July 2005

So Much Confusion On School Funding

Tom Roeser pulls out the 65% Instructional spending proposal again in praising Joe Birkett’s idea to adopt a proposal from Arizona that requires 65% of school funding be spent on instruction.

Now the wording is different in the Roeser column.

Under a Gov. Birkett, legislation would be prepared to require every Illinois school district to spend at least 65 percent of expenditures directly on K-12 classroom instruction, a marked increase from the 58.4 percent now expended. Educational reformers have long been critical of the bureaucratic overload that hobbles teaching because of top-heavy administrative staffs. Illinois has 881 school districts, each with a superintendent, assistant superintendent, principal and assistant principal. Some administrators in Illinois are earning as much as $300,000 a year along with lavish pensions. It’s amazing when you consider that almost half of the 881 districts have fewer than 150 students.

I have a slightly different calculation using the 2004 numbers for the state–59.2%, but close enough to know we are using similar numbers.

I made a bad prediction previously, but I think after going through several districts I’m familiar with that no one has thought through the implications of what such a rule would do.

In suburban schools, classroom instruction % would increase and in larger districts in areas with rural areas that transport students the percentage would increase as well.

However, in smaller districts, the ones that haven’t merged, the percentages are already close or above 65% and yet these are the districts facing some of the biggest problems.

In other words, simply forcing 65% of expenditures to be on classroom instruction would do little to nothing to solve the financial problems in those districts. Roeser tries to imply that administrators are making $300,000 in those districts and that is pure bunk. The areas that pay high administrative salaries are suburban districts in relatively wealthy areas.

Furthermore, such a restriction would hit hard on merged school districts. Those are districts that spend significantly more proprotionally on transportation than do suburban districts. By increasing the amount of travel students have to be bused, the districts have to spend more–and that isn’t accounted for in the formula.

If you look at general administrative costs, the highest proportion of costs are in relatively small districts that must have a certain positions filled, but do not have as large of a budget. No district can go without a superintendent obviously. Illinois already caps the percentage of these costs at 5% as well.

Where the higher proportion of funds is spent outside the classroom are in relatively well off districts where one observes higher support service or higher other costs. Those can include all sorts of differences including transportation, libraries, and other non-classroom programs.

The essential problem of such a plan is that it doesn’t address those districts that are most in need of help. It would make well off suburban and larger districts that have a decent tax base reduce extras offered in the districts. In districts that are small and in financial need, no changes will be made continuing to leave them in financial need. In districts that are merged districts where spending is below 65% for classroom instruction, the reason is because of higher than average transportation costs.

The ‘solution’ doesn’t actually address any of underlying problems of the Illinois educational system. The money being moved from other costs to direct classroom costs would stay in the districts that are relatively well off. It isn’t redistributed to financially strapped districts that are generally within or close to the cap.

Making the situation worse is that if those small districts were to merge, their non-classroom based costs will be higher due to transportation giving them an incentive not to merge–one of the worst decisions in many rural areas.

If one wants to solve school finance problems without a tax increase, one has to redistribute from wealthy districts to poor districts. There is simply no other way to do it. Those who attempt to throw a pithy catch phrase at the public are only going to continue the crisis and reinforce the decline of our rural communities and inner ring suburbs.

The larger issue of what is the exact right amount of non-classroom expenditures is hard to answer. For some communities, they need to spend more on transportation. Others wish to spend money on instructional support of have to if they have a high needs population. Other districts simply wish to spend more so their students have the ability to have more experiences.

The question for the state is what minimum level does it guarantee to all students? From there local districts can tax themselves and provide the service level the citizens want. The problem of capping non-classroom expenses is it doesn’t actually address where need is in Illinois.

All that said, it’s an incredibly good issue to run on in terms of how people perceive it so Birkett gets credit for picking a winning issue, even if the idea is flawed.

Eric Zorn Dismisses 100 years of cycling

Sigh,

This would make it difficult to impossible for ?teams? of riders to work together to help their best rider, but who cares? Teams are antithetical to all forms of racing except relays.

Somewhere after 50 years of tradition you quickly overcome objections that teams are antithetical to rall forms of racing except relays.

And the Chicago Marathon would have to be more like a bunch of 10 mile races over 21 days with steep climbs, sprints and cobblestones.

Only Americans would diss a legendary race that has more history than any major sports event in the US with the possible exception of the World Series.

Return the Contributions Governor

I don’t get very upset that the Governor raised money under the current rules, but proposed stricter rules–that’s the history of campaign finance reform and unilateral disarmament never won anything in Illinois–just ask Glen Poshard. Russ Feingold and Jim Leach (R-IA 02are the only two I know of who have abided by such unilateral rules and even Leach’s last tough race included outside expenditures.

That said, the legitimate issue to criticizes the Blagojevich Administration for is that they’ve held onto donations from those shown to be corrupt. Tony Rezko’s Crucial, Inc. was just decertified as a minority owned business and declared a front company for Rezko.

And yesterday we find that another major donor to the Blagojevich administration has identified as running a front company and the City has decertified his business.

An executive working for a politically connected restaurant owner has been accused of operating as a front for a Latino food concession at O’Hare International Airport to secure a lucrative minority business contract for her boss, city officials said Saturday.

Jennifer Tremblay, an assistant vice president for restaurant management at O’Brien’s Restaurant, participated in name only in Camino Latino, which is owned by a company controlled by the O’Brien family, said Breelyn Pete, spokeswoman for the city’s Procurement Services Department.

The company–MADO Management–may have to shut down Camino Latino and its principals could lose their right to operate in O’Hare, Pete said.

Peter O’Brien, vice president of the restaurant chain and a frequent campaign contributor to Gov. Rod Blagojevich and other Democrats, did not return phone calls Saturday for comment. He is the brother of Daniel O’Brien Jr., a prominent Chicago politician during the 1970s and ’80s before he was killed in a 1989 car accident. Daniel O’Brien Sr., who died in 1990, also was a heavy Democratic campaign contributor for decades.

Under MADO Management, the firm has given Blagojevich $20,000 since 2003 with owner Peter O’Brien giving another $2000. Dan Hynes has also received several contributions from MADO and should return those as well.

The key issue here is that a core Democratic value is ensuring equality of opportunity for all citizens. Minority contracting is a key tool to ensure that small business holders with disadvantaged backgrounds have opportunity for contracts that public entities issue. It is a core value of the party and those that attempt to subvert that process do not share the Democratic Party’s values. To accept money from them is wrong because the individuals in question aren’t donating to promote the Party, but themselves.

Return the money.

Extra Credit for Cynicism: How does Jackson Jr. attack Daley for it while defending Blagojevich?

The Audit Finally Has Legs

While Holland’s audit of CMS received some press, it didn’t create a wave either , but today, almost 2 1/2 months after the Auditor General’s report, the Pantagraph runs a tough editorial with the audit and the power washing scandal front and center.

Illinois Department of Transportation executive Robert Millette is in the middle of this one because the firm doing the work, PWS Environmental Inc., is run by his brother-in-law. But the firm was hired by CMS, the governor’s supposed business arm, not IDOT. They may be different arms, but they belong to the same body.

PWS and its president, William Lologousis, have contributed more than $30,000 to the campaigns of the governor and his father-in-law, Chicago Alderman Ricahrd Mell, according to The Associated Press.

This is just one more instance of the smelly deals the efficiency experts in CMS have been involved in.

A recent audit by the independent state auditor general should have been enough for the governor to clean house at CMS. Perhaps the hesitation is because his own Office of Management and Budget also appears up to its ears in the problems pointed out by the auditor general.

Both CMS and the governor have said repeatedly that CMS efficiencies have saved taxpayers millions of dollars. Too bad the auditor general can’t substantiate the claims.

But the zinger is at the end

Gov. Blagojevich was right when he said he wouldn’t put up with the “business as usual” in Springfield’s politics. He has allowed it to get worse.

The danger of the original audit wasn’t the audit itself to the Blagojevich administration. It was that it came just as the Lege was getting out and reporters had the time to track down corruption stories. The PWS scandal is the first, and it’s causing lots of talk in political circles. If more pop-up, drastic action is going to be needed to demonstrate a significant change in attitude by the administration.

LaHood Targets August as a Decision for A Gubernatorial Run

LaHood is waiting for results of a poll he has had commissioned and says he’ll make a final decision by August.

If IL-18 opens up, the Dems top candidate is listed:

Sources say Peoria County State’s Attorney Kevin Lyons has Hastert’s office nervous. Lyons is a well-known, well-spoken area figure and widely considered the Democrats’ best shot at undoing an 80-year Republican lock on the seat.

The Gore-Bush numbers in 2000 were 43-54 and I’m guessing that hasn’t changed much, or a slight drift towards Republicans—we’ll have to wait for the 2004 numbers later this summer unless anyone has them handy. It’ll be a tough race for any Democrat, though a strong moderate with labor credentials could make a race of it. .

On the Republican side, Bomke would be formidable, though the article points out that Bomke may raise regional issues for many being from the Springfield area.

I would rate LaHood as one of the two potential frontrunners in the Republican primary. One interesting issue raised in the article is that Hastert is pushing LaHood to stay put to avoid another open seat.

UPDATE: Fixed Bomke’s name.

The Administration Bends on NCLB

Ed Secretary Margaret Spelling addressed the American Federation of Teachers and said the administration is willing to alter how states measure progress under the NCLB act. The current system is irrational at best and the administration is giving into a lot of pressure–including pressure from suburban Republicans.

While I’m very critical of NCLB, I also recognize the need to have yearly testing. While high stakes testing has many problems, there are no other objective tools to measure performance. By adjusting how that data is used, one hopes that the system will be returned to being rational.

tech problems

Okay, the site is coming and going so if you can’t post to comments and have something really important to say, send me a note at archpundit@yahoo.com.

I’m probably going to rebuild the entire site in a few so the site might be erratic tonight.

A Different View on Rauschenberger

Dan Proft writes in:

Archpundit,

You’ve completely missed the point of what Steve meant and, frankly, said because, unlike you, I was in the room for the Aurora Beacon News sit down.

He did not blame Topinka for recruiting Keyes…how silly. Everyone knows Topinka opposed Keyes even at the end when the choice was Keyes versus Barthwell.

The blame lies in throwing Jack Ryan under the bus without a plan B…you’ll recall the Hobson’s Choice of Keyes versus Barthwell came after SIX WEEKS of the ILGOP’s inability to find an acceptable candidate to replace Jack. The issue was jumping without a parachute which is not usually the example you want set by your ostensible party leader.

And since, again unilke you, I was actually at the epicenter of the draft Keyes movement, I can say your characterization of Steve’s role is inaccurate.

If the nominee had been Barthwell, that logic still holds up fairly well.

regards,

dan proft

Dan said he was having problems with posting comments–there are technical problems right now so I apologize to Dan and everyone else who is having a problem. The simple explanation is that a new build for the underlying site build is not integrating with the databases. I’ve been assured it will be fixed shortly, but don’t know the time frame.

Dan and I agree on virtually nothing, but I do appreciate his comments.

Where Dan and I begin to disagree is over what happened with Jack Ryan. Ryan wasn’t thrown under the bus–he played a game of chicken with the press bus and lost. He knew what was in the file and would give reporters little winks and nods that it wasn’t that bad. When it did hit (as was obvious it would–the Trib had a solid case), he tried to play it down with party leaders including Jim Edgar.

I argue the blame lies with Ryan and no one else (including Proft and Pascoe who I often jab). Then you had a series of party leaders who refused to get in–remember, even when Edgar declined that took a couple days. Hell, it took a couple days to figure out if Dillard was going to run.

In terms of the version of events at the Courier News, I think Dan’s primary issue is with the Courier News. I believe the context in the story leads one to believe he’s criticizing the choice of Keyes. If that’s not the case, I’ll take Dan’s word for it.

Dan indicates that the version I present of how the draft Keyes movement is incorrect–well, then the version Rich Miller and Aaron Chambers have presented is incorrect as well.

Given Manzullo is the primary source for the Chambers article, either Manzullor or Chambers is wrong.