Making Fiscal Sense II

I (Watt now) think Stan raises crucial questions that deserve honest debate even if I have some doubts about Stan's proposed solutions.

To my mind, Stan flags the biggest challenge we face regarding our public schools: Transparency.

Between the privacy restrictions that obscure teacher/administrator evaluation; collective bargaining labor negotiations; and special education spending, voters/citizens/parents are left to accept a great deal of school management on faith. Add to this the sprawling regulatory compliance requirements for public schools and the idea a volunteer school board can adequately manage this bureaucracy has become -- to my mind -- an open question. This struggle parallels our selectboard's challenges working with professional staff.

I believe we are witnessing the decline of citizen-based self-government in the face of inexorable bureaucratization of municipal governance. This bureaucratization is not some conspiracy or sinister plot, but the accretion of decades of honest efforts by administrative professionals to get their jobs done better and -- as should be expected of anyone -- to look after their interests in the process. To me, this goes to the heart of what our selectboard and school board members' roles should be, but that's a separate post (or book).

In the meantime, take a look at a Norwich Town Report from just a generation ago and you can see how much has changed - - not simply in budget numbers, but in the tone and aspirations expressed regarding town services and the future.

I'm not a fan of Tea Party magic wand of fiscal discipline and I'm not saying things were better when we spent less. I'm just saying the collective delusional thinking that has brought our economy to a standstill wasn't restricted to housing prices. It's easy to promise future defined benefit pension payments when everyone thinks we're going to be richer tomorrow than we are today. It's easy to accept higher property taxes, bond payments and educator salary step increases when we're all confident money grows on houses. Those days are now past and the economic dislocation is still reverberating through our lives.

And here, perhaps, the public/private sector distinction is important to recognize: In the private sector, the owners and creditors define acceptable expenses. In the public sector, taxpayers and the bond market ultimately decide. Taxpayers, by definition, are doing something else with their time/energy so they can pay their taxes. That attenuation of the taxpayer's ability to focus on the services funded by those taxes is supposedly remedied through the efforts of volunteer boards and, increasingly, professional administrators.

There is simply no way taxpayers or the bond market can keep close tabs on the management of public sector entities anywhere near the degree business owners and creditors do. We need to recognize that fact and consider practical measures to reduce the danger posed by public sector management mistakes. We've all seen enough private sector management disasters to know mistakes will occur.

Stan's post highlights several school-related risks and concludes they are leading towards fiscal disaster. Arguing about the public/private distinction doesn't help us assess the magnitude of these risks or consider what we can do to address them. From where I stand, I certainly don't think we can expect a new school superintendent to lead that debate. It's going to require concerned citizens/taxpayers/parents asking difficult questions of ourselves and our community.

I wish us luck.

Making Fiscal Sense I

I believe the entire public sector/private sector discussion referred to (on the Norwich ListServ 10/28/10) arises from Stan Williams' "new superintendent qualifications input" post from earlier this week.

I'm afraid the public/private sector distinction is unnecessarily/unhelpfully obscuring Stan's "three major concerns about the state of the Hanover/Norwich school system."

To press the points home, I've repeated Stan's post below [sanitized of the public/private distinction within bold italicized brackets] as I think his points are well worth pondering and discussion:

I have three major concerns about the state of the Hanover/Norwich school system.

1. Unfunded pension and health liabilities will crush our ability to provide a quality education at a reasonable cost unless we continue to attack these costs - the new superintendent must be able and willing to tackle this issue in the next round of contract negotiations. At a minimum, new teachers should not expect to receive a defined benefits pension - this perk has [become a major and intractable fiscal millstone for many states and municipalities].

2) Teacher Evaluation - as a board member for two years, I was never able to receive ANY data on the number of teachers rated excellent, good, poor (use any rating system you like.) I find it hard to believe that it is possible to effectively run a service sector, labor intensive operation without good data on employee performance, and I believe the board and taxpayers need more information, in aggregate - not individually, about teacher performance.

I know the board has addressed merit pay in the past and defining excellent performance is not easy and can be subjective, but [as individuals, we tackle difficult, subjective decisions every day] and [where evaluating the quality of our childrens' education is in question] imperfection is better than not trying at all.

3) Tenure - originally intended to protect academic freedom, this is another perk that really [begs the question whether we are guaranteeing employment at the expense of evaluating quality of teaching]. The administration needs the ability to more easily terminate teachers that don't make the grade (see above.)

To teachers who may think this sounds a bit harsh, I can only say that I do appreciate the individual excellent efforts of the vast majority of the teachers who have taught my children very well over the years. But I honestly believe these are key issues on which we must focus as a school system as well as a society - we can no longer afford to have education costs rise greater than GDP growth in perpetuity. (This goes as well for universities, where the issues above are all in play, or will soon be.)

Thanks for your efforts on the board.

Stan Williams

[paraphrased/rephrased by Watt Alexander]