The first few letters from Clara, our 10 year old were pretty normal. She wanted mail from us. She told us about her activities and also that she had been sick during the first couple of days of camp, which we knew because camp staff had communicated with us about it. Then, somewhere around the end of week 2 on our end, we got this gem:

So, how is a parent thousands of miles away to react to an obvious cry for help (or stuffed animals) such as this one? In this age of immediate communication we are really no longer used to the time travel effect of physical mail. Obviously she was in some distress when she wrote this, but when was that? And how would she be feeling in the present? After taking a couple of deep breaths we carefully weighed the evidence:

• the repeated requests for stuffed animals did call into question how dire the situation really was
• we did not receive any communication from camp staff about any problems (they do use email)
• we did see several pictures of our kids seemingly enjoying themselves at camp
• at this point there were only a few days left of camp, so there was not much that could be done anyway

So, we emailed the staff to verify that everything was OK and they responded quickly indicating that Clara was obviously having a great time, enjoying activities, seemed to be in good spirits, etc. So, we relaxed a bit. And soon enough we started getting more letters from her, of a totally different nature.

The girls flew back from the East Coast on their own and as we drove home they just talked excitedly about all the nice things they did at camp. And while Clara says she does not necessarily want to go again next year, on her first phone call to one of her friends she told her of this great summer camp that both of them should go to… when they’re a bit older. (not stupid)

I call our system “socialized” because we get socialized health care. The patient experience is one where your doctor sees you for mere minutes before they need to run off and see another patient. There is no personal relationship with your doctor whatsoever, unless while you remain healthy. Our pets, who all see private doctors, in contrast, have wonderful personal relationships with their veterinarians. Going to the vet is a completely different experience, where everyone knows our names and the names of our dog and cats, and the vet takes ample time examining the critters and discussing treatment options with us.

So, here’s a short story of dealing with our system. Is this a story of hardship, life and death, financial ruin? No, sorry. Fortunately the family is healthy and we’re financially stable. This is a story of for-profit companies choosing the most rational path: denying health care, therefore maximizing profits. It’s a story of ridiculous bureaucracy that results in overhead costs that aren’t spent on the actual care. One of the compelling reasons to adopt a single payer system was to vastly simplify administrative procedures, therefore reducing much of the overhead. But we’re not going there. Even after Obama’s Health Care reform, the current system remains in place. In this story you see our dysfunctional system at work.

A Change of Employer

It all started in the end of 2008 when I switched to a new employer. The first thing you do when you join a new place is pick the Health Care option that’s best for you. It’s typically about which doctors you need to keep seeing. Our family has been going to the Palo Alto Medical Foundation (PAMF) for years, and all I had to do was pick the plan that had a deal with that clinic so that my current doctors would be “in network”. There was only one choice: Guardian’s PPO, subcontracted to Interplan.

The first time you go to see your doctor after such a change, you’re asked to see the administration and give them the new insurance information. In my case the information was pretty simple. Guardian sent me a card containing my name, my employer, our group plan number and finally my own member ID. I passed on this information to PAMF and forgot about this altogether.

Claims and their Paper Trail

When you go see the doctor you are charged your co-payment, which can vary depending on your plan. Then the health care provider bills your insurance company for the services provided. If all goes well, the insurance company accepts the claim, pays the health care provider and you’re done. You receive a statement from the insurance company explaining what happened (the instance, the amount billed, the amount covered) and you also receive a statement from the provider showing how much the insurance has paid and asking you to pay for the rest, if insurance did not cover you fully.

The statement from the health care provider is pretty simple. The one from the insurance company is incomprehensible. Typically it’s accompanied by “codes” that indicate the reason something was not covered. The amount covered also can depend on various factors, including deductibles, and percentage of coverage based on an idealized expected total for the given procedure. The point of this is that it’s non trivial to figure out what these statements are saying and it’s non trivial to understand exactly what your health plan provided.

The Story

In 2009 I had to see a doctor for something. After a while I got a bill from the provider for about 100 dollars. I thought that was a bit strange, but assumed there was a small deductible in the plan and just paid it. That month I was probably too busy to look into it as I was doing the bills and the amount was not significant enough to trigger alarms.

This happened a couple of more times, and I paid again. Then I got a bill for $800. That one caught my attention. What was going on? Was the health care plan covering anything at all? Strangely, I noticed I had not received any statements from the insurance company. I assumed PAMF had misplaced the data I gave them on my first visit and called them to find out. Nope. They had all the data and we painstakingly double checked it all. It all matched. And yet, the insurance company claimed that my “identity cannot be verified”. That is, they had my name, employer name, group plan and member id and somehow this was not enough to match the claim to my person. Mission accomplished. Claim denied, more profits this quarter.

Having spent a few hours dealing with this, and many more worrying about this mess, I talked to our HR department to make sure all my records where in place. They were. They suggested I call the insurance company to find out what the real problem was. Note that during this saga, these were hours in which I was not working. Instead my employer was paying me to debug whatever was going wrong in the health care chain. Let’s move on.

Engaging the insurance company was the most time consuming. My insurance card is confusing because while Guardian is the insurer, the Interplan logo appears on the right hand top corner. I called on of the numbers on the card, which turned out to be Guardian. After explaining the situation in great detail to a couple of people, they told me to call the Interplan number.

I explained the situation to the person at Interplan and after a while we moved on to double checking my data. It all matched again. They saw no reason why the claims would be denied, so they asked me to tell PAMF to resubmit the claims. So, I called PAMF again and asked them to resubmit the claims to Interplan. They said they would.

A couple of months later PAMF contacted me to inform me that the claims were denied again. Once again we made sure all the data was in place and it was, and once again they told me to talk to my insurance company, who was still claiming they didn’t know who I was. Interestingly as they seemed not to be able to ascribe the claims to me I never received a statement from them indicating that any claims had been denied. PAMF wanted me to call Interplan again.

I did that. At that point I had already spent possibly 10 hours dealing with this mess and we still didn’t know what to do about it. After explaining my case in great detail yet one more time, the Interplan person I got this time wanted to know what the provider was entering into field 11.B and 11.C of “the form”. I had no idea. I didn’t even know what form they were referring to. They must have been talking about the Interplan form that PAMF uses to submit claims to Interplan. I’ve never seen any of these forms. No worries. They told me to call my provided and ask them to enter “Guardian” into box 11.B and the name of my employer into box 11.C, and that with that it should all work. Thanks for calling and good luck.

Back to PAMF. The person I talked to was extremely skeptical, but willing to make a note of this requirement into my record and have the claims resubmitted. We did that and waited a couple of more months.

At that point I finally saw evidence that the insurance company finally knew who I was. Claims were processed, I started receiving statements from them and, more importantly, I got a refund check from PAMF for the original doctor visits I had paid for by mistake. That was all last year.

This month I get a bill from PAMF for $500 for an individual doctor visit. While I think this is outrageous, what catches my eye is the fact that my insurance company has been contacted and this item is “not eligible for coverage”. That’s all the note says. So, I call PAMF and ask for more details. Once again: the insurance company does not know who I am. This time it’s a claim for my daughter who’s listed under my own account. Sigh.

Fortunately I’ve kept notes from the first time around and I quickly pass on this information to the billing department. It’s been a year and maybe the relationship between providers and insurance companies has deteriorated because the person I talked to was veering on hostile when I told them what they needed to write in boxes 11.B and 11.C. She indicated the claim would be resubmitted and that’s where we are at this juncture of the narrative.

Final Whining Points

We’re still in line for a happy ending, but I’m still fed up enough to whine a bit more about all this. I’ve wasted hours of work time dealing with this crap and I have no confidence this is the last time I’ll be dealing with this.

I have fond memories of my time as a student in Ontario, Canada. I was a member of Ontario’s Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) and I knew that anything I needed would be covered. I never ever saw a medical bill and spent no time at all dealing with forms or worrying about health care at all.

Here in the US, on the other hand, even with a good job and expensive health insurance I’m not only constantly worrying about how much I’ll have to unexpectedly have to pay but also have to deal with ridiculous denials like the one I just described. I really expected health care reform to include a Public Option. I was waiting for the day when it would become law and I would walk into my HR department and ask to transfer my whole family to the public, not for profit system. Not only do I not have that choice at all, but almost nothing changes for people with employer based health insurance. Clearly the system is broken, full in inefficiencies and yet it continues to be the system we deal with every day.

But not in the US. And more specifically not even in the San Francisco Bay Area where there’s a large population of foreigners. The only hint I got that the World Cup was upon us was a pamphlet from DirecTV MAS (the Spanish language package) containing the schedule of games and information about the participating teams.

Of course, I did not need the reminder. I’m among the many that define life as “a succession of those 4 years that seem to fill the void between World Cups”.

As the Cup approaches, the level of intensity rises and I find myself constantly distracted and with an irrepressible urge to consult World Cup related news every five minutes. Who else got injured in the latest friendly? What new colorful news item comes out of Maradona’s rule as head the Argentinian squad.

The lack of prominence of the World Cup in the US results in an unexpected benefit: it is possible to record games and get back home at night without knowing the results, something that would be unthinkable in any soccer country. Of course you can always make matters worse for yourself by wearing a team’s jersey or any other World Cup related article of clothing, in which case chances are someone will approach you and talk to you about games you have not yet watched. But even if you keep a low profile, you still have to deal with your well intentioned co-workers. After all, the only reason to record games is that you still need to go to work, right? Here in Pacific time, the last game of the day takes place at 11:30AM, a rather inconvenient time to step out of the office.

So, I’ve emailed the following message to my whole company, in the hope that they’ll comply and I’ll be able to continue going to work during the Cup:

World Cup Etiquette:

The 2010 World Cup (soccer) starts next Friday, on June 11th. It goes on for about a month. This is the most popular sporting event in the world and it takes place just once every 4 years. Anywhere in the world but here in the US, the World Cup is everywhere and people are bursting with anticipation. There are three games a day during the group phase and at most 2 games on selected days during the elimination round. The whole calendar can be found here:

http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/matches/calendar.html

You may be wondering if there’s any point to this message at all. There is. During the World Cup, the soccer fanatic that has a full time job has two options: take the month off or keep coming to work while also managing to watch a large percentage of games. I assume most of us intend to continue working during this tumultuous month and we face a real problem: in order to come to work we must record games that happen during work hours and we must get home at night without knowing the results of these games. We set games to record, come to work and avoid all external media for the whole day (no looking at web sites, social networks, etc). But the one thing we cannot control is our coworkers who already know the results of games.

So, in order to maintain your soccer fanatic colleagues’ fragile little minds intact during this period I propose the following rule:

* DO NOT, under any circumstances, discuss any games that happen during the current work day.

And it’s more subtle than that, because you don’t need to say anything. Just approaching your favorite Nigerian coworker after aNigeria game and smiling (or making any sort of gesture) will drive him insane for the rest of the day. Why was that person smiling at me? Is it because we lost and they’re enjoying our misfortune? Or maybe it is it because we won, scoring a pile of goals. Maybe they’re smiling because nothing exciting happened. Or maybe a bunch of people got red carded. Argh! And so on…

It’s ok to discuss yesterday’s games. There’s no excuse for not being able to watch yesterday’s games before coming to work.

That’s all. Just one easy rule. Good luck to us all. Hernan.

It’s that simple. Now let’s enjoy the World Cup.

Click here to view the embedded video.

The Redwood City Education Foundation is fighting hard to prevent this one and more cuts but raising funds before June when the School District needs to finalize its budget. If we manage to raise enough by then we can save instrumental music. Donate, volunteer, organize, spread the word, and read all about it in RCEF’s Save the Music page.

And here are additional action items, from an email sent by Georgia Jack, one of the organizers of RCEF’s Save the Music efforts:

Donate to help us reach our minimum goal of $100,000 to maintain 5th through 8th grade instrumental music programs for all of our students in all 17 elementary and middle schools.

Participate in the Groovin’ in the Grove (GIG) concert event on May 29, 2010, being held at Sequoia Unioin High School’s Carrington Hall and Grove area AND the 4th of July Fun Run taking place in downtown Redwood City before the parade. For more information see: www.rcef.org/groovin and www.rcef.org/funrun

Panel participants: Lisa Carlos, moderator. Bret Baird, president of the RWC Teachers Union. William Crowe, president elect. Kim Combs, Classified Union Rep. Jean Martin, member of RCTA. Ara Prigian, CTA representative.

The next section has my notes from the meeting, edited for readability, and without my own editorial comments. You can stop at the end of that if you’d like, or go on to my rather bleak take on the proceedings.

Notes from the meeting

The organizers pose 3 questions to get the discussion started:

1. Where is the union in the process of negotiating for this current year and what is your hope of where this process will lead?
2. How confident are you that the union’s position represents a majority of your constituents with this current contract?
3. What are you suggestions to the district for balancing the budget in the coming year?

Lisa introduces the panel and lets the current president of the Union answer the three questions.

Bret welcomes everyone for coming, and thanks all for the work of the PTAs, the Redwood City Education Foundation, and finally parents in the classroom.

He starts with question #3. The position of the union is not to fire, hire or evaluate. The union does not take positions on this. Individuals can take positions, but the union does not. If the union takes a position it favors some members over others. Their job is to look for the best contract and working conditions, salary and benefits.

On question #1. Currently at “impasse”. At the second day of negotiations, the Union said they would not be involved in suggesting cuts, and then the District got up from the table, interrupting negotiations. Bret points out the “impasse” has never been reached so quickly. This year the Governor allowed districts to reduce the number of school days by 5 days, a reduction that requires negotiation with the teachers’ union. Bret implied that the School Board move to impasse quickly to force arbitration in the hope of forcing the Union to accept the 5 day cut. Currently waiting for arbitration to begin.

The Union is hoping for the status quo. They claim the mid-year cuts and current expectations of further cuts are projections based on the the Governor’s January speech. CTA claims our District is on the conservative side on these matters, cutting early. The Union’s job is to act as check and balance to ensure things are done properly.

On question #2. He’s very, very confident that their position reflects the position of a majority of the members. They did a survey and got results back. Many of the members are upset about the mid-year cuts. The Union is an extremely democratic organization where everyone can speak at meetings. Any teacher can come raise issues and so can anywhere else. They meet the first Monday of every month at Red Morton.

Lisa: district website has papers with the current proposals from the District and the Union. Officials from the District were not invited to this meeting. After some discussion on why the School Board is not here, and what’s confidential during negotiations, Lisa asked the audience to submit their questions.

Questions from the audience:

Has the suggestion been made to furlough District office workers instead of teachers? How about “furlough Fridays” like in Sacramento? Ara: furlough is unpaid. It’s a bad term. 3 days a month for DMV and other state workers. It’s mandatory to have an 180 day school year, but they allow a maximum of 5 days to be removed after negotiation with the local union. Unpaid days for teachers, no education for kids. The proposal is to remove 4 instructional days and 1 non instructional teacher day. Yes, administrators took some days too, but they work a longer year. Administrators reach the top of their salaries quicker than the teachers (6 years rather than 24 years).

What are the other points of contention for the contract? Just the cuts in teacher days. For 08-09 teachers took 0% salary increase. This year the union accepts the status quo, leaving everything the same. No salary increases. This in itself helps the district save money. 4.5M cut this year, already done. 0% increase and then the cuts, and also 0% last year. If you keep the contract going as is, the union will go into negotiations immediately for next year.

Susie Peyton: Last year after the school year ended, cuts came in retroactively and the district used the reserves which went down all the way down to the 3% limit. If the state makes retroactive cuts we can use our reserves down to 1%, and they can stay that low for 2 years. We need to be a little preemptive and conservative. This was the reason to try to cut days off the year, this year.

Lisa: union’s position on dipping into reserves to 1% level? Ara: reserves started going down in past years. Questions the real levels of the reserves. Has not seen a disaster of this magnitude in years. Districts make budgets. Total uncertainty with Governor and legislature. Not enough information from the district to know whether they should be dipping into reserves.

Why not get involved in cut decisions when these will be happening? Ara: too many teachers to be laid off. Rails against Prop 13. Then on the Governor cutting the VLF. We need more revenue and to address this at the State level.

A teacher responds: the union is all the teachers. “It’s not my job to figure out which of our colleagues should be cut.” General applause. This is not a parent vs. teacher thing.

Susie notes that tenure rules determine who gets cut. It’s all about money. And the district prepares for the worst case scenario. Susie justifies the actions of the district. Teachers have to receive pink slips by March 15th by law.

Bret: describes the process by which the Union operates. The contract is put together and needs to be ratified by the union members.

Can you share data about your survey with members? Bret: Listed the district proposals, which were overwhelmingly rejected by the members. No to salary reduction, no to fewer days. Uncomfortable with sharing survey information. Come to the next union meeting and ask for the data.

What can concerned parents do with Federally elected officials? Lisa: the pie we had has shrunk and the federal piece is not that large. Kim (secretary for the union): ask for help from private organizations. Susie: this is what RCEF has been doing for years. Bret: not happy with Education Secretary, Arnie Duncan. Susie: get the Federal Government to fund Special Ed to the full. Bret: we spend 7M of General Fund money on Special Ed. Susie: we should ask for this at the Federal level. Thea: there’s legislation pending in congress about this. Anna Eshoo is involved.

How about evaluation process to priority teachers to be let go first? Bret: teachers are not qualified to evaluate other teachers. That’s what people with administrator credentials do.

Explain who you think your adversaries are. Bret: our opponent is always ignorance and apathy. Back to the Federal Level, think of the difference between our approach to military funding and education funding. We’re going to crumble from within. Spending on military doubled after 9/11. Have the military compete for their cut of the pie, using vouchers. Vouchers is now gone, current talk is about Charter Schools.

Do we have rights as tenured teachers who have received pink slips? Ara: tenured teachers are laid off too. Called “permanent” teachers, not tenured. Then talks about differences between Revenue Limit and Basic Aid districts.

Do teachers get seniority credit for previous work years? Ara: depends on the district. Layoffs affect seniority.

Lisa asks a process question: do you want to take questions from the audience? Bret: no.

Thea gives a speech about making the pie larger. California does not impose oil extraction taxes. Robert Reich’s idea, to demand a bail out for education much like the bailout for the financial system. Last time there was major money for education was during Sputnik! These children created our current economy. Time to invest in Human Capital.

Bret: State legislators claim their hands are tied, but it’s not true. Moderate Republicans hold out to get what they want. CTA suggests: force the Republicans to vote against unpopular measures.

Layoff teachers or reduce salaries for all, what would you choose? The union refuses to answer the question. It’s all bad. Susie tries to push the issue trying to get the union to accept that the options are not equally bad. They will not go there. Let someone else make that choice.

What happens when we go bankrupt and someone else controls our schools? Ara: in Oakland they took power away from the School Board. Dictatorial power from the Superintendent. Bret: in the big districts, larger cuts, possibly an extra month out of school a year. Other districts are in worse shape than ours and the state would take over those districts first.

At that point the meeting ended with a reminder about the proposition to reduce the parcel tax requirement to 55%…

A rather bleak assessment

Before I start let me state unequivocally that I am 100% pro Union. Many, if not all of the social advances we enjoy today were the result of sustained, long term work by Unions. Let me also point out that it’s deplorable that we have to ask our teachers, who are real life heroes, to reduce their salaries by anything at all. We should be paying more to our teachers, not less! I see how hard they work, how dedicated they are. I’m in awe of our teachers.

The worst thing we can do at this point is to take an adversarial position against any of the parties in Redwood City. I’ve said it before regarding School Board meetings and I say it now regarding the Union. We’re all in this together and we all want what’s best for the kids.

And yet, this meeting left me with a bad taste in my mouth. The tone was confrontational and the Union was defensive in its answers. This got worse as the meeting went along, as more of the answers failed to satisfy. I did not feel the Union was our partner in this struggle to do the best for our children. Instead, they refused to accept the current realities and take any position regarding possible cuts. The discussion was diverted quickly into State or Federal issues, which we all agree with, but which the local Union has a very indirect connection to. The refusal to answer direct questions from the audience was just shocking to me. And then there was the refusal to share the results of the survey sent to the members. There was a shocking moment when a Union representative suggested targeting local corporations to raise funds… which is what RCEF has been doing for years!

Basically, I felt that any solutions to the problem are left to us, the parents. The Union will stand aside, wait for arbitration, and hope for the best. And don’t get me wrong: it’s their job to get the best possible deal for their members. But if it comes to what we expect, where we either reduce these 5 days or face an even more draconian alternative, I don’t see the Union standing with us picking what’s best for the children.

The union represents the views of its members. I know some of its members directly, the wonderful teachers that have taught my daughters for years. They would never, ever, pick anything but the best option for the kids.

In the next section of the meeting people had the chance to address the Board. Many people spoke, concerned about the various cuts currently under way. We heard from teachers, parents, staff and even a principal. There was crying, there was yelling, there were some accusations, but by and large the speakers were polite and made their points eloquently. Most of the comments had to do with the removal of teachers from classrooms in the middle of the year and the impact on kids, specially Kindergartners. 8th graders from McKinley made a statement in support of their math teacher, soon to be laid off.

The Board members listened stoically, saving their responses and commentary for the end. When that time came they asked the administrators for some clarifications, discussed the situation and eventually voted to approve the cuts as proposed. (I left at 11:30PM before the vote took place.)

I don’t envy them at all. Their job is to be responsible adults and keep our School District functioning under extremely adverse circumstances. They all pointed out that none of these cuts are good and that we’re making them because we really have no choice. And they reminded us that given the financial outlook, these cuts are just the first, a small sample of the cuts that are coming.

Why Mid-Year Cuts?

Basically, because the district has no choice. The district has to maintain a 3% cash reserve to avoid being taken over by the State. Current cash reserves are around 3.69%. The State Controller has warned that California might not have enough money to pay salaries in the months ahead and the district might need some of the reserves for that. And the situation can get even worse if the State decides to impose a mid-year cut retroactively like they did at the end of last year. Cuts made now also mean fewer cuts to be made for next year’s budget although this is little consolation as we expect massive cuts then regardless.

So, cuts need to be made. What can get cut? In Redwood City not much. The district has already been cutting every year to reach our current situation where 85% of the budget goes to salaries. At this point any non trivial cuts require reducing staff.

And because of various contracts the district has very little choice of who can get cut in the middle of the year. The jargon here is a bit confusing for outsiders like me, but my understanding is that the district can’t lay off teachers when they’ve been employed for 75% of the school year, which requires cuts to happen very soon. “Temporary teachers” get chosen first. Their positions can be filled with teachers that currently work in the district but outside the classrooms. And it seems we’re even lucky in Redwood City that we have other teachers that can take over.

What are the Cuts?

The cuts and some of the rationale is outlined in this letter from the superintendent. You can see them here as well. For each cut, the first number is how much we save this year followed by how much we save the following year:

• 9 temporary classroom teachers: 261K/764K. Positions to be back filled by credentialed teachers in the district but not currently working within the classroom.
• 1 accountant: 23K/87K. The administration would pick up extra work.
• 5 custodians: 67K/256K. Currently school classrooms are on an ABC schedule, cleaned every 3 days. Now they will be cleaned once a week. Restrooms, cafeterias and nurses’ rooms will be cleaned every day.
• Reduce RSP instructional aides to 3 hours: 60K/229K. Impacts 25 employees in the district.
• 1 office manager at Roosevelt: 23K/55K. This is a vacant position.
• 1 system manager, position currently vacant: 39K/105K.
• 1 classroom teacher at Newcomer: 82K/82K.
• Plato learning program: 25K/25K.
• Freeze budget for library books and materials: 23K/31K.

The district is still hoping to reduce the work year for all employees by 5 days, for a possible further reduction this year of 1.3 million. Negotiations are at an impasse with the teacher’s union. Mediation will begin on March 17th. The union notified the district they won’t move until mediation takes place.

The following were originally considered for mid year cuts but were rejected at this point: these will not be cut right now:

• Increase class sizes to 31 at grades K-3.
• 1 transportation dispatcher.
• 10.7 library aides.

Of course, we expect all these to be cut at the end of the year as possibly the deepest cuts in recent memory are expected, their magnitude depending on the level of funding supplied by the State.  As always, our dysfunctional State won’t be able to pass the budget in reasonable time and the school district will be required to make worst case cuts in advance of next school year. And now the projected shortfall has grown, to between 4.7 and 13.7 million dollars.

Raul noted that current funding is about the same of 2006/2007 but we now serve 1000 more students. We reduced our budget by 17% in the last three years. Per student funding went from 5500 per year to 4700 per year in 2009/2010. The situation is expected to get worse in the next few years. The public education system is being dismantled in front of our very eyes.

The Governor: protecting education?

The state is facing a 20 billion budget gap over the next few months. This number goes up and down every day, mostly up. Problems with the State’s retirement system might add 2.6 billion to the deficit, for example. Until the State finalizes its budget, the real impact on school districts is unclear. And while districts don’t have the luxury to wait for the legislature and the Governor to be done, this is what we know about the Governor’s plan, according to Raul’s presentation:

• 8.5 billion in cuts including 2.4 billion in health and human services and 1.2 billion in prisons. Interestingly, the 1.2 billion prison cut was proposed last year but not adopted.
• 4.5 billion in gimmicks and accounting tricks. For example, by changing the gasoline sales tax to an excise tax, it excludes 1.6 billion from the base amount available to fund education via Prop 98.
• 6.9 billion expected from the Federal Government. The Governor expects the Federal Government to fully fund those unfunded federal mandates, claiming that California is not getting its fair share.

Cuts to the social welfare net, more gimmicks, and believing in the tooth fairy. We can safely expect many of these “creative” approaches to fail, a larger deficit than expected, less money for the Prop 98 calculation resulting in huge new cuts for schools.

Interestingly, Prop 98 has a Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA). The Governor has ignored COLA in most previous year, but this year, miraculously, he’s going to honor it. Before you start writing him letters expressing your gratitude note that this year, for the first time, COLA is negative. That’s right, cost of living is down 0.38% and the Governor includes a 0.38% cut to education. For Redwood City this is a mere 200K, coincidentally the cost of keeping the Music program at the middle schools.

A failed state

While it would have been nice to have a parcel tax in Redwood City to shield us from the draconian cuts that are coming, last year’s Measure E would have raised 2.3 million a year, a fraction of the shortfall we’re currently facing.

The solution needs to come from the State. And the State has become ungovernable due to the super majority requirement to pass any budget. The super majority requirement sounds good in principle but it quickly becomes a tyranny of the minority, specially with an intransigent minority oblivious to the needs of the people.

Here’s an illuminating Madison quote from the Federalist Papers, courtesy of Ira Ruskin’s email list:

“To give a minority a negative upon the majority (which is always the case where more than a majority is requisite to a decision), is, in its tendency, to subject the sense of the greater number to that of the lesser…This is one of those refinements which, in practice, has an effect the reverse of what is expected from it in theory. The necessity of unanimity in public bodies, or of something approaching towards it, has been founded upon a supposition that it would contribute to security. But its real operation is to embarrass the administration [of government], to destroy the energy of the government…In those emergencies of a nation, in which the goodness or badness, the weakness or strength of its government, is of the greatest importance, there is commonly a necessity for action. The public business must, in some way or other, go forward. If a pertinacious minority can control the opinion of a majority, respecting the best mode of conducting it, the majority, in order that something may be done, must conform to the views of the minority; and thus the sense of the smaller number will overrule that of the greater, and give a tone to the national proceedings. Hence, tedious delays; continual negotiation and intrigue; contemptible compromises of the public good. And yet, in such a system, it is even happy when such compromises can take place: for upon some occasions things will not admit of accommodation; and then the measures of government must be injuriously suspended, or fatally defeated. It is often, by the impracticability of obtaining the concurrence of the necessary number of votes, kept in a state of inaction.”

We need to reform our current system. And not only the 2/3 super majority requirement. The initiative process, originally conceived as a way to return politics to the grass roots has become an industry, with firms guaranteeing anything can be put on the ballot given enough amounts of money. Propositions are confusing and unintelligible to the average voter. In the end, the side with the most money to pay for ads can make anything go through.

One way to address these problems is with a constitutional convention. A group called Repair California launched a grass roots campaign to add two initiatives to the November ballot to cause a constitutional convention to happen. Unfortunately the campaign has been put on hold as of February 10 due to lack of adequate funds. They claim they need significant new money by March 1st to restart the campaign, but the letter does not seem to be an appeal for funds from citizens. That is, if the letter was a call for donations from ordinary citizens to get things started I would donate in an instant… Hopefully they can get things going again.

If we can’t do away with the 2/3 requirement another option would be to vote some Republicans out of office. This is hard due to district boundaries. Calling their offices to demand changes in their position is also ineffective as we are not their constituents. Maybe we can call and threaten them to fund their Democratic opposition in the next election?

Only in Redwood City?

This keeps coming up: why do other districts seem impervious to cuts? What’s the deal with Palo Alto, Woodside, Menlo Park, and other of our surrounding districts? They’re “Basic Aid” districts while we are a “Revenue Limit” district. If you’ve been around school funding discussions you know what this means. If you’re new, your eyes are probably glazing over just about now. If you want to understand why our surrounding districts don’t seem to suffer like we do, read on:

The State guarantees a minimum level of education funding. In the 2009/2010 year it was around $6000 per student. If the amount of money the district makes in property taxes divided by the number of kids in the schools is less that that minimum guarantee the State makes up the difference. This is a “Revenue Limit” district, like Redwood City. The minimum guarantee per student is the key here, and it’s set by the State based on revenue collected into the general fund using complex formulas established by Proposition 98. Since most general fund revenue comes from income taxes and incomes depends on the state of the economy, funding in “Revenue Limit” districts is volatile and we can expect the guarantee to stay low while the economy remains in trouble.

But what happens if the total amount of property taxes divided by the number of kids is greater than the minimum guarantee? Then that lucky district gets to keep all the money and only gets to take “Basic Aid” from the State, hence the name. A district like Woodside, for example, with expensive houses and a small population always does much better than the state minimum. I don’t know exactly what it comes down to for them, but it’s probably around $12000, double the funding per kid.

In Redwood City we have the unique “privilege” of being surrounded by “Basic Aid” districts. While in the rest of California school districts can despair together, here you can walk a mile to the side and visit an alternate reality where public education is still thriving. And of course, to make matters worse, those districts have large parcel taxes and a population that donates large amounts to their education foundation.

Now what?

Things will get worse in the next few years. While we fight for parcel tax reform or wait for the constitutional convention for California movement to restart we need to focus on our immediate needs.

The Redwood City Education Foundation is launching an emergency fund raising initiative to save music in the middle schools.

The Redwood City Education Foundation (RCEF)  invites concerned parents and community members to join us at our kickoff meeting for the Music! Maestro campaign. This campaign will raise funds to support some or all of the instrumental music program in 2010/11. As you may be aware, the district has this program slated for potential elimination next year, due to state education budget cuts.

We are relying on music parents, staff, and community volunteers to help us manage and run the campaign. The campaign is structured to tap all revenue streams, including local businesses, corporations and foundations, and community members.

Your attendance at this meeting is critical. We need your input, time, energy, creativity, and inspiration to support the campaign’s goals and hit the ground running at this vital moment. Please come and make sure next year’s students benefit from this invaluable program.

Time & Date: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 at 7:00pm

Location: Kennedy Middle School, Room #312
Kennedy Middle School is located at the corner of Connecticut and Goodwin. The music room is easily reached from the parking areas located near that the same corner.  The door will be open from the lot into the music room  (entrances to both lots are on Goodwin).

Go to the meetings. And most importantly, give money to the foundation. Only the foundation can fund programs district wide. It’s fine to give to your child’s school but it’s just as good (if not better) to give to the Foundation that benefits every child in Redwood City.

It will definitely help to get the parcel tax reform initiative on the ballot. If you have not signed, do it now, and take a few sign up sheets to work and gather signatures. The School Board announced in the meeting that it’s legally allowed to gather signatures in school grounds as long as the kids are not the ones soliciting them. Look for people gathering signatures at your school and offer to help them.

The city government and our fellow residents need to understand how dire the situation is. The School Board is hard at work on this right now, letting everyone know what’s going on. And they report that people are actually surprised to find out, as our school buildings look clean and modern. You can help by telling everyone you meet what’s going on.

And finally let’s try not to despair. The cuts are draconian, the situation will get worse for a few years before it gets better, but we’ll still have safe, clean schools, dedicated teachers and staff and kids willing to learn. As we go back to a more basic education offering let’s remember all the things we’re loosing and fight to be able to restore them in the future.

This last week I attended one of the parent meetings with district officials. Jan Christensen, our superintendent, tellingly started the presentation by describing what schools were like in the eighteen hundreds. Think of the school in “Little House on the Prairie”: one big room, full of kids, one teacher, bare bones, no special programs, no frills. The message seemed pretty clear: for next year and on, think “back to basics”. We’ll continue to have public schools, safe clean places for learning. We’ll continue having devoted, heroic teachers, striving to teach our kids to the best of their abilities. And our kids will learn, just like they did back then. But that’s it. We can no longer expect from the public school system those features we’ve taken for granted for so long and which have been vanishing in front of our very eyes these past few years.

My daughter started Middle School this year. Last year there was an extra period with cool “enrichment” activities: art, dance, drama, even TV production. Last year’s cuts did away with many of these, so this year’s 6th graders did not have the same options as their predecessors. Year after year we see programs removed. And it hurts. The knowledge that my second daughter, only 2 years younger than her sister, will have a poorer education experience is hard to take.

So, what are the cuts our district will very likely have to make this year? First, here’s a list of the School District’s priorities, as outlined by Jan in the meeting:

1. Student achievement. Keep the students learning. Prepare them for high school where they’ll be competing with kids from more affluent school districts.
2. Safety. Provide a safe, clean environment for learning.
3. Compliance, Rules and Regulations. The District needs to comply with a large set of rules and regulations if it wants to keep its funding from the State and Federal Government.
4. Solvency. The School District cannot run deficits and is required by State law to maintain a 3% cash reserve.

Unfortunately solvency rules this year. The district already spends around 85% of its funds on salaries. The required cuts are so high again this year that we won’t be able to avoid reducing the work force. So, what do I think we’ll be cutting?

• Everything we did not cut last year from our prioritized list of possible cuts. This includes the GATE program, IB program, music in the middle schools, outdoor education and much, much more, nurses, psychologists, support staff, etc.
• The school year will be shortened by 5 days. This is one way to save money without laying off teachers. I assume it will happen in spite of opposition from the Teacher’s Union and us, the parents. (Note that a proposal to cut the school year by 5 days this year was already rejected by the Teacher’s Union).
• Class size reduction will be over, everywhere: all schools and all grades. All classes will have 31 students. Fewer teachers will be needed to teach the same number of kids. Kindergarten classes with 31 kids will hurt those kids that don’t arrive prepared with Pre School experience. Tragically, teachers won’t have time to make sure no kids are left behind. The benefits of small class size, specially in the first few years are well understood.
• Fewer administrators, resulting in lower levels of service. Principals will be required to take on other jobs, the district office won’t be as responsive as before. Administrative processes will suffer. There will be slower turn around times for non emergency services.
• Closing a school site. There’s serious discussion of moving Orion to Roosevelt and renting out the Orion campus for extra revenue. This could happen as soon as next year.

What good things can we look forward to then? Here’s a list of possibilities, in decreasing order of probability…

Creative Gimmicks. The District can figure out ways to save programs through creative gimmicks. An example: if we could make all our schools eligible for Title 1 funding we could raise an extra million, possibly more. Note that all but 4 of our schools qualify for Title 1. I’m no expert on this and I’m sure it’s rather complicated, but if we can reshuffle our student population and get enough money to save music, PE, etc, it’s worth considering the option. I don’t know if this could work, but I assume there are more gimmicks we can come up with.

Private Funding. The Redwood City Education Foundation works really hard to raise money and pay for programs the school district cannot afford. RCEF would need to very substantially increase the level of private donations to be able to save a number of the very significant programs on the chopping block. Saving music in the middle schools, for example, requires 200K and the foundation raises around 350K per year, destined to other essential programs. Grants are always a possibility, but unfortunately grants typically focus on establishing new programs rather than on maintenance of existing programs.

Parcel Tax. Prop 13 established the 2/3 super majority requirement to pass a local parcel tax measure. In Redwood City we already tried twice and failed to pass modest parcel taxes. In both cases the YES vote hovered above 60%. Joe Simitian has been working for years on a law to lower the requirement for parcel taxes to 55%, constantly being blocked by the republicans in Sacramento. This time around there’s an initiative to add to the November ballot a constitutional amendment to do just that: the Local Control of Local Classrooms Funding Act. Let’s hope we can get it there and it passes.

Constitutional Convention. The 2/3 requirement to pass a budget in California has made the State impossible to govern. As most of the money for public schools comes from the California general fund, our funding woes will continue until we can reform our government away from its current dysfunctional state. This needs to happen, but I’m not holding my breath. Note that parcel taxes cannot make up for the funding we receive from the State. The Parcel Tax we failed to pass last year would have provided 2.3 million in funding, a fraction of the cuts we expect this year alone. If the State of California is serious about its public schools system, it will have to raise taxes to pay for them. The 2/3 requirement makes this impossible.

A new stimulus package from the Federal Government would be ideal and would directly save jobs right now, in our local community. It really is too bad that Obama has turned away from the plight of local communities, instead opting for the symbolic but ineffectual gesture of promising a freeze in non military spending starting a year from now. For us on the front lines of the crisis it’s all going to be about coping.

The question then is how to cope with schools that can offer a lot less. One answer that works: increased levels of parent participation. Our K5 school in Redwood City, Orion, requires parent participation from all parents. You sign a contract to work 72 hours for the school per year, either in the classroom or outside the classroom helping teachers prepare, grade, etc. Orion parents help the teachers in many ways and help run many activities that would otherwise be impossible. In the next few years implementing an Orion Lite model in other schools might help mitigate the effect of the coming reductions.

Parents also need to understand that the days of free public schools are over, if they have not figured this out already. Our schools already need money for the most basic things. And if we want anything extra we need to pay for it ourselves. If you’re devoted to the idea of public education, high quality and available to all, and you can afford to make a monthly donation to your school, this is the time to do it. Private school already costs hundreds of dollars per kid per month. Donating a fraction of that, say $100 per month per kid to your school’s PTA will have a real impact in the quality of your child’s education.

And I can’t avoid ending on a sad note. The constant cuts, the programs that disappear before our very eyes, the yearly shock to the system will make people who can, run away from our school district. Some leave for private schools, some leave for our neighboring Basic Aid districts. This is already happening and it breaks my heart to admit that the present situation forces all of us, at least in the backs of our minds, to consider the possibility.

Dear Parent Leaders,

Last year the Redwood City School District faced the worst budget cuts in many decades. Due to the state budget crisis, the district was forced to cut $5.5 million from the 2009-10 budget, including administrators, teachers, counselors, and clerical staff.  Class sizes increased at the K-3 level, and library hours were reduced.  About $5 million more would have been cut, but the federal stimulus package allowed the district to save a number of programs including instrumental music, and the Gifted and Talented Program (GATE), and a number of important staff positions.

The news from Sacramento remains grim.  The state’s Legislative Analyst’s Office projects a state budget shortfall of $6.3 billion for 2009-2010, and a $14.7 billion shortfall for 2010-11.  We do not yet know the full extent of the impact on our district from this latest bad news, but it is very possible that the state will impose mid-year cuts for the current school year.  If the state imposes mid-year cuts, our district will have to eliminate programs and positions during this school year.

In addition, we will have to cut $5-8 million dollars from the 2010-11 budget.  There is no pleasant way to communicate such bad news, but it is important for you to know the challenges that lie ahead.  Keeping our community informed of budget developments is a top priority, so we have planned a series of interactive community budget meetings for January and February to provide a budget update, and answer questions.

Please feel free to attend one of our regular community forums:

Date/Time: Location
January 19, 6-8PM: Garfield School, 3600 Middlefield Road, Menlo Park
January 25, 6-8PM: MIT/North Star, 400 Duane St., Redwood City
February 8, 6-8PM: Roy Cloud School, 3790 Red Oak Way, Redwood City
February 16, 6-8PM: Clifford School, 225 Clifford Ave., Redwood City

Sincerely, Jan Christensen
Superintendent

It’s good that we’re starting to discuss next year’s situation earlier this year. Typically we go through a very quiet time until the end of the year panic. Last year we faced huge cuts, partially mitigated by the stimulus package, which sadly won’t be available next year.

Related public education news

In San Mateo County residents in need would fare worst under budget proposal the San Mateo County Times reports that…

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s proposed budget would have the most impact on low-income San Mateo County families and others who rely on some form of government assistance, while schools have a chance to emerge unscathed, officials and lawmakers said Friday.

I’ll have to see it to believe it. The part about remaining unscathed. Raul Parungao, RCSD’s chief administrator is quoted in the article:

“It’s pretty encouraging,” said Raul Parungao, chief business official for the Redwood City School District. “But we are still proceeding with caution.”

Parungao recalled how school districts endured many changes in the fiscal landscape last year after the governor announced his budget plan. Even after the governor signed the budget for 2009-10, Parungao said, Schwarzenegger made a revision in July that resulted in some funding loss for education.

The Redwood City district still faces cuts of at least $4.7 million in 2010-11, according to Parungao. That’s largely because the $6.1 million in one-time federal stimulus money the district received will be used up, he said.

I’ll keep reporting as more news emerge. Happy New Year!

CDs prepare for their new life in storage

So, today was the day to run through all those CDs and put them into boxes, by category, sorted within each category. That was fun! The process resulted in a large pile of CDs not even worthy of their new backup-in-the-basement role. Some can probably be given away, most others will end up in the garbage.

Another side effect of this epic development: removing from our 18 year old stereo any component that is not directly involved with playing music from iTunes via AirTunes. That is, the tape deck and the CD player carrousel are Gone, Gone, Gone. Only the amplifier, speakers and connection to AirTunes remain. The cabinet that hosted all those components is now too big and will soon go meet them wherever it is these obsolete but noble devices end up.

It’s all part of the trend shared with eBooks: more and more annoyance at the environmental impact of having to produce these physical items.

From a poll by DailyKOS

Progressives like me are getting increasingly disappointed with the Obama administration and the Democratic Congress and sadly, the graph indicates that our window of opportunity will close if we end up with a significant defeat in the upcoming elections. Can you imagine trying to advance the progressive agenda with more Republicans in Congress? I’m having trouble imagining doing that now, when we have absolute majorities everywhere.

Let’s review the current major sources of disappointment…

Financial Markers and The Economy

As soon as Obama named his economic team it was clear we had to brace ourselves for “more of the same”. The promised change would be delivered by the very same people that helped create the mess we’re in. Remember the “Committee to Save the World“? These people presided over an era of rampant deregulation, creating the rules that lead to last year’s meltdown. Frontline’s recent “The Warning” episode details how these fundamentalists of deregulation fought tooth and nail to prevent regulation of Derivatives during the nineties. Summers is the current Director of the White House’s National Economic Council. Matt Taibi’s current article in Rolling Stone shows how the administration is full of people connected to Rubin, Geithner being the most prominent one. The article shows how Wall Street insider “experts” were placed in the positions of real power while the more progressive advisers of the campaign were marginalized. We even went out of our way to confirm Geithner after having found out he cheated on his taxes. And why? Because the person that had let the whole mess develop under his own nose as Chairman of the New York Fed was uniquely qualified to lead us out of the mess? Nonsense.

This group gave us the continued bailout with its outrageous aftermath of financial institutions returning to record profitability and record bonuses, while the tax payer guarantees gobs of toxic assets. The sense of urgency with which the bailout was decided, over a single weekend, says it all. Unlimited funds to bail out Wall Street: perfect. Funds for emergency mortgage relief for real people: not so much. It’s socialism for the financial institutions and the ruthless free market for the real people.

Unemployment figures are unacceptably high and expected to remain so for a number of years. But sadly, the urgency with which we bailed out the financial institutions is nowhere to be seen. A weekend bailout for them, a “Jobs Summit” for the unemployed. Many economists noted that the stimulus was too low to start with and that we need another stimulus right now. Not the people in this administration.

And where’s financial regulation? We bailed them out a year ago and no rules have been changed. What are they waiting for? The financial institutions are back on their old shenanigans, raking in the profits, with more wild abandon than ever before with the new certainty that the tax payer has their backs. I thought Obama was elected to fight for the people, not the fat cats in Wall Street.

Health Care Reform

Everybody knows the Clintons failed to pass Health Care Reform in their time. The lesson Obama seems to have learned from this: it was because they developed the plan themselves and Congress felt left out and sabotaged the whole thing. So, his choice from the get go: a hands off approach, letting Congress come up with the details with only minimal, if any, guidance from the White House. The result? A set of different, overly complicated bills from multiple sources. No coherent message to communicate to the people. Instead, the opposition had a wide open field to play the fear card based on any presumed feature of the upcoming bills. We had to endure the month of August, with the hysterical and frighteningly anti democratic demonstrations of the radical right. And finally, we ended up giving too much power to the pseudo Republicans also known as “Blue Dogs”. A seeming disaster from any angle.

Maybe the right lesson to have learned instead was that the original bill was too complicated, hard to message and allowed the opposition to pick and choose multiple attack points. Obama had the power to propose something simple and clearly specify which aspects of his approach he would not compromise on. “Medicare for all!”, for example. The Right would never go for it and would attack it from day one (just like they would attack any proposal!), but the other side would have known how to defend and debunk their preposterous accusations. But this is not how it played out.

Instead, we’re getting a set of different, watered down bills that don’t address cost control as effectively as they could. Yes: some of the provisions in the new laws are good, like preventing insurance companies from denying policies due to pre-existing conditions, no lifetime benefit limits, etc, etc, etc. But at the end of the day, the major reform we’re now contemplating ends up maintaining the current dysfunctional system based on “for profit”, private insurers whose main incentive is to deny coverage at all costs. We’ll continue spending 30 cents out of every dollar in wasteful overhead for multiple, complicated administrative procedures. The insurance companies get to keep the “change” here, 30 cents out of every dollar.

I philosophically oppose the notion of any “for profit” outfit providing health insurance. My original naive expectations for the public option was that anyone would be able to sign up for Medicare and I was planning to switch out of the private insurers as soon as I could. But no: people with private, employer provided insurance don’t get the option to choose the public plan, and there’s now a possibility that states might be able to choose not to have a public option at all. Obama’s major health care reform just provides 40 million new customers to the existing insurance companies.

Foreign Policy

Last week we had to watch the sad spectable of Obama addressing West Point cadets, in a scene right out of Starship Troopers, to finally unveil his approach to Afghanistan. It’s 30,000 more troops, to be deployed now and to start pulling out in July of 2011, a definitive date, as long as conditions on the ground warrant withdrawal. So, we’ll definitely withdraw… unless we can’t in which case we won’t. This is a cowardly choice that won’t achieve anything. Does anyone believe we’ll be able to “fix” Afghanistan in 18 months? Obama had two real choices here: ending the war and switching to an intelligence gathering and police approach, or really escalating the conflict, going in with a couple of hundred thousand more troops to really take control of the country. The first option would be attacked with the old cliche of “Democrats weak on foreign policy” and the second option is just not feasible without a draft. So, instead, we get the middle of the road option which sends more soldiers to die for a dubious and ineffective extension to the current conflict.

Again, we elected Obama for change, not for maintaining old Bush policies. The speech was incredibly depressing in its use of the same old Bush-style devices starting with mentions of 9-11, then Afghanistan as the place where it was planned, then talking about victory and so on. Jon Stewart summarized it brilliantly in the Daily Show. Warning: this clip is hard to watch (and then it becomes a bit silly):

I wanted Obama to have the guts to propose something different, to choose a different path, explain it to the American people and hold his ground. But no. It’s more of the same old Bush policy. Very disappointing from the “anti war” candidate.

A final Plea

Obama is clearly intelligent, informed and armed with good intentions. During the campaign he appeared to be toning down his progressive ideas to be elected and while I was extremely uncomfortable with that approach, it worked and he got elected. Unfortunately his record in power so far demonstrates that he’s not a progressive: he’s a centrist, an extremely cautious, eager to compromise politician that’s failing to excite his base. His inexplicable quest for bipartisan solutions, dealing with an opposition whose only goal is to derail every initiative of the administration without regards for the consequences to the real people of this country, is infuriating. Obama the centrist will not win the next presidential election, as long as the Republicans manage to field a half decent and sane candidate.

Rolling Stone Magazine’s editorial, “Doubting Obama”, sadly notes that Obama’s credit has run out. After endorsing him during the primaries, a move they had never made before, they now sadly bow to the evidence that Obama is not what we hoped he would be. As Rolling Stone Magazine goes, so goes the nation? Hardly. Obama will soon find out what missing the progressive wing with its cadre of idealistic youngsters will do to his chances for re-election. Too bad the prize we’ll pay for this “epiphany” will be loss of seats in both houses with the subsequent end of legislative progress.

We don’t have to wait for the next election cycle to correct this course. Too bad about Afghanistan. The health care fight is on, and it’s time for Obama to exert his influence to achieve the best possible bills, which most certainly won’t have any Republican support anyway. He should fire the whole economic staff and find a new set of experts, and move right now to pass a new stimulus package. And the fight for Global Warming legislation is coming up. A course correction is needed now.