[ RadSafe ] Re: dumbing down

[James Salsman]

Louis Molino wrote:

> Dr. Ward you described the problems with the educational system in the US  
> very well. Now if only we had solutions.

Given that the relation from education achievement to safety in
general an radiation safety in particular puts this subject just
barely on topic, I offer the following letter to my elementary
Superintendent of Schools as one possible solution.  In order to
understand why I concentrate on elementary education, I would
point out that according to the peer-reviewed educational
literature, the strongest predictor of college degree attainment
other than socioeconomic background is the ability to read at
grade level by the third grade.  First and second grades are
therefore the true crux of the issue.  This is also the reason
that I chose my career at www.readsay.com instead of going into
chemistry as many of you have inquired about.

Maurice Ghysels
Superintendent of Schools
Mountain View-Whisman School District

Dear Superintendent Ghysels:

Thank you for your interest in making the student/teacher ratio
in the Mountain View-Whisman School District more competitive
with that of neighboring districts, in order to prevent further
student flight leading to continuing declines in enrollment.
Our district has suffered significant declines recently.  And
at least as troubling as the prospect of further student flight
is the prospect of teacher flight.

As I hope you know by now, the Mountain View-Whisman School
District has only been able to afford a 1% cost of living salary
adjustment during a time when the state predicts 4.25% increases
in the cost of living.  I am certain that many of your staff
will be unhappy about that.  I am also very unhappy with the
fact that our district hasn't been able to keep teacher salaries
up with the cost of living.  That means that as a society, we
value teachers below average.  Nothing could be further from the
truth, as surveys prove every year.

I demand, and I will continue to demand, that my city and
school officials act to make our district's salaries more
competitive than in neighboring districts by increasing them
above, not below, the increase in the cost of living, and
that the student/teacher ratio decline instead of remaining
stagnant, and that the district manage its finances in such
a way that the board will not have to consider school closure.

Even if the new $400,000/year in technology funding available
through the new Joint Powers Agreement with the City's ultra-
rich Shoreline Community were able to offset existing budget
items to be support teacher salary increases entirely, which
I am informed is not likely, then teacher salaries could only
be increased 3%, leading to a 1.25% cost of living shortfall
for this year.  That would be very unacceptable performance.

It is heartening, though, to see that the Mountain View City
Council is willing to provide additional school funding.  I
had, until the recent passage of the Joint Powers Agreement,
lost some faith in them.  They have restored part of my
confidence with the passage of the agreement.

It has come to my attention that my ballot proposal below could
be enacted as a City Council ordinance, such as the following,
that I hope you will ask them all to enact:

  Mountain View City Code, Chapter 29, Article II, SEC 29.7a.
  For the privilege of conducting a large business, a tax on
  the gross sales of all businesses with more than _________
  employees is hereby imposed at the rate of one tenth of one
  percent, to be paid to the Mountain View-Whisman School District.

As I am sure you know, taxes in California have become more and
more regressive over the past 30 years, so this tax, which is
as progressive as I believe is possible, is the appropriate way
to return to a time when the people cared more about elementary
education.  That ordinance is authorized by California Revenue
and Taxation Code sections 6006(a), 6010, 7251.1, 7285.9 (note
there that 0.25 times 0.4 equals 0.1), and 7285.92.

The proposed ordinance would require two-thirds support from
the City Council, so you need only determine what number of
employees, and thus what tax rate, would be approved by two-
thirds of the Council.

If you plug the number 500 into the blank above, then you will
be able to raise enough money to completely match the second-best
student/teacher ratio in all of Palo Alto's Elementary schools;
about $14 million/year.  Larger numbers of employees at the
cut-off mean less funding.  There is complete information about
expected levels of funding here:
   http://www.livejournal.com/community/mountain_view/97634.html

I recommend that you do the following:

1.  Please ask each and every member of the Mountain View City
Council to agree to enact an ordinance to provide you the money
to get our student/teacher ratio down to that of Palo Alto, and
to provide a full cost-of-living adjustment for teacher salaries
for the next three years.  The proposed ordinance would raise
that kind of money, and it would raise it in a progressive way,
unlike regressive parcel or retail sales taxes.  And please ask
them, if they are unwilling to go that far, exactly how far
they are willing to go to keep our teachers' salaries competitive
with the cost of living in Mountain View, and to make our
student/teacher ratios more competitive with the Palo Alto
Unified School District.  Please ask them to put their answer
about how far they would go in the form of a number of employees.

2.  Please let the people of Mountain View know exactly which of
the City Council members will and will not support the
elementary schools, and to what extent they each do.  Write
letters to editors, ask editors for columns, just please make
sure that the voters of Mountain View know where their council
members stand on supporting their elementary schools.

3.  Please Ask the Board of Trustees to give you the authority
to place a measure on the next available Mountain View citywide
ballot, in accordance with California Elections Code Section 9500,
upon the agreement of your CFO.  This will allow you more freedom
in your bargaining position with the City council, knowing that
if they turn you down, you can go directly to the voters without
having to wait for the Board's notice requirements.  Sadly, the
88 day requirement in Cal. Education Code Section 5322 means
that unless you can convince the Board of Trustees to meet next
Friday, by Tuesday (72-hour notice requirements), then you will
not be able to get anything on this year's special election.
However, as I note above, you can get extra funding with a city
council ordinance.

I look forward to your views on these issues.  Without the benefit
of your thoughts and ideas, there is no way for me to improve my
suggestions to you.

Sincerely,
James Salsman