|
Official
Defends School Administration Spending
MIRS, September 20, 2005
For more articles like this
visit
http://www.bridges4kids.org.
A national study
may rank administrative spending at Michigan schools tops
outside of the Eastern seaboard, but the head of the Michigan
Association of School Administrators (MASA) told MIRS recently
that data collection plays a role in how "classroom dollars" are
calculated.
He also said that taking care of administrative spending is not
necessarily spending outside of the classroom. Rather, the
functionality of a school district has a direct bearing on what
and how a child learns.
MASA President William MAYES defended administrative spending as
the education community prepares for what could be a very public
battle over how state money is spent on education. The American
School Board Journal ranked Michigan No. 7 in administrative
spending and tops in the Great Lakes region (See MIRS, July 26,
2005), a fact that surely will come up during a ballot campaign.
Mayes spent the last 14 years at the Huron Intermediate School
District in the Thumb, the last 12 as superintendent. He started
his new job Aug. 1 when former MASA head Mike FLANAGAN was
tapped to become Michigan's new state Superintendent.
In an interview with MIRS, Mayes also defended the K-16,
rate-of-inflation proposal. He's gathered his signatures for the
ballot drive, but he hopes it doesn't have to get all the way to
the ballot box in order for it to happen.
Mayes, a former principal at Hartland Middle School, also was an
assistant superintendent for instruction at Hartland
Consolidated schools and a government teacher in Fowlerville.
The following are excerpts of a 30-minute interview with him:
Q. What is the biggest policy change you think needs to be
made in regards to schools? Is it the K-16, rate-of-inflation
funding increase question? Is it employee health insurance?
Pension?
A. You've touched on some very important issues. In our support
of the K-16 coalition, we were the last education group to come
on board and our position was very strongly stated: "We believe
increased revenue is critical to education, but we have to have
cost containment put in place at the same time."
We need to come to grips with rising health care costs. We're
not the only ones facing this increase. The bottom line is that,
yes, we need increased revenue, but, yes, we need help in
bringing this health care costs under control. I shared with the
Senate Appropriations Committee a couple weeks ago that one of
my biggest concerns is that if K-16 gets a funding increase and
it all just goes for health care and retirement costs and we
don't have the new programs for early childhood or we can't hire
new and vibrant teachers, then we'll miss out.
It's a two-edge thing we need to have. Yes, we need increased
funding, but we need cost containment and we're working
extremely hard as an association to make sure that happens.
Q. Do you think cost containment can be done under the
current structure with the Michigan Education Special Services
Association (MESSA) playing such a large role in school employee
health insurance?
A. They have about a 55 percent share in health care. I think
you have to look at a variety of things. The Hay Report pointed
out that there are ways you can contain health care costs. Some
of their numbers said $200 million. I don't know. Those figures
still need to be crunched. But the Hay Report demonstrated,
clearly, that cost containment is a possibility. There are ways
you can save money in the health care arena and we're supporting
exploring all of those possibilities.
I talked with MEA (Michigan Education Association), Chuck
ANDERSON, a couple weeks ago. They want to explore putting out a
new product and putting out some insurance things that might be
different. Every step in this process toward containing those
spiraling costs is a positive. It doesn't mean it's going to
happen tomorrow, but, boy, we better start stepping so we
protect the whole system . . .
I want to be able to provide education employees a good, sound
health care system. Good insurance. Does it have to have all of
the bells and whistles that some of the other health insurance
plans have out there right now? I don't think so. You have to
have good, basic health insurance.
Q. So what you're talking about is less benefits?
A. I'm talking about having the benefits you need and not having
the benefits you don't need and don't use. I'm talking about
some of those things. I think looking at pooling is a very
positive thing. If we can do that, that is a step in the right
direction. Economies of scale, the more you put together, the
easier it is to administer and the easier it is to continue good
benefits.
I come from a family that used health insurance. We were a
spike. I had a son who at age 17, was a senior in high school,
diagnosed with sarcoma, a rare bone cancer. He was given three
months to live. But because we had good health insurance and the
University of Michigan hospital, he's teaching school today.
That's 13, 14 years ago that this all happened.
I found, over the period of years, I can afford to pay $10 for a
co-pay or $20 on a co-pay for a prescription and I think that's
fair as long as it keeps the whole system healthier. We just
have to find a way. It may be a higher co-pay. It may be a
higher deductible, but there are ways to fight the high costs.
Q. Is your group collecting signatures for the K-16
Coalition?
A. Yes, it is. We encourage our superintendents to be
participants. I collected 10 signatures. Yes, I think increased
revenue is a critical component of improving the education
climate. I have been in school districts this past week. They
are fighting for their very survival.
You cannot have your fixed costs continue to go up and not have
at least a cost of living increase. We have school districts in
the Upper Peninsula that are an hour … one way. I'm going to
tell you, you know what it costs to pay for gas. It cost you
more than a month ago, when I started in this position, almost
75 cents a gallon more. Think about every day putting that kind
of gas in our buses, but it was budgeted when gas was about $2 a
gallon and now it's been over $3.
Those types of fixed costs are there. Districts are absorbing
them and that's putting them at risk. Outside of some growing
districts, the majority of districts who have had stable or have
had declining enrollment have had to cut staff and certain items
the school district had been using for a good, quality
education.
Q. How are the school districts different from other spending
items in the budget, human services or corrections?
A. No question. I firmly believe that human services needs every
cent it can get. It needs cost-of-living increases. I believe it
is important for them, too. I believe firmly that we're just one
agency that needs increased funding.
When a company looks at coming to a state, executives will tell
you time and time again that one of the things they look for is
a strong education system. A strong school district makes for a
strong community and a strong economic base. If you have a great
school district, your potential of encouraging business and
industry to come will be so much easier.
If you have a poor school district with crumbling buildings and
infrastructure, all of those things suffer when you don't have a
cost-of-living increase. You can't put a new roof on when you
don't have enough money to keep all of the teachers or all of
the programs.
So you talk about other agencies needing money. Absolutely, they
do. But I have the luxury of arguing for what I believe is the
most important industry in this state and will be the key to
turning this state around — educating a good workforce.
Q. Do you think the education community has a better shot of
getting a guaranteed funding increase through the ballot box or
the Legislature?
A. My whole life, I've been a negotiator. I think you negotiate
it and try to reach common ground. I'd prefer that it not have
to go all the way to the ballot and we can negotiate some sort
of settlement so the essence of what we're looking for —
survival with a cost-of-living increase — could be had.
I believe the signatures will come in and there will be enough
signatures to take it to a ballot and I believe the education
community can present a strong enough case that Michigan will
not totally rebound until its schools rebound. That's every one
of its schools. That's going to be a case we can win before the
voters. I'd prefer we not go before the voters, but we can win
it.
Q. Do you think school administrators are paid enough?
A. I think school administrators earn every cent that they make.
Are they paid enough? Some are and some are not. I know
administrators who are far underpaid. It's an interesting job
being a superintendent. Let me give you some glimpses of it.
You're always out on this limb. You're always alone. I
understand, in some ways, a glimpse, of the President's job. The
President is out on that limb alone. When it all goes south,
he's there and when they start pointing arrows, they point them
at the lead person and that's the case with a superintendent.
I have watched superintendents who have worked diligently, who
have worked hard to provide for their districts, who have built
fund equity by tightening their belts, but on a certain issue,
have the hackles of a few concerned citizens who have a personal
agenda to make their lives absolutely miserable.
And on that, no amount of money is enough. We don't pay the
president of the United States enough for what he goes through.
But I'm going to tell you, it's not for the money. It's for that
moment when they see a kid who they said would never make it,
make it. Or it's for that moment when you see that new program
coming out for two-and three-year-olds that will help them get
at a level playing field when they hit kindergarten. That's the
gratification. They want to be compensated, sure, but they
prefer that inner warmth of accomplishment.
Q. We've run stories in the past on studies that have
Michigan's administrative costs among the top seven in the
country (See MIRS, July 26), which leads to the question, "Are
Michigan's schools too top heavy?"
A. Number one, absolutely not. I can say that truthfully because
often times it's how the reporting is done. When you say
administrative costs, what costs are dropped into that category?
In some states, paraprofessionals are reported as an
administrative cost as opposed to a professional cost. In other
situations, are you aware that in Michigan every piece of
insurance — building insurance costs, liability insurance,
storm/water insurance — is an administrative cost. In other
states, that's not administrative.
We don't have a standard reporting form that we're comparing
apples with apples and oranges with oranges. I think our central
offices costs run about six percent, well within the normal
range, and I would argue that those costs have a direct bearing
on the quality education in the classroom.
They provide the support. They take care of the ordering of
supplies. They make sure the building is well equipped and that
has a direct bearing on whether a kid has what he or she needs
to learn on a given day. In Michigan, a vast number of every
dollar goes to educating a child.
Let's have some standard report forms and I guarantee that we
will not be higher paid than, Ohio, California, New York and the
other states that provide quality education.
Q. Rep. Jack HOOGENDYK (R-Kalamazoo) is pushing a measure
that would dictate that 65 cents on the dollar goes to schools,
but what you're saying is that every dollar going to schools
ends up in the classroom in some way.
A. Let's start at the superintendent. A superintendent provides
an umbrella of what goes into the classroom. They oversee the
whole operation. They make sure the buildings are safe, they
make sure there are policies in place that protect students.
They make sure that every facet runs smoothly. That's absolutely
vital. If you can't equate some of that to helping the
classroom, your reasoning is faulty.
If you did have a smooth-running operation, quality education
would not take place. If the copy machine could not be repaired,
you may not get all of the things to make for a quality day.
Every paraprofessional and everybody who works closely with the
kids is direct classroom money.
I could make a very strong case that the person who keeps the
books has a direct bearing on the classroom. Every day. I think
it's a fallacy to try to break it off and that it doesn't equate
to classroom. We have superintendents who get up at 4 a.m. and
start checking roads in the winter, who get stuck, who get on
the phone and say, "I'm stuck. I'm on Shock Road. Get someone
out here and, by the way, get someone to call the radio stations
this morning, we're not having school today."
Governor Signs Bill Keeping Schools Closed
Until After Labor Day
MIRS, September 30, 2005
Michigan schools can't start classes until after Labor Day under
legislation Gov. Jennifer GRANHOLM signed into law today, a
measure the Governor believes will spark Michigan's tourist
industry as the state's economy continues to sputter.
The Governor told reporters she signed HB 4803, sponsored by
Rep. Ed GAFFNEY (R-Grosse Pointe Park), after speaking with the
chambers of commerce Up North and was assured that such a change
wouldn't harm education.
"As a parent and as one voter, I like the idea of starting
classes after Labor Day. But I do things as Governor based on
what's good for the state of Michigan," Granholm told reporters
during this morning's press conference on the signing.
Granholm's final action on the measure has evolved since July 7,
when she told reporters (See MIRS, July 7, 2005) that she
thought school districts should determine when their start date
is, but had stressed that she hadn't made a final decision at
that point.
"I have not seen, as of yet, a compelling argument to move a
common start date for all districts, but those hearings are
still yet to be held," she said nearly three months ago.
A lot has changed since the Governor made those comments. For
one, she's hurting in the polls, particularly in Northern
Michigan, which will benefit the most from the new law. The
Marketing Resource Group (MRG) released numbers from a Sept.
16-21 survey that showed the Governor's approval numbers in the
Cadillac/Traverse City/Sault Ste. Marie area are at 48 percent,
the lowest regional numbers outside of Lansing and the
mid-Michigan area.
Also, tourism season is wrapping up north of Highway 10 and
businesses continue to express disappointment about the drop off
in foot traffic this Labor Day weekend compared to years past.
Granholm said her position is not a "flip-flop" because the
legislation simply adjusts the school calendar. Districts can
take away a day during the winter break or spring break. They
can add another day at the end of the year or add a few minutes
of schooling at the end of each day.
"This legislation is a great economic tool that will create new
job opportunities in Northern Michigan and the Upper Peninsula,"
Granholm said today. "This will jumpstart our economy, which has
needed a boost."
Karen SCHULZ of the Michigan Education Association (MEA) said
the organization feels it's unfortunate that local communities
won't be able to decide for themselves what start date works
best for their school districts, unless they are a year-round
school or qualify for a special exemption.
The MEA also had concerns that the later start day could put
schools behind in their efforts to prep their students for the
Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) test, which is
being given in the fall instead of the winter. State
Superintendent Mike FLANAGAN apparently informed school
superintendents Wednesday, during their annual conference, that
if the post-Labor Day bill was signed, the Department of
Education would be adjusted to allow schools a comparable amount
of time for preparation.
Senate Majority Leader Ken SIKKEMA (R-Wyoming) issued a
statement thanking the Governor for her position.
"Testimony in committee reaffirmed that this bill will have a
positive impact on businesses and communities struggling in
today's economy," Sikkema said. "Signing this bill was the right
thing to do for Michigan's workers, businesses, schools and
families."
Chamber, Kuipers Like Proposal A Changes
MIRS, September 30, 2005
The Michigan Chamber of Commerce and the GOP chair of the Senate
Education committee are voting yes on the proposed change to
Proposal A, which would shift more state dollars to local
districts and away from legislative control.
A panel of former lawmakers who drafted the original Prop A in
1992 recommend the elimination of all so-called categorical
state grants (See MIRS, Sept. 28, 2005).
Instead, the bi-partisan group suggested lumping all of those
dollars into the state's foundation grant and allowing school
boards to decide where to spend the money.
"I'm a local control guy," says Sen. Wayne KUIPERS (R-Holland),
after getting his first peek at the proposal. Reserving the
right to see the entire report before making a final
determination about it, Kuipers said that local districts are
qualified to make those decisions instead of the state.
While some lawmakers may not want to give up that authority,
Kuipers reports he is not one of those.
Ditto from Chamber lobbyist Rich STUDLEY who thinks the quality
of education could go up if more power to spend is shifted from
lawmakers to school boards.
Studley says it would allow those districts to target the funds
where they are needed most.
"It gives more discretion to the locals and that's good," he
tells MIRS.
Former Rep. Lynn JONDAHL, who chaired the Prop A review
committee, told the Off the Record panel before yesterday's news
conference that he and his colleagues wanted to do away with all
the categorical spending when the amendment was implemented.
There were about 30 such categories at the time.
"The number slowly crept up over the years," Jondahl observed.
Now he and his former House colleagues have pledged to get back
into the legislative process to lobby for this major tweak of
Proposal A.
back to the top ~
back to Breaking News
~ back to
What's New
|
