |
$100.00 |
| Branch, Talmadge Friends of |
$1,000.00 |
| Branch, Talmadge Friends of |
$100.00 |
| Committee For A Progressive Prince Georges Slate |
$250.00 |
| Currie, Ulysses Friends Of |
$1,000.00 |
| Currie, Ulysses Friends Of |
$200.00 |
| Currie, Ulysses Friends Of |
$2,000.00 |
| Democratic State Central Committee Of Maryland |
$1,500.00 |
| Democrats 2000 Slate |
$1,000.00 |
| Duncan, Doug Friends Of |
$500.00 |
| Ehrlich, Bob For Maryland Committee |
$4,000.00 |
| Ehrlich, Bob For Maryland Committee |
$150.00 |
| Grady, Milt Friends Of |
$100.00 |
| Green, Leo Friends Of |
$250.00 |
| Healey, Anne Friends Of |
$250.00 |
| Healey, Anne Friends Of |
$250.00 |
| Holmes, Marvin E. Jr. Friends Of |
$250.00 |
| Ivey, Glenn Friends Of |
$1,000.00 |
| Ivey, Glenn Friends Of |
$250.00 |
| Jackson, Michael Friends Of |
$500.00 |
| Jacobs, Jeana Citizens For |
$1,000.00 |
| Judges, Comm. To Ret. Sitting C.C. Bruce, Warren, Jaklitsch |
$1,000.00 |
| Lawlah, Gloria Friends Of |
$500.00 |
| Lawlah, Gloria Friends Of |
$500.00 |
| Merkowitz, David Friends Of |
$100.00 |
| Miller, Mike Marylanders For |
$1,000.00 |
| Miller, Mike Marylanders For |
$1,000.00 |
| Miller, Mike Marylanders For |
$1,000.00 |
| Miller, Mike Marylanders For |
$1,000.00 |
| Miller, Mike Marylanders For |
$1,000.00 |
| O’Donnell, Tony Friends Of |
$500.00 |
| O’Donnell, Tony Friends Of |
$1,000.00 |
| Patterson, Obie Committee To Elect |
$250.00 |
| Patterson, Obie Committee To Elect |
$400.00 |
| Patuxent Progressive Leadership Slate |
$4,000.00 |
| Skerpon, Lynn Loughlin Friends Of |
$100.00 |
| Skerpon, Lynn Loughlin Friends Of |
$100.00 |
| Swain, Darren M. Friends Of/Visionaries 2000 |
$100.00 |
| Townsend, Kathleen Kennedy Friends Of |
$2,000.00 |
| Townsend, Kathleen Kennedy Friends Of |
$1,000.00 |
| Twenty Third District Team Slate |
$500.00 |
| Twenty Third District Team Slate |
$2,500.00 |
| Victory Team Slate, The |
$4,000.00 |
| Victory Team Slate, The |
$350.00 |
| Vision For 2006 Slate |
$2,000.00 |
| Vision For 2006 Slate |
$500.00 |
Gambling Away Our County’s Future: We’re All Guilty as Charged
The headlines around the County today make it clear that the debate about whether to put slots in Prince George’s County has a way of bringing many people into the political process. I won’t be using my blog to state a position on slots, but will provide some additional food for thought on this issue. I’m not surprised at the way the final vote turned out yesterday. Tom Dernoga had it right when he tweeted that the 5-4 vote was decided long before our residents packed Council chambers to try and persuade Council opinion on the matter. But how were those votes decided, and when?
Many of my fellow bloggers, tweeps, and political activists point to Senator Mike Miller’s personal stake in Rosecroft Raceway, and his persuasion over those Council members who owe their positions to him, as the one to place their blame. Senator Miller is undoubtedly the most powerful politician in Maryland, if not the United States, for the amount of control he can exert over the political process. That is not up for much debate. But Senator Miller is also correct that Prince George’s County relies too heavily on state funding to pay for our schools, the new hospital we want, additional transit options, more funding to encourage growth around our metro stops, etc. Many people may not like it when I point this out, but our tax cap also limits our ability to generate more tax revenue and just “hoping” for future commercial development won’t pay our bills now. We can’t just go to Annapolis each year with a tin cup in our hand and hope they’ll find a way to send more money our way. Those days are over, the state coffers are empty.
Do I believe there’s waste in our County government that can help reduce our operating deficit? Of course. I’ve pointed that out multiple times on this blog, and uncovered ways that our government overpays employees, overstaffs their administrative positions, and provides mediocre services. But that’s not going to fix the long-term structural deficit we face. We’re going to have to pay more now to get the government services our residents want, and if we’re unwilling to do that then our elected officials are going to make the lousy choice we observed yesterday by opening the door to putting slots in the County to generate the revenue we need. Of course, this doesn’t guarantee slots will deliver that revenue, but it is one of the few options left on the table.
We’ve come to a point where we can’t aspire to Cadillac services on a Ford budget. So we get what we deserve, and an issue I’ve harped on repeatedly: we spent far less on our students than any other jurisdiction in the region or the state, and we get poor-performing schools. Poor-performing schools are dropout factories for youth who turn to crime to survive, and that crime discourages commercial development and high-end growth because nobody who has a choice would want to come here. Crime also costs us money as we pay for more social services, jails, and public safety support to deal with the problems generated from crime. I’m not painting a pretty picture here, but it is the reality that we are facing right now.
We do have choices, and some of those choices don’t involve more taxes. If you want to change the way our community looks, then you need to start by helping our youth. Get involved in your local schools, ask your church leaders to rally people to volunteer their time to mentor and tutor our children, and foster neighborhood relationships so you can create a community where you are proud to live. If you don’t like the choices our politicians make, then don’t just show up at a public hearing to complain. Volunteer for an honest candidate who will make courageous choices as a politician. To remove political party bosses like Senator Miller require lots of money and hundreds, if not thousands, of volunteers who knock on every door in this county to educate, inform, and get our residents to the polls to make a change. Otherwise, you’ll get what we’ve always had: people who are bought and paid for holding elected office, making choices with the limited options that are on the table, with residents who are unwilling to get off their comfortable couches and make positive changes in this community.
Voluntering your time doesn’t cost a dime. Every hand can help, everybody can do something, but we all have to contribute to shaping a more positive future for this county, or nothing will change.
Why Education Matters
Education is the most critical issue facing the county right now. We can’t create jobs if people aren’t educated for them, we can’t spur development with poor-performing schools, and we can’t reduce crime if we don’t educate our children out of a life of crime. We need to push for a fully transparent PGCPS budget (at the central office) this year. I agree we need more revenue too, as Dr. Hite says, but let’s make sure our own house is in order first. Join me in this fight. We’ll be circulating an online petition soon, which you can sign. Stay tuned, stay involved!
Your Input Needed on FY 2013 PGCPS Budget
Please come out and provide your feedback on the FY 2013 PGCPS Budget tonight!
PGCPS Superintendent will hold the 2nd of two public hearings to discuss the FY 2013 PGCPS Operating Budget on Tuesday, October 25th at 7:00 p.m. This is an opportunity for parents, guardians, and community members to be involved in the process and to express your concerns.
- The public hearing is in the Boardroom at the Sasscer Administration Bldg. located at 14201 School Lane, Upper Marlboro. Please click the following link for directions, http://schools.pgcps.org/officedirections.asp?code=10013
- To speak at the hearing, you must be registered. To register, please send an email to eferg@pgcps.org or call (301) 952-6382;
- Please have your testimony statement prepared for speaking and bring 2-3 copies;
This is serious business about the education of our children, the more people who attend the better!
PGCPS Budget for FY 2013
Below are remarks I made at the Superintendent’s Public Hearing on October 19, 2011. Let me preface this blog entry by stating that I was one of only two individuals who showed up to speak. Last winter, after budget cuts were proposed, more than a hundred individuals showed up to speak at the public hearing I attended. Parents, we need to be involved in the budget process from the very beginning if we are going to keep the pressure on the Board of Education to keep funding in our classrooms instead of succumbing to political and personal agendas. You will have another opportunity to speak on October 25, 2011, and the Superintendent will introduce a new budget format this year, called “Student-Based Budgeting.” Dr. Hite expects to release the proposed budget in December 2011. Stay tuned, and stay plugged into other advocacy networks. I recommend you join Parents and PGCPS – it’s the best way to stay engaged.
Last spring, I came before you as a prospective parent to urge you to do whatever was necessary to make sure that our teachers and their students are given top priority. Since that time, as I watched the process unfold from the sidelines, it became evident to me that while our public commitment is to put our children first, our political and personal agendas took priority. Because of that experience, I enrolled my daughter in a private school elsewhere.
Not all parents are fortunate enough to have that choice, and that’s why I am here today. I’m not sure anyone on the School Board currently has children enrolled in PGCPS, and while I’m delighted we have a student representative among you, we desperately need a parent advocate. Parents once again ask you to build out a budget that puts our classrooms first. (Note: After the hearing, District 7 Board Member Henry Armwood (not my district) told me that five of his children graduated from PGCPS, and four of his grandchildren are currently enrolled, implying that he understands my concerns as a parent. However, I would ask Mr. Armwood whether he is proud of the education his grandchildren are receiving as PGCPS ranks near the bottom in the State of Maryland. Does he know what they are learning in school, review their progress on a daily basis, volunteer in their classrooms, and come to their PTA meetings? I invite him to respond.)
The last time I was here, I supplied you with information about what happens when we develop our budget starting in the central office. I reported that in one division of human resources, we are paying $65,000 to data entry clerks, $90,000 to secretaries, and more than $100,000 to several mid-level bureaucrats. Why? I never got answers from you. While I understand that cutting those salaries barely scratches the surface of what is needed, I’ve scoured your FY2012 budget and found other examples of waste, such as the IT Department. They have two deputy department heads and pay almost $2M in contractor services. They employ 17 people in their print office to copy teacher curriculum, which is supposed to be created by the teachers themselves. They have 40 computer technicians and analysts in the central office, and similar positions in the schools.
What’s even more astounding is that PGCPS is paying an unexpected $4 million in back pay to foreign teachers after the Department of Labor determined the teachers were illegally charged for fees that should have been paid by PGCPS. The Chief of Human Resources, nor anyone else, has ever been held accountable. It’s particularly egregious considering the Chief of Human Resources possesses a law degree, formerly served in the Office of General Counsel, and should have known the law. These are just a few of the ways we have wasted our very limited resources this past year.
Let’s get back to the basics. If our children can’t read by third grade, the state starts planning a place for them in our jails. These children can’t advocate for themselves, but if they could, they would probably want to go to school early and often, starting with preschool. They would want the highest paid employees to be their beloved teachers, and those who help them succeed with Reading Recovery, and the media specialists who inspire them with a love for books that expand their universe. If we want to get our schools moving in the right direction and restore public confidence, let’s start by spending our limited tax dollars wisely, on the priorities our parents and children have in mind.
FINAL NOTE : Although PGCPS Superintendent Dr. Hite limited me to three minutes and did not allow me to publicly finish my remarks, he did promise to respond to all of my concerns in writing. I was disappointed that I could not finish, because no one else was there to testify after me. I understand that while they want to comply with hearing procedures, some flexibility should be built into the process if they hold these hearings so the public can truly be heard. I will share Dr. Hite’s response to me here as soon as I receive it.
