[Local-Maine-Schools] Ms. Gendron and Mr. Galgay

[Gail Marshall]

Susan Gendron has announced that she is backing off the alleged $45  
million in savings she and the governor were planning on by  
increasing class sizes. She says it has now become clear that would  
have resulted in cuts in many other vital educational programs such  
as AP classes and arts programs.
Five comments about this latest epiphany:

1.Now?? This isn't rocket science. And that she didn't "thought  
experiment" even a bit before plunging the state into this chaotic,  
destructive debate is a serious failure of leadership.
2. How long before she "now" realizes what else in her proposal (is  
it even yet in bill form?) will harm those she is appointed to serve?
3. Where is that $45 million coming from? Are we laying off all  
superintendents now?
4. When will our legislators suggest she resign to spend more time  
with her family?

On a different angle, from the outset I have been rather disturbed by  
the teachers' union's posture in this debate. Chris Galgay, the  
President of MEA, in an editorial listed on our web page on Feb 26th,  
(http://mdischools.net/) made a series of unsubstantiated and unwise  
assertions:

1. He claims that in the public testimony before the Education  
Committee, all superintendents and board members said that everything  
is "just fine". First, that is not accurate and, second, I seem to  
recall hearing quite a few teachers speaking in concert with supers  
and boards.

2. He fears progeny of Palesky and TABOR, both of which were  
defeated, apparently requiring the teachers' union to support, nay,  
even propose, self-inflicted wounds to our educational system. These  
are included in the MEA sponsored proposal:  A 2/3rds vote needed to  
override the very bogus EPS levels. How crazy for our kids education  
is that proposal?  An arbitrary 10% mandated cut in administration.   
Given Prof. Donaldson's report, where is the evidence that supports  
that number? Where would local members make that cut here? Twenty- 
six  "regional planning alliances" (that Wal-Mart number again!) made  
up not of school administrators and boards but of 4 municipal  
officials, 4 school officials and 4 members of the public (Which  
towns in our mega-district do not get a voice?) This is the creation  
of another big bureaucracy to study how we should or shouldn't buy  
supplies together, provide special ed, share busses, coordinate  
teacher contracts (???) etc.

3. Then Mr. Galgay lays out his two big concerns: raising teachers  
salaries and the "coercion" that teachers pay a percentage of  the  
enormous health insurance bill. The health insurance system is  
broken. Everywhere. It is a national disgrace.  Despite that teachers  
get relatively superb health insurance benefits. And the drain on the  
educational budget for that is staggering. Last I checked schools do  
not have any say over what that bill will be. Doesn't the MEA  
participate in the negotiations with insurers for that tab? How about  
real MEA leadership on fundamentally altering that system? Or maybe  
he thinks that's working "just fine"? And, while I also believe  
teacher's salaries across the state should rise, since that is a huge  
part of the budget, how can there be major salary increases and  
stricter adherence to EPS? What big time educational programs will we  
cut to do that???

4. Way down in the column is vague reference to improving the quality  
of education, which Mr. Galgay exhorts us to be a "partner in the  
solution" to achieve.

I should think that the president of the MEA, a major player in this  
debate, would have far more to offer than the non-substantive mood  
piece he wrote.

I am a strong union supporter, but my type of union courageously,  
intelligently and assertively supports a far larger, progressive  
agenda than just it's own parochial interests. If natural allies in  
this debate like boards, supers, and the MEA do not work closely  
together to achieve the best we can for our students someone might  
get hurt. Just trying to protect your own ox from being gored is not  
a responsible strategy.  "Partners", indeed, but enlightened self  
interest means that you put the interests of the whole organization  
first, and, in so doing, your own interests will be well served.

I ask our local MEA members to look carefully at what your  
organization is doing and consider whether or not you think it is  
acting in the best interests of your schools and students.

I don't know about you, but I enjoyed a week or so away from daily  
attention to this mess. It is hard to get back into it, but that is  
just what we all must do. The education committee needs our renewed  
attention.

Thanks,
Gail Marshall