1-to-1 Computing at the High School

One of the lightning rods in the current school budget proposal is the “1:1 Technology Initiative” for the High School. This program would provide a laptop computer for each of the 1,000 High School students. (Currently the School Department provides computer devices for every student in grades 3 through 8.)

Here’s a summary of the costs of the program in the FY 2016 budget, to the best of our ability:

Yes, right around a million bucks, give or take. Or about $1,000 per High School student.

Now this may surprise some, but we at LookOutScarborough believe there should be a 1:1 laptop program at the High School. Kids today need to be computer literate, no matter what their future plans are. And the trend toward 1:1 programs is unmistakable, both nationally and in the local area.

We do, however, have a significant issue: is this the correct 1:1 program for the High School? We claim no expertise in computer environments for secondary education. But even casual research will reveal that there are several different ways to skin this particular cat. Our fear is that our well-meaning School leaders may have selected the most expensive skinning method and, once again, not adequately considered the financial constraints that the Town’s taxpayers face.

We have reviewed the thorough proposal (click here to download) that the School leadership prepared. And we note that they did do a financial comparison of the several computer devices that met their specifications. But there’s the rub! The financial evaluation happened after the specifications were determined. In other words, they selected specifications that fulfilled most or all of their “requirements” without examining the financial implications of those specifications.

Investing in 1:1 technology at the High School is not that different from the major investments we all make in our lives, like buying a car or house.  We decide what we would ideally like to have and then temper those desires with the realities of our financial circumstances.  Trade-offs need to be made between what we would like to have and what we can afford.  Implementing 1:1 technology — like making a personal investment — needs to consider the buyer’s financial circumstances.

In the case of 1:1 computing, the specs call for the device to have a built-in webcam and an HDMI port. Perhaps nice to have, but are they critical to have? And at what cost?

The result of having top-of-the-line specs is, as one would expect, top-of-the-line devices being recommended. That’s how we ended up with a $459 laptop being the chosen device. At a time when Chromebooks, for example, are available in the $200 – $300 range.
Speaking of Chromebooks, a recent article in Education Week stated: “Even some experts who were initially skeptical have begun touting the Chromebook’s benefits, including the ease of managing large deployments, the ways in which the computers can support student and teacher collaboration, and, especially, their cost: Most versions of the device sell for under $300.” (From: “Educators tout low cost, ease of use with Google’s digital devices” by Benjamin Herold in Education Week, November 12, 2014.)

Again, we’re not suggesting that a $300 Chromebook is the answer. But we would like some assurance that we absolutely need a $459 device to have a quality 1:1 technology program at the High School. Have other local schools found less expensive alternatives? What is the “best practice” (love that buzzword!) when it comes to selecting the best combination of low cost and high quality for 1:1 technology programs?

So here are our questions:

Song and Dance Time

On April 14, the School Board presented the school budget to the Town Council’s Finance Committee. It wasn’t a particularly enlightening presentation. At one point, the School Board was trying to demonstrate its prowess and success in negotiating the labor agreements with the various unions. It turns out that’s a hard thing to do when you’re not willing to disclose the financial impact of those contracts.

For instance, the increase in cost of the teachers’ contract was described as “per CBA steps + 2.5% COLA.” Translation: “automatic annual increases specified in the Collective Bargaining Agreement plus a 2 ½% cost-of-living adjustment.” So without understanding what the “CBA steps” are, we have no clue whatsoever of the real financial impact of the teachers’ contract. That’s like asking “how much does that sweater cost?” and being told “$50 plus another amount.” Half an answer is not better than no answer at all.

Steps in the teachers’ contract

Naturally, our analytical curiosity kicked in, so we explored the real financial cost associated with the increase in teacher pay in the FY 2016 budget. The logical starting point would clearly be the union agreement itself. In it you will find the secret of “the steps.” Click here for a link to the table in the teachers’ collective bargaining agreement that lays out the salary steps

It’s not difficult to follow… A teacher’s salary is based on his or her educational level (BA/BS or Masters) and years of experience. Each year the teacher moves up a step and the salary amount associated with each step is increased based on the negotiated agreement between the School Board and the union. After 15 years or if you get a Masters’ Degree, you move to a higher step scale. The COLA increases are built into the annual step scales. And there are other add-ons available. But that’s the basic outline.

So, for instance, a teacher with a BA/BS and at step 10 (i.e., 9 years’ experience) will have a base salary of $48,709 in FY 2015. In FY 2016, that teacher will move to step 11 and receive a salary of $51,518, an increase of $2,809 or 5.8%.

The following table shows a sample of increases for FY 2016 for a few different education and experience levels. You will note that the steps appear to be arranged so that teachers get much larger percentage increases in the early years of their careers.

So how much of a pay increase are our teachers getting in FY 2016? Depending on the teacher’s education/experience, the increase will be between about 2.5 and 7.5 %.  To the best of our calculating ability, the total annual increase in teachers’ salaries in the FY 2016 budget is about 4%. We wish we could be more precise with this number, but current School Department reporting does not allow us to perform an accurate calculation of this fundamental statistic.  Please note that we are simply attempting to report facts here and not making any value judgments on the amount of the increases.

Conclusion: Our current teachers’ contract includes automatic raises of between 2.5% and 7.5% in FY 2016, with an overall increase of about 4% — at a time when inflation has averaged about 2.0% between 2010 and 2014.  Indeed, for the twelve months ended March, 2015, inflation was actually slightly negative (that is, we experienced slight deflation).

So here are our questions…

Please don’t forget about the TOWN BUDGET FORUM to be held at 7pm on Wednesday, April 29 at the High School. This may be a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to hear Town and School officials talk about the Municipal and School budgets and answer our questions about them. They are now soliciting questions in advance through the Town and School websites. Please take advantage of this opportunity to ask about the things that may have been bugging you.   (Don’t hesitate to submit some of the same questions outlined in this blog.  The more often they get the same question, the more likely it will get addressed.)  Click here for a link to the web form where you can submit your questions to the Town/Schools.

As an added incentive to ask a question or two, LookOutScarborough.com is sponsoring a “best question” contest. To be eligible, just submit a question to the Town or Schools and let us know what your question was – either through the “Leave a Reply” button at the end of this post or an email to tthannah@yahoo.com. (The “Leave a Reply” option is public, the email option is private.)

Here are the prizes the winner may select from:

Submitted questions, including those asked from the floor on April 29, will be reviewed by our blue-ribbon panel of judges. The best question will be selected based on the following criteria:

* Question content (75%) – Does the question zero in on an important factor that is currently not addressed in the budget? Will the answer to the question give the public significant insight into the budget?

* Question style (25%) – Is the question asked in a clear, non-confrontational manner that encourages a straightforward and unambiguous answer?

Decision of the judges is final. Prizes may not be redeemed for cash. In the event of a tie, multiple prizes may be awarded at the discretion of the judges. LookOutScarborough.com’s  employees, its affiliates and their family members are not eligible.

One last plea…

The Town Budget Forum is coming up soon – Wednesday, April 29 at 7pm at the High School. This will be a unique (at least in modern times) opportunity to hear about the Town and School budgets and ask questions of Town and School officials.

Unfortunately, this opportunity has not been well publicized. For instance, there hasn’t been a peep in the three local papers about this meeting through the issues of April 16-17. That means any notice in the papers will come April 23-24, the end of school vacation week, and less than a week before the grand event.

Please take a moment right now and do two things: (1) make sure the Budget Forum is on your calendar, and (2) call or email friends and tell them about this event. We need a strong turnout at this event to let Town and School officials that we are indeed concerned by the “first reading” tax rate increase of 8.5%.

 That’s it for now, folks.  Stay informed.  Speak up.  Share this blog.

Happy Patriots Day!

Fred, we got a lot of ‘splainin’ to do on this budget!

Yes, the FY 2016 budget is now out there, all 281 pages of it.  Although it’s not for the faint of heart, we can’t let the size and complexity of the budget prevent us from understanding what’s in it.  So let’s all try to channel our inner-accountant and dive in with both feet!

Remember that on Wednesday, April 29, we’ll be able to ask questions about the budget at a public forum at the High School.  Not only that, but we’ve been promised the questions will be answered.

But now, to provide some inspiration for possible questions that might be interesting to ask on April 29, we highlight a few potential budget concerns we’ve identified…

School salary & benefit increases — very generous or just misunderstood?

Salaries and benefits account for 75% of the Schools’ operating expense.  And most of these salaries and benefits are governed by contracts with the various unions — teachers, bus drivers, custodians, etc.  Those contracts, of course, were negotiated and approved by the School Board.  So don’t be misled when you hear salaries and benefits referred to as “contractual obligations.”  As if they are beyond anyone’s control or just happened out of the blue.  They are indeed contractual obligations that were put in place by the School Board.

In a document released last week, we got our first glimpse at the increase in salaries and benefits in the FY 2016 school budget… 5.73%.  Yikes!  That increase apparently is in the “level services” scenario, i.e., with no new programs or personnel added.  With medical and dental insurance premiums staying mostly flat, one assumes that a good chunk of that 5.73% increase in combined salaries/benefits must be attributable just to salary increases.  So just how much is salary expense increasing in the Fiscal 2016 budget?  Sounds like quite a bit more than the 2% increase we’ve heard about in various contracts.

Questionable comparison alert:   Note that the above four numbers are the increases in school salaries and benefits.  They are just raw numbers.  They certainly don’t tell the whole story, but they should at least lead to some thoughtful questions as to why Scarborough schools are in “first place” in salary/benefit increases.  How can our increase be more than double those of Portland and Cape Elizabeth schools?

So here are our questions:

 Trashing the Trash Tax?

The proposed Fiscal 2016 municipal budget includes $400,000 of new revenue from the plastic trash bags that each of us will now be required to buy at $2 per bag or so and put our trash in before we put it in the curbside bin.  (That extra plastic bag doesn’t sound that green, does it?) So if you’re like most folks who wheel the green-topped trash bin out to the curb once a week, you’ll now be paying an extra $104 per year for the privilege.

Also included in the budget is a savings of about $140,000 of reduced “tipping fees”; these are the fees the Town has to pay to dispose of the trash after it is collected.  This new program is known as “Pay As You Throw” (or, “PAYT”) although we prefer to call it “Sneaky Hidden Incremental Trash Tax!” (or… well, never mind).

The reason for the program?  To encourage more recycling, certainly an admirable goal.  But wait.  You and I, dear taxpayer, will be shelling out $400,000 in order to save the Town $140,000 in tipping fees.  When you come right come down to it, all PAYT does is shift about a hundred bucks a year from your tax bill to a new payment to Hannaford or wherever you buy your newly-required trash bags.  So your tax bill appears to get a bit smaller, while you’re really just paying the tax via Hannaford instead of in your tax bill. If and when we see the detailed financial analysis of this program, we’ll see if it adds up somehow. In the meantime, here’s our assessment of PAYT:

And don’t you think there has to be a cheaper way to encourage recycling?  How about a little public education to start with?

What we also find very frustrating is the manner in which this program was introduced.  All it took was one slick PowerPoint presentation — with absolutely no details of the alleged savings and costs and with minimal public input — and whammo, it’s incorporated into the proposed budget.  When things get rushed like this, one has to wonder what’s being hidden?

So here are our questions:

What the heck is an “allocation”?

Here’s a little item tucked away inconspicuously in the budget package.  And without a whit of explanation.

What the heck is this?  It certainly looks like a list of donations the Town is making — to the tune of more than $79,000 next year.  (It’s hard to read that bottom line request number, but it’s $79,415.)  Please don’t misunderstand, this looks like a list of eminently worthwhile charities.  And presumably the Town is receiving some sort of direct or indirect benefit from each charity.

But let’s have some clarity here: If a charity is providing the Town a service, then there should be a contractual relationship between the Town and the charity specifying the terms.  If there is not a contract, should the Town essentially be making a donation in the name of the taxpayers to various charities?  Answer: No, most of us feel quite comfortable making our own decisions on charitable giving.  (And, no, the excuse that it’s only $79,000 will not fly… even if it’s only the price of a cup of coffee once a month.)

So here are our questions:

The Credit-where-credit-is-due Department

We have a good backlog of questions to cover in future issues of this blog.  But if there’s one that’s been bothering you, please feel to suggest it in the Leave a Reply box below and we’ll try to highlight it in a future issue.  In the meantime…

..

Please mark your calendar now for Wednesday, April 29, 7pm at the High School for the public budget forum.  There needs to be a grand turnout for this event.  You don’t have to speak, just be there.  Of course, if you have a question, so much the better.  If there’s a weak turnout, that will be the perfect excuse to never repeat it.  Come join friends and neighbors and let Town leaders know your questions and concerns.

Thanks for reading and sharing this blog.

Happy trails until we meet again!

CORRECTION! WE SCREWED UP! SCHOOL TAX FUNDING INCREASE UNDERESTIMATED!

In our last issue, due to a reporting error, we incorrectly stated that the taxpayer funding for the schools in the FY 2016 budget would increase by 12.2%. Based on more complete information now available, we know the correct increase is 13.3%. [Please pop your eyeballs back into their sockets now.] We apologize for the error, but not for alerting the public to the large magnitude of the increase.

Also, based on the April 1 release of the first version of the FY 2016 Municipal and School budgets, we note these highlights:

• Your overall tax bill will increase by 8.5% in 2016. (Inflation, as measured by the CPI-U, was zero for the twelve months ended February 28, 2015.)
• The owner of a $300,000 home will see his or her tax bill increase from about $4,530 to $4,914, or $384 (8.5%).
• Nearly all (96%) of the tax increase is attributable to the Schools.
• Capital spending will amount to about $ 5.0 million between the Town and Schools.
• About $4.5 million of additional debt will be issued to pay for much of the capital spending. (Outstanding debt as of 06/30/14 is $97.9 million.)
• Total payments on current debt of the Town and Schools will amount to about $10.0 million in FY 2016. This represents about 13% of total Town/School expenditures.

Speaking of the budget… As an added free bonus to our loyal readers, we are pleased to present an exclusive new resource to guide you through the Scarborough budget season. Please welcome…

The Informed Citizen’s Nifty Condensed Scarborough Budget for FY 2016

We here at Look Out Scarborough! really enjoy boiling things down… sap, facts, even budgets. So it seemed like a natural for us to take the 281-page Proposed Scarborough Budget for FY 2016 and boil it down to something a non-accountant could follow. So our financial staff has prepared a two-page version of the budget, complete with how it ties directly to your tax bill. Another exclusive service of Look Out Scarborough!

With this Nifty Budget you will be able to:

* Astonish family and friends with your knowledge of the budget.

* Confound your uninformed friends with solid facts instead of their vague notions that there has been relentless cutting of School budgets for many years now.

* Answer important questions like, “Of the 8.5% increase to my tax bill, how much of that is due to the reduction in State aid to education?” (Answer: If the State aid to education had remained at the FY 2015 level, your tax bill would “only” have increased by 6.6%.)

Please click here for the Nifty Budget.

More Trash Talk

Image courtesy of FeelGood Trash Advisors, Revere, MA.

Very few details about the proposed new trash tax have been released. It is still not at all clear how much each of us will now have to pay for trash collection. We’ve heard $2 per bag, but don’t have a clue how much trash each bag holds. Even if the bags are quite large and you only need to use one a week, that’s an additional $104 you’ll be paying to the Town per year for service that is now included in your tax bill.

We have taken the liberty of including this additional trash fee (or, more accurately, trash tax) into the tax bill of that “average” $300,000 Scarborough home:

So instead of an 8.5% tax increase next year, you’re looking at an increase of more than 10%! Let’s stop the madness.

Here’s a link to a great letter to the editor on the new trash tax by Harry White.

We’re hoping that the Town Council members have received enough outraged calls and emails objecting to this proposal to take it off the table. But just in case, please take two minutes right now to send them an email. It is, as they say, easy-peasy. One email address will send your email to all seven Council members: scarboroughtowncouncil@googlegroups.com.

The “Tell Us What You Really Think” Department

Marie Antoinette (1755-1793)

Those attending the April 1 Joint Town Council/School Board meeting experienced a real let-them-eat-cake moment. School Board member Jane Leng, speaking as a private citizen and not in her School Board capacity, made an impassioned plea in favor of the proposed School budget. In the course of her remarks, Ms. Leng suggested that those of us feeling the pinch of higher taxes might be better off moving somewhere else, allowing us to better live within our means. (Buxton is nice, we hear.)

Among her comments: “If you say you’re going to move because of the Schools or taxes, well, maybe you have the freedom. Maybe it’s good for somebody to move, because you know what, the market gets better when everybody does what’s best for them. And maybe it’s better for Scarborough if everybody does what’s better for them.”

Good grief. You folks who can’t afford year-after-year of outsized tax increases to support the Schools in the manner to which they have become accustomed should do the decent thing and move! It doesn’t matter that you’ve lived here for many years, or perhaps your entire life. Doesn’t matter that you’re living on a fixed income. Doesn’t matter that you have a couple of kids in the schools and are having a hard time making ends meet in a stagnant economy. Just move so your home can be available for someone who doesn’t mind a tax increase of 8.5%.

Ms. Leng’s comments may be seen at the Scarborough Community TV website: April 1 Town Council meeting.  [Link here.]  Her remarks begin at about 1:23:45 on the video. We urge you to spend five minutes watching how one School Board member sees her role and her responsibility to the taxpayers.  (Hint: not much responsibility to the taxpayers.)

.
Please don’t misunderstand us. We applaud the sincerity and good intentions of Ms. Leng and all our School Board members in their advocacy for an excellent school system. And we are grateful for their service to the Town. But at some point their advocacy for the Schools must recognize and be brought into balance with the real-world financial constraints of the citizens of the Town.  That balancing is currently not happening.

.

That’s it for now, friends.  Stay tuned.  If you want to see the School Board and School Leadership Council discussing the next moves on the School budget, please attend their workshop meeting from noon to 4:30pm this Thursday, April 9, in the Council Chambers at Town Hall.  This meeting is open to the public.

Thanks for reading this blog.  Please share it with family and friends via email or Facebook.  Social media helps spread the word!

Breaking News…

The bottom line of the school budget has been publicly released. Not the details, but the amount that you, dear Taxpayer, are expected to pick up in FY 2016. The envelope, please. And the amount of the proposed FY 2016 Education budget is…

$40,623,274.

Compared to $36,198,345 in FY 2015.

An increase of 12.2%.

(Deep breaths! Remain calm. That’s right, deep breaths.)

The increase left this writer speechless. It’s almost as if the School Board is thumbing its collective nose at the citizens of Scarborough who elected them.

12.2%. And recall that hapless letter writer who was severely taken to task by the School Board [link here] for having the audacity to publicly suggest that the School budget might exceed 10%.

So the stage is now set. We had hoped that the School Board was going to take a different approach this year… perhaps be a bit more sensitive to the inability of the taxpayers to afford large increases. But, alas, it is clearly business as usual. Ask for 12% so we can come in at 6%. It remains to be seen whether that was a prudent strategy.

The boogey men.  There are bound to be several boogey men cited in the School Board’s need to bring forth a 12% tax increase. Don’t be surprised if the Governor’s name comes up. It will likely be stated or implied that he was behind the $1 million reduction in state aid to the Scarborough schools (“General Purpose Aid,” or “GPA”). But, if that assertion is made, it will not be an accurate one.

While Scarborough’s GPA did indeed decline by about $1 million, the reason for the decline was the allocation methodology that distributes that aid, not an overall reduction in State funding. Due to a decrease in our student enrollment and an increase in the overall property valuation of the Town, the aid formula reduced our share of the overall state funding of education dramatically. Whether that reduction was foreseeable or not is unclear. (Note that the total amount of State aid to education actually increased somewhat this year. For a fuller description of this topic, please see Tough Year for Some School Districts in the previous blog entry.)

You will also likely hear the School Board bemoan the fact that about two-thirds of the School budget is comprised of salary expenses that are contractual obligations. As if the School Board had absolutely nothing to do with those contracts! Those contracts were, of course, negotiated by School administration and approved by the School Board. In the past, it has been very difficult to determine the actual financial impact of contract renewals. We hope that the presentation of the FY 2016 budget will allow the public to understand the year-to-year salary and wage increases that flow from those “contractual obligations.”

Be on the look out! We can almost guarantee you will hear this statement or a close variant of it at Wednesday evening’s Council/School Board meeting: “While I have significant reservations about the proposed school budget, I am going to vote for it at tonight’s meeting in order to move the process along.” How many times have we heard that unprincipled statement uttered in the past? If you have significant reservations about the budget, VOTE AGAINST IT! Send it back and tell the School Board to present something reasonable.

Be seen and heard! The full details (or at least, fuller details) of the proposed municipal and School budgets will be unveiled at the April 1 joint Town Council/School Board meeting at 7pm. Let’s make this a standing-room-only meeting! This is the first opportunity for the Council and School Board to see the public’s reaction to the proposed budget. Let’s make certain they see how seriously we take the budget proposal.

One tip if you are planning to attend: the budget doesn’t come up until quite a way into the agenda [link here], so be prepared to sit through some less than exciting matters before the main event. Some people do crossword puzzles.

Obviously this is one of the most critical Town Council meetings of the year. Please consider attending the meeting on Wednesday, April 1, at 7pm. If you can’t make it, tune in to the live broadcast on cable channel 3 or catch a rebroadcast on demand.

 Trash Talk

Moving right on…  Just as the budget season heats up, the Town fathers and mothers seem hell-bent on imposing a new trash disposal fee on us. They can call it a fee if they want to, but we know it’s really a new tax. Why now? Are we failing to keep up with Portland in some eco/green contest? What’s going on here?

First, a quick overview of the proposed program: You gotta buy a plastic bag for $2 to put your trash in before you put it in the trash barrel that you wheel out to the curb once a week.

That’s it. That’s the program. Note that the fee is just on your trash, not your recycling. But still, all of a sudden you’ll be paying at least $100 per year for trash collection if you put trash out once a week – something that’s now covered by your taxes. Tell us again how that’s not a tax increase.

.

The advertised purpose of this new tax is to encourage more recycling, which supposedly will reduce the Town’s trash disposal costs. Wait.  What?  Have the Councilors been swamped with complaints about the current trash/recycling program or with desperate pleas for more Town-wide recycling?

One of the talking points for adopting pay-to-throw is that the current system is unfair. Some of us, it turns out, should be recycling more and trashing less. And we’re driving up the Town’s trash disposal fees for all of us. Shame, shame! So now we’re going to start charging you based on the amount of Town trash services you use. Hmm, imagine if that philosophy – paying for services based on what you use – were extended to all Town services. Imagine the tax reduction those with no kids in the Town’s school system might see! [Editor’s note: I realize I have probably crossed the line here, but I’m just trying to make a point.]

Hopefully the Town leadership will not attempt to ram this program through without an opportunity for the public to understand and react to the proposal. And if they do make the case for the program, here’s a suggestion – why not put the proposed new program to a Town-wide vote on June 9 when we’ll be voting anyway? Isn’t this a perfect opportunity for down-and-dirty democracy in action?

Quick takes…

1-to-1 Laptops at the High School

One component of the proposed 12% increase in the School budget is extending the current laptop-for-each-student program to the high school for the first time… at a cost of $935,000. It’s called “1-to-1 computing,” which sounds much better than “free laptops for all.” Now, strange as it may seem, we think this may be a good idea. The concept, at least – that all high school students should have a high degree of computer literacy – is one that probably most of us would agree with. It’s how that goal is achieved that causes significant differences of opinions.

This is not a simple issue to address. There are many trade-offs to consider in implementing a program like 1-to-1 computing. Trade-offs between cost and effectiveness. We hope that the School administration’s proposal is a reasonable balance of those trade-offs.

But whatever cost School administration settles on for 1-to-1 computing, they still need to work the program into the priority list of School needs. The simple fact is that the community cannot afford all the School’s perceived needs. If 1-to-1 computing at the High School is a top priority, then less important programs need to be ended or trimmed back. This sort of financial prioritization happens every day in our personal and business lives. The Scarborough Schools are not exempt from the process.

The “School Calendar” Proposal

Sounds like the School Board has another hornets’ nest on its hands with the “school calendar” proposal. Here’s a quick summary of the proposal: convert about 4.5 days of student instruction time into “professional development” time for teacher training by having additional “late start” days (or, in Plan B, additional “early dismissal” days). In either plan, it appears that students lose about 4.5 days of classroom time… about 2.5% of their total annual instruction time.

While we are unsure of the merits of this proposal, apparently most of the parents who attended the March 26 public forum on the issue were not at all reluctant to share their judgments – they were strongly critical of sacrificing instructional time for professional development time. And it does seem counterintuitive to expect less classroom time to translate into improved student learning. We’ll update you on further School Board action on this matter.

Your snarky editor thanks you!

Thanks to all of you who read and shared the first installment of this blog on Facebook. In addition to the favorable reactions (which were much appreciated), there were also some critical comments. Which were also much appreciated since they help us improve future posts. One critical response said, in part: “In my opinion there is no place for snarkiness or sarcasm in a meaningful conversation, which is why I question the usefulness or factual accuracy of this blog. And frankly, reporting % increases in budgets for other local districts is only relevant in the context of per pupil spending.”

Three quick comments on the comment… First, we were somewhat surprised that the snarkiness of the blog rose to the offensive level. We had the snark filter on the blog editing tool set to 95% in the hope of not offending anyone too much right out of the box. Clearly we failed.

Second, we do not understand how snarkiness or any other stylistic element affects the usefulness or factual accuracy of the blog. Facts is facts. While one may not agree with the manner in which they are presented, the underlying usefulness of the facts in creating an informed opinion should not be at issue.  (And, by the way, this is a blog, for crying out loud, not a doctoral dissertation.)

Finally, the assertion that percentage increases in the budgets of neighboring school districts is only relevant on a per-pupil basis is highly debatable. An informed opinion requires having access to and considering as many relevant factual inputs as possible. Numbers and statistics can be made to dance. As good citizens, our task is to distill all available data into an informed opinion on which we can act. The purpose of this blog is to provide solid facts for your consideration.

Thanks again!  And if you find any redeeming social value in this post, please share it with friends.