PA Sen. Piccola: eliminate school property tax before consolidation talk

Meanwhile, Pennsylvania state Sen. Piccola made an eye-opening comment when asked about Gov. Ed Rendell's school consolidation plan as contained in the Governor's 2009-2010 budget.

Eliminate the Property Tax

Bigger school districts, lower taxes?
By Anthony R. Wood and Dan Hardy

Inquirer Staff Writers

Eighty percent of the state's school districts would disappear, small districts would become parts of bigger ones, and hundreds of administrative jobs would evaporate.

In one of the more ambitious initiatives of his six years in office, Gov. Rendell has called for a major reorganization of Pennsylvania's school bureaucracy, in part to tame wildly unpopular property taxes.

But based on the early response - and the long, tormented history of school district mergers - the road to school consolidation in Pennsylvania is likely to be a torturous one that could take years to navigate.

The Rendell administration holds that enlarging districts would lead to better schools and to lower - and fairer - taxes by reducing administrative costs and spreading property wealth.

Janis Risch, head of Good Schools Pennsylvania, a reform group, argues that since schools are so dependent on the property tax, the disparities have driven well-off homeowners from poorer towns.

"For several decades, we've had a public policy that did a really good job of concentrating poverty and fostering divisiveness in communities," she said.

"To talk about consolidation without addressing that reality is missing a giant elephant in the room."

Piccola agreed that those wealth disparities were the biggest obstacle to consolidation.

"You are not going to get any widespread mergers until you eliminate the property tax," he said...

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/education/20090322_Bigger_school_districts__lower_taxes_.html

Our thoughts exactly. "You are not going to get any widespread mergers until you eliminate the property tax," he said...

In fact, PA reformers seeking elected public office just a few years back made just that promise. "Eliminate school property taxes."

The tune sure changed once the office was clinched.

State Representative Tim Mahoney made the promise as his second 'top priority.'

After open records, Rep. Mahoney announced on a local talk radio program (WMBS 590 Let's talk)(August, 2007) his second top priority (after his first, open records): eliminate property taxes.

Now, he's talking about consolidation of local school districts, but has yet to have a study completed to back up savings he's already announced publicly.

During his interview with the Herald-Standard Editorial Board, Rep. Mahoney highlights the costs to run several Fayette County school districts, citing the figure $250 million.

Yet Rep. Mahoney doesn't note, as one of our previous posts reveals with resources that include a "pie chart" of district costs, the largest cost to a school district, 70%, is that area which Rep. Mahoney's legislation does NOT deal with. Those costs being employee/teachers' salaries, pensions and healthcare.

Rep. Mahoney then uses a technique familiar to anybody who's been around the political block at least once.

He promotes the savings his bill will bring, and the waste that will be eliminated when his bill takes effect.

Rep. Mahoney states, he doesn't suggest, he states:

Mahoney said while meeting with the Herald-Standard Editorial Board that Fayette County has traditionally had the highest rates of poverty, unemployment and crime across the state. He said people don't want to discuss consolidation because of "imaginary lines." He added that U.S. Rep. John Murtha, D-Johnstown, won't always be in office, calling Murtha a " job-creating machine."

"We have the opportunity to change our course and we have to cross lines," Mahoney said. "We spend $250 million a year on education in this county and it's time to overhaul the system. There is so much waste we could absorb."

Mahoney said he believes that homeowners could save 25 to 30 percent on their property tax bills if his bill were to become law and get implemented.

Mahoney said he would like to do a two-month, state-funded study after the state budget is adopted later this year that he could use as a selling point to get the county commissioners to put it on a referendum. He said he is looking at consolidation for purposes of transportation contracts, and reducing administration and operation costs.

Now anybody who's passed even basic 5th grade reading comprehension tests will question:

How can Rep. Mahoney claim a belief in any savings first on homeowners property tax bills, let alone a range of savings 25 to 30 percent since he states he'd "like to do a two-month, state funded study after the state budget is adopted later this year..."

So how can Rep. Mahoney claim any potential range of savings when he doesn't have a study in hand to back up any savings.

But there's more. Assuming such savings let's take the high end 30 percent on homeowners school property tax bills, across Fayette, on the total Rep. Mahoney cites - $250 million - would mean a cost savings of $75 million.

Yet, Rep. Mahoney's bill as noted does not touch the largest cost to a district, and that will remain unchanged with consolidation.

Rep. Mahoney's bill consolidates for purposes of Administration and "taxation purposes..."

Rep. Mahoney's interview with Herald-Standard Editorial Board:

He said he is looking at consolidation for purposes of transportation contracts, and reducing administration and operation costs.

(Amy Revak, “Mahoney meets with H-S editorial board,” Herald-Standard, 03/22/2009)

What happened to "for taxation purposes" expressed specifically in his HB 351? We'll get to that in another post.

Nevertheless, Rep. Mahoney ignores completely the largest cost with consolidation of schools will remain employees/teachers' salaries, pensions, and health care costs.

And even if Rep. Mahoney claims the consolidated school district can save on health care by bundling costs, it's been noted by a Commonwealth Foundation group in PA that such can be done without formal consolidation of individual districts.

Herald-Standard Editorial Page Editor Paul Sunyak stated in “Mahoney on right track,” 03/22/2009:

During a recent meeting with our editorial board, Mahoney reiterated the objectives of a bill he's introduced that would let voters decide whether to create a countywide school district. A single seven-member board, elected by voters by region, would oversee the operation; a single superintendent, responsible for all hirings, would be at the helm; each school would be guided by a principal, who would ultimately be responsible for student performance...

Sorry, but we're still looking for who actually does the hiring as such doesn't appear in Mahoney's HB 351.

Does this power remain with the county school board members? Does the county superintendent have a "final say" by virtue of as Mahoney stated on local talk radio Let's Talk with Bob Foltz, the county superintendent would "approve" of and "sign-on to" hirings?

HB 351

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/CFDOCS/Legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&sessYr=2009&sessInd=0&billBody=H&billTyp=B&billNbr=0351&pn=0382

Would the superintendent be able to nix a hiring of a unanimous 7-member board, or a majority 7-member board?

All questions and more left unaddressed since Rep. Mahoney fails to engage the public in even one town-hall meeting on this consolidation legislation.

See our other criticisms...

Sunday, March 29, 2009
Gov. Rendell Budget School Consolidation Plan Criticized

http://netthetruthonline.blogspot.com/2009/03/gov-rendell-budget-school-consolidation.html

Net the Truth Online

Posted on Tues, Mar. 31, 2009 held in reserve and revised April 14, 2009

Beck Covered Fairly by NYT says Beck

At the end of Glenn Beck's program on the Fox News Channel today, Beck held up a copy of the NYT issue featuring an article about him.

Laughing and looking a liitle mad or maddening, take your pick, Beck said:

Am I saying this? I never thought I would. The NYT's article about me was fair...

Net the Truth Online

Fox News’s Mad, Apocalyptic, Tearful Rising Star

...On March 12 Mr. Beck introduced the 9/12 Project, an initiative to reclaim the values and principles that he said were evident the day after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. On a special broadcast he asked: “What ever happened to the country that loved the underdog and stood up for the little guy?”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/30/business/media/30beck.html?hp

9/12 Project

http://theglennbeck912project.com/

Car Warranty Backed says Obama by US of A

President Barack Obama said this morning warranties on cars sold in the United States will be backed by the United States.

Hmm. Will this uniformly apply to foreign car manufacturers based in the United States? Or only the two which opted into and received the federal government bailouts/rescue plan known as TARP.

Ford has not opted into the federal monies.

And maybe the reasoning will hold.

Ford has developed its unique newbies readied for the "free" market without government help. so far...

New for 2009 (a 2010 Model)
Ford has had one wildly successful hybrid - the Escape Hybrid SUV - but is only now beginning its effort in the hybrid car market with the Ford Fusion Hybrid. Ford will call it a 2010, but in reality the Fusion hybrid is scheduled to hit showrooms in spring 2009. As with many Ford vehicles, the Fusion Hybrid will be born with a twin sister -- the Mercury Milan Hybrid. There are few details available yet on the differences between the siblings, but more is certain to be revealed over the coming weeks.

http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/Ford_Fusion-Hybrid/

So will Ford be out of the largesse stretched-arm of the federal government plan to back US car manufacturers?

No doubt, unless and until they too fall in line...

Well according to the site jalopnik in "Carpopcalypse," the Obama Administration has extended the carrot to any domestic auto maker...

Obama Auto Restructuring Plan, Warranty Commitment Program Details
By Ray Wert, 7:01 AM on Mon Mar 30 2009

...What's really interesting is the auto task force has left the door open to Ford with the Warranty Commitment Program. The verbiage of the relevant section says: 'Any domestic auto manufacturer is eligible to participate in the program." Obviously, the administration wants to make sure that Ford's attempts to distance themselves from the other two domestics now for purposes of sales retention doesn't negatively impact their ability to go after entry into the program later on down the road. Kudos to the administration for the foresight.

http://jalopnik.com/5190116/obama-auto-restructuring-plan-warranty-commitment-program-details

While we give the nod to jalopnik for the analysis, (as does obama.wsj.com)

http://obama.wsj.com/article/06Es3gQ7QO7jg?q=White+House

there isn't a link to the Car Warranty Commitment, and we disagree with the author that kudos are in order to the Administration for the foresight.

As a Congresswoman recently queried to the Administration's Geitner, "where's the Constitutional authority" and so we echo - where's the Constitutional authority?

It won't be long, one for all and all for one - the good-old US of A.

Once we knew what the free market was, but we don't have a clue now.

Net the Truth Online

http://jalopnik.com/5190116/obama-auto-restructuring-plan-warranty-commitment-program-details

http://obama.wsj.com/article/06Es3gQ7QO7jg?q=White+House

http://masterdrive.org/2009/03/30/obama-auto-restructuring-plan-warranty-commitment-program-details-carpocalypse/

Daniel Hannan: Would've Voted for Ron Paul on Constitutional Basis

During his interview with Neil Cavuto, Daniel Hannan noted several mis-steps of the U.S. GOP, and made the statement:

clip

European Parliament Member Disagrees With Spending to Get Out of a Recession

...CAVUTO: Well, we can actually beat you on the government spending, even on the per capita front. So, we have you beat there.

But here's where — where there is an interesting question, because I know your reputation, as being a sort of this young rising maverick, such a maverick, even among conservatives, that, if memory serves me right, sir, you had supported Barack Obama to be president, not that you could vote in the election.

But what was your argument for Barack Obama over John McCain, if you now know that — and he didn't exactly hide this — that he would be quite a big spender?

HANNAN: Yes, you're making sure I'm never going to be asked back on to FOX News.

(LAUGHTER)

HANNAN: I'll tell you what the — I'll tell you what the argument was.

The argument was — and I kind of still think this. And this may be something that you see a bit more clearly from abroad. It is really a unfair thing that this should be so, but the fact of the matter is that the election of a mixed-race candidate who had opposed the Iraq war from the beginning was going to make your country a lot more trusted and popular and, therefore, authoritative around the world.

And you know that that has happened. But you're right. We have paid a price for that. You have paid a price for it.

Let me — let me — the only thing I would kind of say in his defense is, I think the Republican Party didn't exactly have a brilliant record on this. And one of the reasons why I wasn't wild about the McCain campaign, even though I'm a — you know, more loyal generally to the Republican Party, more uncomplicatedly loyal, shall we say, than I am to my own, is that I think GOP had drifted away in the Bush years from what ought to have been its core principles.

It had become the party of federal deficits. It had become party of big spending. It had become the party of trampling over states' rights, particularly on the gay marriage amendment. And it had become the party of external protectionism with — with the steel tariffs.

And, then, of course, laterally, it became the party of nationalizations and bailouts with the first of the bailout packages.

Now, OK, here is an argument for Obama that maybe will go down a little bit better with some of your viewers. He has already united the Republicans around a more sensible economic policy.

CAVUTO: Well, let me ask you about his policy. Let me ask you then about...

(CROSSTALK)

HANNAN: ... Republican congressmen voted for the Bush bailout, but they opposed his.

CAVUTO: Right. Very good point.

But let me ask you now about his policies. He is going to be going to your country. I know you're in France right now. But he is going to be going to your country to say, we, together, have to address what is this global crisis.

And it is pitching your prime minister against the likes of Angela Merkel in Germany, who does not share that. In fact, she has said that, if governments spend willy-nilly, it can lead to hyperinflation, and, if her memory serves her right, the last time that happened in Germany, a guy with a mustache took over. And — and she doesn't want to go back there.

HANNAN: Yes.

CAVUTO: But — but that is the great divide. And I'm wondering whether it's going to be a real tense meeting next week? What do you suspect?

HANNAN: I mean, you're right.

Obama and Brown are pushing for an especially bad policy. Let's not let others off the hook. I mean, all the governments have been doing this stimulus, bailout...

CAVUTO: Right. Right.

HANNAN: ... spend your way out of a recession. So, again, they are at an extreme end of the bad policy, but they're not alone in it.

And the French and the German governments have their own bad solution, which is more regulation of the markets, which is going to make it even harder to kind of crawl our way out of this place.

You would be amazed how much potency the name Obama still has abroad. The — the big argument that Brown is using, look, I can't be making a terrible mistake here, because Obama is doing same thing. And that's like a — like a kind of magic amulet that wards off any criticism. But, of course, the policy is going to get catch up with him and with us.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,510781,00.html

clip

HANNAN: I don't think I'm ever going to be a prime minister.

And one of the reasons why is basically I — basically, I think that governments shouldn't do things.

You know, I will tell you, you said I supported Obama.

(CROSSTALK)

CAVUTO: You have got to whisper that. See, Mr. Hannan, you have got to whisper that.

(CROSSTALK)

CAVUTO: I mean, very few politicians say government shouldn't do things. That gets to be dangerous.

HANNAN: Right.

(LAUGHTER)

HANNAN: The guy I would have really voted for, had he been a candidate, the guy I would have really voted for in your election is Ron Paul.

CAVUTO: Interesting.

HANNAN: I like his interpretation of the Constitution. I like his — his — his view on fiscal policy. McCain had done a number of things that annoyed me, not least his support for closer European integration.

But, you know, hey, I don't have a vote in your country. It is not for me to say these things. But, you know, it is so hard for a politician to say, I don't know, that, you know, there's no answer to this. Over to you guys.

And that is a — and that is kind of partly a media thing. It's partly a modern expectation thing.

But I heard a really interesting story from a guy who was a minister in New Zealand when they had a banking crisis. It was when they had taken away the subsidies from their farmers. The land prices collapsed. Farmers were in negative equity. The bankers came to the government and said, we need a bailout. If we don't get a bailout, there's going to be a meltdown.

And the New Zealand government said, you know what, guys? That is your problem.

And you know what happened? The banks went away and said, yes, this is our problem. We had better sort this out.

And, so, they — they rescheduled the mortgage payments. They gave people interest-only options and this kind of thing. Within three years, land prices had recovered, no crisis.

Now, here's the real point. If the government had given in and had the bailout that the banks were asking for, it would have almost certainly triggered precisely the kind of crisis that they were aiming to avoid.

And, so, it is a tough argument to make.

(CROSSTALK)

CAVUTO: Well, you know, we say in this country, Mr. Hannan...

(CROSSTALK)

HANNAN: ... nothing at all.

CAVUTO: All right, I apologize. I know there is this delay here, and I apologize for that.

But there's an argument in this country that New York is not New Zealand, that when a U.S. bank is on the verge of collapsing or folding, we have to do something. That has been the argument of both the last Republican administration and this one.

If you were a leader either there or here in the same situation, would you have said, let 'em rip?

HANNAN: Yes, I would.

I mean, the trouble is that both of your parties, like both of ours, were allowing their policy to be written by bankers, who are not disinterested in this.

And don't make the mistake that a lot of people on the left make of thinking that financiers are kind of for free trade. They're really not. All financiers are monopolists. All financiers will grab a subsidy if they can.

Every big businessman, left to himself, is a corporatist. And the beauty of the capitalist system is, it doesn't let them indulge that instinct. Or, at least, it didn't until the last six months, when we have suddenly turned the clock back to this kind of — this economic consensus that prevailed between the 1930s and the 1970s, with disastrous consequences.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,510781,00.html

Daniel Hannan: United States Limited Government Foundation

Daniel Hannan, the whirlwind slamming the Prime Minister with inspiring words like "you can't spend us out of a recession" - captured the reason for being of the United States of America and summarized it as likely no U.S. history professor in University or College could, or would. (Majority being wholly liberal).

Appearing on Fox News Network cable programs recently - as he answered a final question from Sean Hannity, Annan said:

the United States should stick to its basics from its founding principles...

Hannity interrupted and said "capitalism."

Annan continued, instead highlighting limited government...

OK! Sometimes, it takes someone from outside our own "village" to educate us to what our country's government really was all about when it was founded and should be all about.


Hannan grabbed headlines - legitimately so as well - when he said on Hannity's program:

(video clip provided)

"It's common sense that when you are in debt you spend less. Anyone except a politician can see that."

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/03/british-sensation-daniel-hannan-its.html

Hannity loved the line.

It'll be on Fiat/Chrsyler car bumber stickers, soon, surely.

But his more pertinent line U.S. = Limited Government will be lost to many... unless Hannan keeps on saying it whenever he faces the U.S.-based Press and other cable interviewers.


Net the Truth Online

European Parliament Member Disagrees With Spending to Get Out of a Recession
"Your World With Neil Cavuto," March 25, 2009

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,510781,00.html

My speech to Gordon Brown goes viral by Daniel Hannan
Posted on Mar 25, 2009 at 19:14:00
Tags: blogs , dizzy , European Parliament , Gordon Brown , Guido Fawkes , youtube
The internet has changed politics - changed it utterly and forever. Twenty-four hours ago, I made a three-minute speech in the European Parliament, aimed at Gordon Brown. I tipped off the BBC and some of the newspaper correspondents but, unsurprisingly, they ignored me: I am, after all, simply a backbench MEP.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/daniel_hannan/

So I said to Gordon Brown, I said...
Posted By: Daniel Hannan at Mar 24, 2009

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/daniel_hannan/blog/2009/03/24/so_i_said_to_gordon_brown_i_said

Link to video of Hannan speech to PM and transcript

MEP Daniel Hannan Stripping the Bark Off PM Gordon Brown
By Bob Ellis on March 26th, 2009

http://www.dakotavoice.com/2009/03/mep-daniel-hannan-stripping-the-bark-off-pm-gordon-brown/

Speaking truth to the prime minister Posted: March 30, 2009

Editor's note: Daniel Hannan's fiery speech addressing Gordon Brown at the European Parliament electrified the Internet when it was broadcast on YouTube last week. Vox Day interviewed the iconoclastic Englishman about Brown, Britain, and the global economic crisis on March 26, 2009.
In your speech, you mentioned that one cannot spend one's way out of a recession. This would appear to contradict the neo-Keynesian approach of Alastair Darling and the U.S. fiscal authorities. Do you subscribe to a different economic model?

Yes, certainly! We saw where the Keynesian model led! We pursued it from the '30s to the '70s. And it ended up in recession, stagnation, inflation and debt. It's much easier to begin a government program under the guise of counter-cyclical spending than it is to terminate it, so you end up with the state becoming more and more bloated. It's a measure of how panicked people are, that they've forgotten all of the lessons of that unhappy period.

http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=93261

President Barack Obama: Coercer in Chief

President Barack Obama: Coercer in Chief

All it took was a few stuttered, but emphatic words, to CEO of GM 'What's your salary, you say, uh, um, um, uh, you - we want you - to go - now.'

The spin of it all: "at the government's behest."

Leave now, or we'll tax your income back 20 years!

What a hypocrit. I believe in the entrepreneurial spirit, Obama once said.

As long as you don't make millions before we force you to take the federal help we think is necessary to keep your company afloat.

And to Chrysler... we'll keep you in clover until somebody like Fiat comes along to scoop you up at a bargain basement price!

Net the Truth Online

US demands new chief for GM, Chrysler-Fiat marriage (Roundup)
By Pat Reber Mar 30, 2009, 6:20 GMT

Washington - The US is carrying out a major family shake-up in the debt-ridden US car industry, demanding a new head-of-household for General Motors and a forced marriage between Chrysler and Italian carmaker Fiat, according to reports late Sunday in various media.

Read more: "US demands new chief for GM, Chrysler-Fiat marriage (Roundup)" - http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/business/news/article_1467640.php/US_demands_new_chief_for_GM_Chrysler-Fiat_marriage__Roundup__#ixzz0BEmYZIN3

http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/business/news/article_1467640.php/US_demands_new_chief_for_GM_Chrysler-Fiat_marriage__Roundup__

GM CEO resigns at Obama's behest
By MIKE ALLEN & JOSH GERSTEIN | 3/29/09 5:23 PM EDT
The Obama administration asked Rick Wagoner, the chairman and CEO of General Motors, to step down and he agreed, a White House official said.

On Monday, President Barack Obama is to unveil his plans for the auto industry, including a response to a request for additional funds by GM and Chrysler. The plan is based on recommendations from the Presidential Task Force on the Auto Industry, headed by the Treasury Department.

The White House confirmed Wagoner was leaving at the government's behest after The Associated Press reported his immediate departure, without giving a reason.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/20625.html

Chrysler reverses claim Fiat would take debt
Move apparently ends a public tiff between Italian, U.S. automakersupdated 2:22 p.m. ET, Fri., March. 20, 2009
DETROIT - A public tiff between Italian automaker Fiat SpA and Chrysler LLC apparently ended Friday when Chrysler rescinded a statement on its Web site that Fiat would be responsible for part of Chrysler’s debt if the two companies join forces.

Chrysler, in a Web video on Thursday explaining why an alliance for the two companies would be good for Chrysler and the country, said Fiat would be responsible for 35 percent of what Chrysler owed to the U.S. government.

But Fiat on Friday denied that it would be responsible for any of Chrysler’s debt.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29789956/

43 years ago, area school merger failed to save money

BY SAM GALSKI
STAFF WRITER
Published: Sunday, March 1, 2009 4:13 AM EST
Forty-three years ago, Hazleton Area School District was formed when five community-based educational “units” merged into a mega-district that today services 16 municipalities in Luzerne, Schuylkill and Carbon counties.

The merger occurred in 1966, just two years before then-school Director Pat Capece began the first of his 24 consecutive years on the board.

Consolidation, he recalled, was sold on the argument that it would save money spent on the education system.

It instead came with a price, Capece said.

“It didn’t work out,” he said. “The state said it would be less costly for consolidating. Unfortunately, it was more.”

In the years following the merger, community schools closed, transportation costs increased and communities essentially became cliques — with each fighting to maintain its own identity, he said.

“Bigger is not always better,” he said. “Too big is not good.”

Today, Hazleton Area is the 17th largest of Pennsylvania’s 501 school districts. About 10,300 students are enrolled in the 250-square-mile district, which is considering its second multi-million-dollar expansion program since 2004. It has a projected $108 million budget for 2009-2010.

Governor’s plan

On Feb. 5, Gov. Ed Rendell called on legislators to develop a plan to reduce the state’s 500 public school districts to no more than 100...

...Administrative costs are about the only area where Victor says consolidating could yield savings.

“The only changes that would probably occur would be administrative,” he said. “You still will need the same amount of teachers — they are based on the number of students. You will still need the same amount of buildings.”

Larger schools require a more complex administrative hierarchy that would include a transportation director and curriculum directors — positions Weatherly Area does not need, he said.

Coming from the substantially larger Hazleton Area School District, Victor said larger schools do have some benefits.

Schools with more students can offer courses such as honors engineering and can offer extracurricular activities such as football, Victor said.

At Weatherly, however, it wouldn’t make sense to hire a teacher for an honors class that would appeal to a handful of students, Victor said.

“But then with the small schools too, there are many advantages,” he continued. “You are familiar with total school operations and you’re more actively involved in each program. In a larger school, you have to rely on others to do those things and you lose touch with a lot of those things.”

Shenandoah Valley Superintendent Stanley G. Rakowsky recently called Rendell’s proposal “ill-advised.”

Rakowsky wrote to local elected officials, asking them not to support the proposal if it were put to a vote.

“Indeed, the governor’s suggestion strikes at the very heart of local control, small schools and the quality of life we have created that has the school as the center of the community,” Rakowsky wrote.

A union’s view

The “bigger is better” philosophy from the mid-1960s cost Hazleton Area its local schools without delivering the promised savings, said John Busher, elementary vice president and chief negotiator for the Hazleton Area Education Association.

“The proposal scares me,” Busher said. “When we lost our local schools — many of us in the district for years worked at a time at (schools in) Conyngham, Nuremberg and West Hazleton — we lost our sense of community spirit.”

Consolidation would create school-leadership issues such as election of school directors, Busher said.

Even if the commonwealth were to revert to a county education system, like Maryland, savings on superintendents would be offset by administrators needed to serve on the “local level,” Busher said.

“We’ve never really seen the savings in the school district,” he said.




http://www.standardspeaker.com/articles/2009/03/01/news/hz_standspeak.20090301.a.pg1.hz01_consolidate_s1.2325974_top2.txt

Gov. Rendell School Consolidation Commission Loophole

Beware. The commission Gov. Rendell wants to have the state legislature to create to study the issue of school consolidation across Pennsylvania has a huge loophole.

If created by the state legislators, after studying the issue, the commission is supposed to present or recommend two plans for the General Assembly to consider.

But, Rendell's proposal enables in the event the General Assembly nixes either of the recommended plans, the authority for consolidating would revert to the state Department of Education.

Isn't that nice?

Net the Truth Online

Pa. official grilled on graduation exam, school mergers
Tuesday, March 03, 2009
By Tom Barnes, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
HARRISBURG -- State Education Secretary Gerald Zahorchak ran into a bipartisan buzzsaw today before the Senate Appropriations Committee, as he was assailed for trying to reduce the state's 501 school districts to just 100 and for pushing to develop a new high school graduation test.

Democratic Sens. Sean Logan of Monroeville and Andrew Dinniman of Chester questioned Gov. Ed Rendell's controversial idea of consolidating school districts.

Mr. Logan said it had been tough enough just to close Duquesne High School and transfer those 135 students to nearby high schools.

"How are we going to deal with transferring millions of students if the districts are reduced to 100?'' he said.

Mr. Dinniman asked where the number of 100 came from.

Mr. Zahorchak, who is Mr. Rendell's point man on several emotional education issues, said some people had talked about having just one school district per county, and there are 67 counties. Larger counties, such as Allegheny, would probably need several school districts, so the figure of 100 came up, he said.

Mr. Zahorchak said the upcoming merger of Monaca and Center districts in Beaver County could provide a blueprint for other combinations.

The school district consolidation idea did get some support from Sen. John Wozniak, D-Cambria, who said a study by a legislative committee a couple years ago supported the idea and said that about 2,500 students was a good number for each district

Mr. Rendell wants the Legislature to set up a committee to study the consolidation idea and settle on a different, lower number of districts if it chooses.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09062/952857-100.stm

Gov. Rendell School Consolidation Commission Authority

Hold on. Alert. If the General Assembly of PA doesn't go for either of two commission-recommended plans for school consolidation across the state, the law still enables authority to consolidate schools across the state -

to

the Department of Education.

Isn't that nice? talk about political power in the hands of a few. How about in the hands of a few - unelected individuals - appointed individuals - and appointed by whom? The Governor of the state of PA.

Net the Truth Online

• The proposed commission would have one year to develop a plan for the reorganization or school
districts. It would be responsible for determining the optimal enrollment size, new statewide boundaries, and an implementation plan.
• To ensure progress is made, the Governor proposes that the commission adopt up to two merger plans. After a period of public comment, the General Assembly would be required to give an “up or down” vote to each commission consolidation plan within six months.
• If the General Assembly rejects both plans, the law would vest authority for consolidating school districts with the State Board of Education.


http://www.pdenewsroom.state.pa.us/newsroom/lib/newsroom/fact_sheet-consolidation_-_FINAL.pdf

2/17/2009 3:34 AM
School district consolidation considered
By Dawn Keller, Staff writer dkeller@observer-reporter.com

Gov. Ed Rendell wants to consolidate Pennsylvania school districts down to 100.

But is that a good idea?

It depends on whom you ask.

The research about it is murky. Proponents say it will save money on administrative and other costs, while opponents say that it's a short-term savings that will cost more in the long run and won't improve student achievement.

Rendell says the merger could save millions of dollars, primarily by consolidating administrative services that would stop spending taxpayer money on redundant costs and instead put them in the classroom. He says individual schools would not need to close or merge.

"Full-scale school consolidation provides a very effective way to relieve the local property tax burden all across Pennsylvania," he said recently.

Rendell said small schools are important but reducing the number of districts doesn't automatically mean bigger schools. Fewer districts means that the local share of public education costs can be spread across a wider population, he said.

Critics of forced mergers don't believe him. In Arkansas, consolidation was forced along with promises that no schools would close, said Joe Bard, executive director of the Pennsylvania Association of Rural and Small Schools.

Since the state order, 35 percent of the involved schools in Arkansas have closed, he said.

Marty Strange, policy director for Rural Schools and Community Trust, said it's impossible to save as much money as Rendell is suggesting by consolidating administrative services.

"The money is in the teachers," Strange said. "Unless you are going to lay off teachers, it's not going to happen."

Closing districts is always a precursor to closing schools, he said.

Strange said the myth that consolidating schools to make them bigger will save money is part of "Americana." The problem is that research doesn't back it up, he said.

As schools get bigger, they spend more on administration, he said. In tiny districts, a superintendent usually also is the transportation director, the curriculum director and sometimes the only central office administrator, he said.

When districts centralize, there are increased costs of communication, an increased number of specialists, assistant superintendents and curriculum directors, Strange said.

Over 10 years, West Virginia closed 325 schools and enrollment declined by 44,000 students, yet the number of administrators increased by 16 percent, he said.

"The centralized bureaucracies do not shrink; they grow," he said.

Mergers aren't always bad, Strange said. Sometimes districts determine they can work together better as one, he said. But when it's forced by a state government, it doesn't end up saving a lot of money, he said.

http://www.observer-reporter.com/OR/Story/02-17-Consolidation-pros-and-cons

Gov. Rendell Budget School Consolidation Plan Criticized

Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell's 2009/2010 Budget which also calls for a state commission to be formed to propose a plan for school district consolidations has thankfully faced some tough and legitimate criticism.

And for far more than meets the usual first-glance.

We would like to support Kiski Area School Board president Gary Haag's comments, wholeheartedly and emphatically so.

"I don't know how that would reduce cost," said Gary Haag, president of the Kiski Area School Board. "I think it would take local governance away from the district residents more so than ever before."

think about the remark. "it would take local governance away from the district residents more so than ever before." (Gary Haag, in Rendell's massive school merger plan has its critics By Tom Yerace and Brian C. Rittmeyer Feb. 6, 2009 )

Having reviewed the bill state Representative Tim Mahoney (D-51st) reintroduced regarding his plan to consolidate local school districts - for Administrative cost savings and taxation purposes, we would also apply the same Haag criticism to it.

HB 351

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/CFDOCS/Legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&sessYr=2009&sessInd=0&billBody=H&billTyp=B&billNbr=0351&pn=0382

Here's the criticism:

it would 'take local governance away from district residents more so than ever before.'

With its board of directors, limited to 7 for the county-wide district, and 1 county Supervisor, would there be greater enabling of local governance for district residents, or less?

There would be less, since each area will be represented by 1 elected/appointed school board director.

The Mahoney plan includes provisions for the county board of commissioners to deliniate merged district boundaries. The Mahoney legislation also allows the newly formed county-wide board of directors, some 7 individuals, to further divide the county into 3 or 9 areas.

Whatever it turns out the representative areas will be 3 or 9 - it appears from the legislation, the county board of school directors will still consist of 7 individuals.

That's 7 people with all the political power now distributed over some actual 6 for Fayette County school districts each with 9 board members which amounts to 54 school board directors.

That could be argued to be 6 different little kingdoms, but how is that going to be corrected in the a larger county-wide district with 7 school board members for the entire county representation?

wouldn't there be the same amount of political power, (not going to go away) but now in the hands of a few - 7 people with 1 county Superintendent?

The position of the Superintendent is also under scrutiny.

First, in previous articles from local newspapers, there were indications the county board of commissioners would appoint the county-wide district's Supervisor. It's unclear whether Rep. Mahoney's bill introduced last year made provisions for that, however.

The current legislation, introduced in Feb. 2009, can be found here.

The Mahoney legislation (Feb. 2009) - as pointed out by an emailer - doesn't appear to provide for how the county Supervisor will be chosen - appointed - by whom?

By the county board of school directors? There is no provision contained in the '09 legislation.

By the board of county commissioners? There is no provision for that as well in the Mahoney legislation.

This brings up a legitimate question of who will the county Supervisor be appointed by and then who will the Supervisor be accountable to?

If the Supervisor is appointed by the board of county commissioners, and he/she is unelected, it's a stretch by far to claim the county Supervisor is accountable directly to the people. He/she doesn't face an election. The same of course occurs in the current system, the district Supervisor/Administrator is hired by the board of school directors. so the school board directors who made the hiring are accountable and can select someone else when contracts expire.

But who will the county Supervisor contract with if appointed by the board of county commissioners? The county commissioners?

Many other features of the Mahoney legislation have been criticized in our earlier post, so we won't go over those now.

Note, another issue arises in light of Rep. Mahoney's support for Gov. Rendell's budget and school consolidation plan. We'll tackle that in an upcoming post.

For now, again we agree and argue, with both the Mahoney plan and the Rendell plan, local governance - representative though it is - will be diminished - with the political power - not going to go away - contained in the hands of a few.

Net the Truth Online

clip

Rendell's massive school merger plan has its critics
By Tom Yerace and Brian C. Rittmeyer
VALLEY NEWS DISPATCH
Friday, February 6, 2009

When Gov. Ed Rendell proposed consolidating the state's 500 school districts into 100 on Wednesday, he was talking about an order that may be just too tall to fill.

At least that's what many state legislators and school district officials from the Alle-Kiski Valley are thinking.

"I just don't know if it would work as smoothly as people think," said state Rep. Jeff Pyle, R-Ford City.

Pyle doesn't think that anticipated cost savings should be the motivating factor.

"When you reason it all out, it can't be," he said. "Because the money you save in shutting down a building, you spend in adding on more buses."

"I don't know how that would reduce cost," said Gary Haag, president of the Kiski Area School Board. "I think it would take local governance away from the district residents more so than ever before."

Theory vs. reality

In proposing the state budget, Rendell asked that the General Assembly form a commission to reduce the number of school districts from 500 to 100 to eliminate duplication of services and reduce costs. He called for a report to be finished within one year.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_610557.html

State Department of Education

http://www.pdenewsroom.state.pa.us/newsroom/cwp/view.asp?A=256&Q=148032

Very important documents

Mahoney legislation currently awaiting action state House Education Committee

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/CFDOCS/Legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&sessYr=2009&sessInd=0&billBody=H&billTyp=B&billNbr=0351&pn=0382

Rendell 2009-2010 Budget Plan for School Consolidation

http://search.state.pa.us/query.html?style=pde&qt=school+district+consolidation&OK.x=16&OK.y=6

Rendell budget plan consolidation

http://www.pdenewsroom.state.pa.us/newsroom/lib/newsroom/fact_sheet-consolidation_-_FINAL.pdf

Fayette Commissioners Hired Delta Lobbyists Won't Release

them from the county's services.

Wait until the locals get hold of this right? The commissioner meetings will be packed with taxpayers who have to fork over nearly 10,000 per month for the organization, right?

don't bet on it. The public who put the two commissioners into office won't raise the barn, or storm the courthouse.

they didn't raise an eyebrow when the pair authorized the Delta Development Group to lobby on behalf of Fayette County for state and federal monies, and they won't be upset that the pair are staunchly defending the firm.

Net the Truth Online

Hempfield has second thoughts on lobbyist
By Richard Gazarik TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Saturday, March 28,

A lobbying firm with clients in Western Pennsylvania has become politically toxic after the revelation that it allegedly received $1 million in tax money as part of a no-work contract with a Beaver County nonprofit with ties to former state Rep. Mike Veon.

One day after the House Democratic caucus canceled a contract with Delta Development Group, based in Mechanicsburg, Republican Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi ordered members of his party to steer clear of Delta lobbyists.

"I am suspending any contact between any representative of Delta Development and my office until Delta provides an adequate explanation of the nature and extent of its relationship with the House Democratic caucus," Pileggi said Friday.

Two of Delta's clients are Hempfield Township and Fayette County. Both are paying the consulting group $8,500 a month to obtain state grants to fund improvement projects.

While the Hempfield supervisors will schedule a special meeting to discuss the future of Delta as the township's lobbyist, Fayette County commissioners say they are standing by the firm.

Hempfield supervisors are paying Delta more than $200,000 through October 2010 to obtain grants to fund several critical projects. They approved a contract with Delta in October.

The supervisors had second thoughts after Delta's name surfaced in connection with a criminal probe of Veon, who steered the $1 million contract to Delta on behalf of Beaver Initiative for Growth...

...Delta is being paid more than $100,000 by Fayette County, which signed a contract in January. Commissioners Vincent Zapotosky and Vince Vicites said the money is well spent. Commissioner Angela Zimmerlink opposed the hiring but declined to comment yesterday.

"I do intend to contact the folks at the office and get an understanding of what happened, why it happened and any ramifications," Zapotosky said. "I don't want to be (painted) guilty by association."

"We will be judged on the results. Hopefully, folks in Fayette County realize we are now on a level playing field with some of the bigger boys who tend to have gotten more than we've gotten," he said.


"They've impressed me with their skills," Vicites said. "This is too big of a funding year for us not to go 150 percent aggressively toward that funding."

"We're going to keep Delta's feet to the fire producing ... for Fayette County. We're going to get our money's worth."

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribunereview/news/fayette/s_618218.html

PA: Whose Statistics Show Fayette Gain from KOZ?

Everything is always rosey when conducting a report of report of findings, and the report is researched by an arm of your own agency.

So with the local Fayette KOZ program, the numbers are based on whatever the agency, in this case Fay-Penn, wants to base the numbers on.

If the report excludes the massive amount of additional state government monies that flow to the KOZ locations (under a variety of clever names for the freebie "grants" - the costs of the program to the taxpayers would rise dramatically.

Those costs would edge into the $400,000 expected to come in annually.

Another non-guarantee of the various companies receiving the tax-exemptions - state and local - is whether the company will move out after the exemptions expire.

Or possibly they will "threaten" to move out, like Duke Energy perhaps, if they do not receive more tax exemptions, under another name of course. And more state help for job creation, and so forth and so on.

That is exactly what has happened in Easton, we made a post about that previously.

Net the Truth Online

Fayette could gain $400,000 in new revenues
James Pletcher Jr., Herald-Standard
03/28/2009
Updated 03/28/2009 12:42:57 AM EDT
Email to a friendPost a CommentPrinter-friendly
Some local communities can expect about $400,000 more in revenue when a tax abatement program expires in four years.


In the past decade, the Pennsylvania Keystone Opportunity Zone program has brought more than 550 new jobs to Fayette County and garnered more than $500 million in business investment.

Barry Seneri, Fay-Penn Economic Development Council economic development manager reported those statistics to the agency's board at its quarterly meeting Friday.

"The state has written new KOZ regulations,'' Seneri said, adding that part of those rules is a 7-year extension to the program, which would allow Fayette County to offer tax abatements to new companies through 2020.

KOZ initially offered tax abatements to companies locating in an area designated in the program during a 10-year-period.

"Most of the companies in the KOZ in Fayette County will see those expire in 2013,'' Seneri said, adding that the extension is not for companies currently in the KOZ.

"We have 25 companies in the KOZ, most of which will go onto the tax rolls in 2013. That will mean an annual increase in tax revenues of about $400,000,'' Seneri said. Broken down, the county will get about $300,000, the school districts $89,000 and the municipalities the balance.

"We have to get ordinances approved by the taxing bodies, the school district, municipalities and the county,'' in order to get the 7-year extension, he said. "We have contacted everyone expect the county and I have a good feeling about the initial meetings,'' Seneri said.

There are about 2,500 acres in the KOZ in scattered locations in Fayette County. Seneri said Fay-Penn would like to expand that by about 1,700 more acres under the extension.

He also explained that "raw land we own, we will have to start paying taxes on in 2014. Only developed land will be tax exempt.''

Meanwhile, Joe Podolinski, coordinator for the Fayette/Washington Keystone Innovation Zone (KIZ) announced that Washington and Jefferson College will receive $150,000 through the Keystone Innovation Starter Kit (KISK) program. The state is offering the money to colleges, universities and academic medical institutions statewide to recruit top faculty researchers in advanced knowledge areas.

"We have Penn State Fayette, California University and Washington and Jefferson in our KIZ region and I know all three applied for money from the $2.5 million the state made available,'' Podolinski said. "I'm disappointed that Penn State and Cal U did not get a grant but pleased that Washington and Jefferson did.''

Washington and Jefferson College was awarded the grant for its bioinformatics program. The funds can be used to hire faculty, build curriculum and build out lab space.

KISK is directly linked to the KIZ program, which provides funding for community/university partnerships to create jobs by transferring technology from the development to commercialization and encouraging entrepreneurship...

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20288506&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=480247&rfi=6

KOZ Coming Around Again to Fayette? Watch

They're not giving up on the Keystone Opportunity Zones in Easton?

Guess they have been reading on the glowing reports from the Governor's office, or from whatever economic development agency they use to siphon state grants to KOZ projects and support for projects located in a KOZ.

We don't have to wonder whether the same will be tried for Fayette - either before the earliest KOZs automatically expire, some in 2010, or later. Or maybe there will be proposals for new KOZs in even more property the local economic development agency purchases and owns.

Look who said his third top-priority would be to 'eliminate' KOZs because he agreed with other locals these were 'unfair,' 'not uniform according to PA Constitution, and 'unconstitutional.' Then, Rep. Tim Mahoney (D-51st) turned around within a few short months and voted for the Rendell budget and an accompanying bill which extended the KOZ program for the state. (See sidebar under KOZ)

Net the Truth Online

Easton mayor not giving up on Keystone Opportunity Zones
Thursday, March 26, 2009
By EDWARD SIEGER
The Express-Times
EASTON | Maybe the third time's the charm.

The city will take another shot at convincing the Easton Area School Board to approve tax-free Keystone Opportunity Zones for a trio of redevelopment projects.

Mayor Sal Panto Jr. said he spoke to some of the school board members who voted against the KOZ legislation last week. They agreed to meet with him tonight to talk in more detail about the process, Panto said.

On Wednesday, city council approved legislation to create new KOZs and extend the lives of other existing tax-free zones. The city has been trying for months to include the Pomeroy's building, the former Mount Vernon Ale House and the silk mill property on North 13th Street in the KOZ.

Council agreed to a handful of changes to make the KOZs more palatable to school board members, including eliminating residential development from the designation. Council also eliminated the earned income tax from the list of exempted taxes.

When council initially proposed creating the new KOZs, the city was to require a payment in lieu of taxes totaling 110 percent of a property's current real estate tax rate. A property owner will now make the payment in lieu of taxes for the entire 10-year period.

Property taxes on a redeveloped property will increase after reassessment.

Exemption from all state taxes, such as the capital gains tax, is what makes KOZ projects most attractive to corporations, Panto said.

Although city council supports KOZs, the mayor made his pitch Wednesday for why they are so important to the city.

Panto said a major developer expressed interest in the silk mill project but only with the KOZ. The city of Allentown is offering an Easton businessman, who'd like to open another business in the city, tax incentives, according to the mayor.

http://www.lehighvalleylive.com/easton/index.ssf?/base/news-1/1238040309137480.xml&coll=3

PA: Delta Development Group Dismissed by House Dems Caucus

Very interesting. Wonder what would happen if attention came out Fayette's way to the recent hiring of the same consultant group to handle 'grant-writing' and lobbying for the county?

Grant consultant hired for Fayette
By Liz Zemba
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Friday, January 30, 2009

Fayette County commissioners will spend thousands of dollars each month on a consultant to seek state and federal grants.

Commissioners Vincent Zapotosky and Vincent Vicites on Thursday voted in favor of hiring Delta Group of Mechanicsburg to prepare grant paperwork on behalf of the county and push it through the appropriate state and federal agencies...

...The firm listed a monthly fee of $9,500 in its proposal, but Zapotosky said the county will try to negotiate a lower fee.

Vicites and Zapotosky said they anticipate the amount of money the firm will secure in grants will more than cover its monthly fees. They said other counties that use similar agencies have reported successfully landing millions of dollars in grants for projects that include improvements to airports, transportation and recreation.

Vicites said money to pay the firm is available by transferring a portion of $155,000 from a 2000 bond issue into the tax-assessment office's budget. The bond money can only be used for reassessment purposes, he said.

The transfer would eliminate the need to use money from the general fund for reassessment purposes. That general-fund money, Vicites said, could then be used to pay Delta Group.

The two commissioners said timing is critical with the hire, especially as the Obama administration seeks Senate approval of its $819 billion economic stimulus package. The U.S. House of Representatives approved the measure on Wednesday. The Senate will consider it next week.

Vicites and Zapotosky said they believe Delta Group will ensure the county is at the head of the line when grants for various infrastructure programs become available through the stimulus package...

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribunereview/news/fayette/s_609486.html

Fee per month is almost $10,000, and recently, the same two commissioners who hired the consultants to seek stimulus money from Federal government travelled to Washington DC to make the rounds to request bundles for Fayette, mainly transportation projects.

Plus, the county has a transportation guru, also a consultant, who's paid annually at a fairly hefty salary.

Net the Truth Online

via grassrootspa link

House Dems abruptly cancel deal with consultant Delta Development

HARRISBURG — The House Democratic Caucus on Thursday canceled its contract with a consulting firm, fewer than 24 hours after the release of a stinging report by a statewide grand jury.

Delta Development, an economic development consultant and lobbying firm based in Mechanicsburg, received $1 million from a Beaver County nonprofit agency controlled by former state Rep. Mike Veon, D-Beaver Falls, for doing "little or no work," the grand jury said in a report issued Wednesday.

"After seeing the details of the grand jury report, we have terminated our contract with Delta Development effective immediately," said House Majority Leader Todd Eachus, D-Luzerne County.

Delta, a large contributor to Democrats' campaigns, hired Veon's brother Mark for $160,000 a year, the grand jury said. For years, Delta has had a separate contract with the House Democratic Caucus for $360,000 to $450,000 a year, records show. The firm helped prepare grant applications and find grant opportunities, a caucus spokesman said.

Delta officials did not respond to numerous requests for comment.

The firm lobbies lawmakers and has a broad range of clients...

...Mike Manzo, former chief of staff to DeWeese, has told the grand jury that Delta received contracts because it is "a very good Democratic contributor." Delta wasn't needed because the House had staff to do the work, said Manzo, who has agreed to plead guilty in the bonus scandal...

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/s_618054.html

Commissioners pitch critical projects By Mary Pickels
TRIBUNE-REVIEW Sunday, March 15, 2009

Fayette County Commissioners Vincent Vicites and Vince Zapatosky this week met with Sen. Robert Casey, congressmen John Murtha and Bill Shuster and Sen. Arlen Specter in Washington, where the two pitched nearly $15 million worth of regional priority projects.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribunereview/news/fayette/s_616151.html

National Constitutional Convention Open Pandora's Box

"A Constitutional Convention would open a Pandora's Box in this country and would allow debate on our most precious rights," said the WFC's chairman, John Birbari of Lander...

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=92771

Agree with that. we think it's highly unlikely that the calls can be based on "different" issues, or proposal for an amendment to the Constitution .

It seems a stretch a handful of calls by the states for a convention for a 'balanced budget' amendment could be added to a call for a convention for 'no unfunded federal mandates', and so on.

The one proposal (offered by each state) would have to be of such urgency to require a call for a convention that it would be easy to get the required amount of states to sign on to the call for a convention to propose it.

(At that time, when a convention is called, and delagates meet, the convention could move into any number of matters and issues, and as the first Constitutional Convention to revise the articles of Confederation shows, not only could the method for ratification be changed, an entirely new document could emerge.)

Ever watchful. Compliments to the American Policy Center and Tom DeWeese.

Wyoming: Don't mess with U.S. Constitution
Resolution opposes convention to debate 'our most precious rights' Posted: March 24, 2009 By Bob Unruh © 2009 WorldNetDaily

The state of Wyoming has adopted a resolution to inform Washington bureaucrats and bureaucracies of its opposition to any plans to hold a Constitutional Convention that would recommend changes or alterations to the nation's founding document.

House Enrolled Joint Resolution 3 was signed recently by Democratic Gov. Dave Freudenthal.

The Wyoming Family Coalition said the measure, sponsored by state Rep. Bob Brechtel, R-Casper, is intended to announce the state's opposition to "any attempts to dismantle the United States Constitution which has generally served the country well for nearly 230 years."


WND reported earlier when Wyoming legislators expressed alarm at the idea previous votes in the state would be used to call for such a convention, and also when a public policy organization reported that the nation was only two state votes away from the necessary two-thirds required to call a convention....

...Brechtel's resolution repealed all prior requests formally made by Wyoming to call for a Constitutional Convention.

Read how today's America already has rejected the Constitution, and what you can do about it.

"A Constitutional Convention would open a Pandora's Box in this country and would allow debate on our most precious rights," said the WFC's chairman, John Birbari of Lander.

"These rights come from God and are guaranteed by the lawful U.S. Constitution, they include our rights of free speech, the right to assemble, the right to practice the religion of our choice, the right to keep and bear arms and many others," he said.

"Given the current climate in Washington, the people of Wyoming do not want these rights or any of the basic provisions of the Constitution threatened by a Constitutional Convention."

The bill passed both houses with overwhelming majorities and was signed into law by the governor March 11.

"It takes 34 for states calling for a Constitutional Convention in order to have one,” Birbari said. "Until this action by our legislature, 32 states had issued the call including Wyoming. Now, it's down to 31."

Whether a rescission vote would be found valid, however, remains in question. Constitution expert John Eidsmoe, author of the book "Christianity & the Constitution," told WND earlier there isn't a clear constitutional directive on the issue.

A public policy organization recently issued an urgent alert that affirmative votes were needed from only two more states before a Constitutional Convention could be assembled in which "today's corrupt politicians and judges" could formally change the U.S. Constitution's "'problematic' provisions to reflect the philosophical and social mores of our contemporary society."

"Don't for one second doubt that delegates to a Con Con wouldn't revise the First Amendment into a government-controlled privilege, replace the 2nd Amendment with a 'collective' right to self-defense, and abolish the 4th, 5th, and 10th Amendments, and the rest of the Bill of Rights," said the warning from the American Policy Center...

... Tom DeWeese, who runs the APC and its education and grassroots work, previously told WND the possibilities stunned him when he discovered lawmakers in Ohio were considering a call for a Constitutional Convention. He explained that 32 other states already have taken a vote, and only one more would be needed to require Congress to name convention delegates who then would have more power than Congress itself. The Ohio vote later was delayed after DeWeese publicized its work.

Eidsmoe, who now is staff counsel for the Foundation for Moral Law, told WND the constitutional requirements for such an event are unclear.

"It leaves a lot of unanswered questions," Eidsmoe told WND. "Ultimately it would have to be resolved by a court, but a court has never considered this."

At the last Constitutional Convention, in 1787, the proposal was to make modifications to the Articles of Confederation, but delegates simply threw them out and wrote a new Constitution, according to historians.

Among other unanswered questions are how officers would be chosen, how delegates would be named and whether it would be open to the public or would allow changes in the Constitution be written behind closed doors, he said.

Chuck Baldwin, presidential candidate for the Constitution Party last year, said the delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention were "freedom-loving patriots who had just fought a bloody war for independence and were in no mind to re-enact tyranny upon the land they had just fought to liberate."

"However, can one imagine what would happen if the current bunch of politically correct leftists in Washington, D.C., were to be granted the power to rewrite our Constitution?" Baldwin continued. "It would be the end of the United States of America, and that is no hyperbole."

The effort to establish a convention began about 40 years ago, mostly based on issues such as the desire for a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution.

"Since then, 32 states have issued the call. The total number of states that are required to enact the Con Con is 34," Baldwin wrote. "Simple math reveals that we are only two states short of this disaster. As word of this potential calamity began to surface, the effort stalled with the total states issuing the call stuck at 32.

"With the election of Barack Obama, however, supporters of a Con Con have been emboldened and are now trying to resurrect the momentum. The state that is currently in the crosshairs appears to be Ohio," Baldwin said...

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=92771

What Constitution?

Fox News Fox 'n Friends discussion this morning focused ever so briefly on the question of a Constitutional foundation for the actions of handing over billions in rescue/recovery monies from the Treasury of the United States. And the Treasury Secretary requesting and getting even broader powers than currently had.

The trio showed a clip of a portion of the Financial Services Committee hearing

"Where is the Constitutional Authority in the Constitution of the United States?"
Congresswoman Michele Bachman asked Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernacke and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geitner during the Tuesday Financial Services Committee hearing on AIG and bank rescue plan.

Geitner answered in a generality... the authority comes from this body.

Bachman pressed repeating her question.

Geitner said the authorization comes from action this body has taken.

He still could not actually cite where the Constitution itself enables the powers.

It's all pretty clear, without the spin.

Update: U.S.Constitution Powers

Article 1 Section 8
Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;

To establish post offices and post roads;

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;--And

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articlei.html

Net the Truth Online

U.S. Seeks Expanded Power in Seizing Firms
By EDMUND L. ANDREWS and ERIC DASH
Published: March 24, 2009
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration and the Federal Reserve, still smarting from the political furor over the bailout of American International Group, began a full-court press on Tuesday to expand the federal government’s power to seize control of troubled financial institutions deemed too big to fail.

In his news conference on Tuesday night, President Obama said the government could have handled the A.I.G. bailout much more effectively if it had had the same power to seize large financial companies as it did to take over failed banks.

“It is precisely because of the lack of this authority that the A.I.G. situation has gotten worse,” Mr. Obama said, predicting that “there is going to be strong support from the American people and from Congress to provide that authority.”

Earlier on Tuesday, the Treasury secretary, Timothy F. Geithner, offered a proposal that would allow the government to take control, restructure and possibly close any kind of financial institution that was in trouble and big enough to destabilize the broader financial system.

The federal government has long had the power to take over and close banks and other deposit-taking institutions whose deposits are insured by the government and subject to detailed regulation.

But the Obama administration and the Fed would extend that authority to insurance companies like A.I.G., investment banks, hedge funds, private equity firms and any other kind of financial institution considered “systemically” important. That would let the government for the first time take control of private equity firms like Carlyle or industrial finance giants like GE Capital should they falter.

The Treasury and the Fed each sent their own proposals to the House Financial Services Committee on Tuesday, and President Obama has asked Congressional leaders to put the legislation on a fast track.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/25/business/economy/25web-bailout.html?em

Geithner Campaigns for Broader Control of Financial Firms By ANAHAD O’CONNOR Published: March 25, 2009

Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner on Wednesday pressed the case for expanding the government’s ability to take over and restructure ailing institutions that threaten to the broader financial system.

Speaking in Midtown Manhattan to the Council on Foreign Relations, Mr. Geithner said that the government needed the expanded powers in order “to help ensure that this country is never again confronted with the untenable choice between meltdown and massive taxpayer bailouts.”

“One of the key lessons of the current crisis is that destabilizing dangers can come from financial institutions besides banks,” Mr. Geithner said in his remarks, “but our current regulatory system provides few ways to deal with these risks.”

On Tuesday, Mr. Geithner, testifying before the House Financial Services Committee, proposed expanding the government’s power to give it more control over financial institutions, like insurance companies, that are in trouble and big enough to destabilize the broader financial system.

With such authority, the administration argued, rather than having to spend $170 billion to bailout the American International Group, the government could have put the insurance company into receivership or conservatorship and regulators would have been able to unwind it slowly.

Atop A.I.G. insurance companies “is an almost entirely unregulated business unit that took extraordinary risks to generate extraordinary profits,” Mr. Geithner said Wednesday. “And when this unit’s derivative contract losses pushed A.I.G. to the brink of failure last fall, the entire financial system was endangered.”

“The legislation that I believe we need would help us deal with a similar case in the future,” he said.

The proposal would extend power the government has long had over banks to insurance companies like A.I.G., investment banks, hedge funds, private equity firms and any other kind of financial institution considered “systemically” important. That would let the government for the first time take control of private equity firms like Carlyle or industrial finance giants like GE Capital should they falter.

If Congress approves such a measure, it would represent one of the biggest permanent expansions of federal regulatory power in decades. But scores of questions remained about how the authority would actually work,

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/26/business/economy/26bailout.html?hp

Federal Reserve Transparency Act Audit Gains Sponsors

Ron Paul's "Federal Reserve Transparency Act" to audit the Federal Reserve is now up to 39 co-sponsors the House, and an identical companion bill, S604, has been introduced in the Senate.

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=14040#comments

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread448569/pg1

Treasury Secretary Fed Reserve Chair Reject Global Currency

Fox News coverage House Financial Services Committee hearing on AIG Oversight with Federal Reserve Chairman and Treasury Secretary in attendance.

Congresswoman... asks, by what Constitutional authority do these federal monies flow to such as rescuing AIG, etc.

She asks specifically for the citation of the clause in the Constitution.

Bernacke gives an answer - by the emergency lending authorization to the Federal Reserve by Congress in 1930s.

The Congresswoman turns to recent news headlines wherein there's been a proposal for a new International monetary standard and talk of a global currency to reportedly be proposed by China at the G-20 Summit upcoming in Aprl.

would you reject global currency

Mr. Sec Yes

Fed Reserve chair Yes

PA State Rep. Mahoney School Consolidation Plan includes Uniform Curriculum

This page has been updated to include a Net the Truth Online first-hand report of the exchange between state Representative Tim Mahoney and radio program caller Rob during Rep. Mahoney's radio interview in Uniontown with host Bob Foltz on Thursday March 26 Let's Talk (WMBS 590). We have access to a copy of the audio from the program. As we get our site more in line with technology, it may be possible to have an archive section of such audio filings. For now,

See the section entitled:

MAHONEY LEGISLATION AMENDS DUTIES OF SUPERINTENDENTS - AUTHORITY TO HIRE?

We also made an update in the section concerning cyber and charter schools.

Rep. Mahoney spoke briefly on his plan in those specific areas, but faced no questions from the host of the radio program Bob Foltz, or after the comments from any radio callers. (There wasn't time for callers) We would have made a call to ask for clarification on his comments in general regarding "improving education"and items we've broached here, but 20 minutes into the program, host Bob Foltz said they were stopping discussion on the school district consolidation issue and moving on to Rep. Mahoney's proposal for a regional police force. (We found it odd they didn't talk about a regional fire department as this is among Rep. Mahoney's top priorities, apparently.)

On Thursdays, the Let's Talk program is only 45 minutes long vs 90-minutes, and at least 7-10 minutes are taken up with radio spot commercials.

We found the Let's Talk program thus limited listeners/callers feedback when Mr. Foltz announced an end to discussion on the school district consolidation plan.

As this school consolidation issue is not just a small little matter - the Mahoney legislation contains a section for setting a goal of "uniform curriculum" - and there has been no information forthcoming how this will be enacted in consolidated schools, we will contact the state representative for further information.

Note, we reference where we can as many resources as possible to highlight data, other criticisms of Governor Ed Rendell's school consolidation plan, and focus on Rep. Mahoney and his legislation because that legislation as currently written includes several sketchy areas not yet specifically addressed by the state legislator.

During the radio interview, Rep. Mahoney noted one thing we ALL expect from not only our school officials, but all of our elected officials and representatives in government, any government entity.

Accountability, Rep. Mahoney said we need accountability around here in education of our students. Nobody is being accountable.

That struck us as hypocritical when the state legislator seems to dismiss as political parlaying any questioning of his provisions as contained in his own legislation HB 351, his school district consolidation bill.

When will Rep. Mahoney be accountable for what is actually in the bill and explain it to the public, not merely speak in generalities?

We all want good education and quality education for the youth of our area. Each and every one of us wants our youth to succeed with the basics of as fine an education as one can get in this country.

How does consolidating school districts with one county-wide school Superintendent and only 7 (1 from each former school district) with new so-called "boundaries" and a "uniform curriculum" (across Fayette County) in the "grades" going to specifically improve local education?

Does it not seem the exact opposite will occur when one "uniform curriculum" might be applied - in fact - the lucky-for-many move is to try different methodology and one way of obtaining that is exactly the kinds of outside the box avenues such as cyber schools and charter schools.

Yet, the state representative's legislation would curtail private school choice in the consolidated county-wide school district by making provisions for only one cyber school and one charter school - and these would not be private-run, his plan is for these to be established and run by the same county-wide Superintendent and 7 (county) school board directors!

So where is the accountability from Rep. Tim Mahoney?

Plus, the legislation as caller Rob points out in his exchange with Rep. Mahoney underlines a portion under Duties of Superintendents which if anything will make an "appointed" "by the county board of commissoners" (it's still unclear who will actually appoint the superintendent) county Superintendent, one man, having an ability to hire each employee of the county consolidated school.

How will that individual Superintendent ever be held accountable for potential nepotism gone wild? The legislation doesn't address in any way that we can tell how a Superintendent would be removed from the position. Would the board of county commissioners who appoint the individual (if that's who appoints) have the exclusive authority to dismiss or reappoint? Who will the Superintendent have a contract with, and how hard or easy would it be to review and dismiss one person responsible for so many things?

The same would apply to the School Board Directors. How much power will they be able to weild, even if elected "at large" - in the representative smaller district?

As an example 1 each from 7 representative districts and those districts at least in Fayette are wholly a Democrat political party stronghold - isn't it more likely than not all Democrats will be chosen to serve on the one county-wide representative board?

At the least, why not have a 14-member board, or more, all without pay, some minimal stipend for expenses, who are elected, much like Allegheny County's Home Rule district representation?

Now we've thought of this as well. If we're going to move to such a "regional approach" in all of these areas, education delivery, albeit 'county' consolidation for the time being, and regional police force and fire departments, why not a move from "county" government to "regional" government?

Why not as already does happen with some pacts between counties such as Fayette and Washington county and the ferry-boat, and others with Greene County such as a financial bond/loan pool, why not merge counties?

At least, merge county-wide school districts into regional-wide school districts?

It isn't a stretch to believe if one or more areas of government can be consolidated for whatever purposes, cost savings, efficiency of public services, other areas can't be consolidated as well.

That is among the primary concerns we have with consolidation of schools, and particularly this one as it is apparently determined to edge out as best it can private education approaches. Rep. Mahoney's bill limits a county to one of each cyber and charter, and according to his remarks on the Foltz radio program, these would be "county-wide" and "public run."

As we've noted on the site for a long time, we are a proponent of private education approaches. We haven't joined any state or national organizations but we are tempted to begin inquiries, especially if this legislation passes the state House and Senate in the near future.

Uniform curriculum - run by the 'state' - the only choice availabe in a county-wide school district - just does not sit well for a host of reasons. The main reason being - it can only lead to one way of thinking, or else.

Net the Truth Online (Friday March 27, 2009)

HARRISBURG, Feb.10 – State Rep. Tim Mahoney, D-Fayette, has again introduced legislation that would provide taxpayer savings by allowing residents to approve the consolidation of smaller school districts in the state into countywide school districts.Mahoney's legislation (H.B. 351) would allow county commissioners to place a referendum on the ballot asking voters if they support consolidating small school districts into a single, countywide school district for the purposes of administration and taxation. The consolidation process would begin if at least two-thirds of voters approve the referendum.

The Fayette County lawmaker said he agrees with Gov. Ed Rendell's 2009-10 state budget proposal calling for the consolidation of school districts in Pennsylvania.

"We need to review school district consolidation in Pennsylvania to see if we can provide taxpayers with expanded real estate tax savings," Mahoney said.

Mahoney said the process would create a countywide school district for administrative purposes, not necessarily fewer or larger schools within the district. Individual school buildings, facilities, sports teams and mascots would not be impacted, and could remain in place.

Under the measure, a county school board would be formed to govern the new consolidated district. The county board would be composed of seven members and elected from regions within the county divided equally by population.

The state Department of Education would develop regulations and approve the application process for the countywide school consolidation plan.

The legislation is awaiting action in the House Education Committee.

http://www.pahouse.com/PR/051021009.asp

NOTE: HB 351 may be taken up by the Pennsylvania State House Education Committee anytime - if not this session - in the next session - after the May 2009 Primary Election. Watch for it.

UNMENTIONED IN FEB. PRESS RELEASE - UNIFORM CURRICULUM - BUT IT'S IN THE LEGISLATION HB 351

When is an agenda for "uniform curriculum" among several school systems not an agenda for "uniform curriculum" among several school systems in Pennsylvania?

When state Representative Timothy Mahoney (D-51st) says so.

Nobody has yet directly questioned the basic reason Rep. Mahoney actually touts as the reason for his school district consolidation plan during the representative's meeting with the Editorial Board of the Herald Standard.

A video of the meeting can be found at the Herald-Standard site

Note, the Press Release announcing reintroduction of the bill does not specify the reason Rep. Mahoney touted during the editorial board meeting.

Mahoney reintroduces bill to consolidate school districts for local tax reform

HARRISBURG, Feb.10 – State Rep. Tim Mahoney, D-Fayette, has again introduced legislation that would provide taxpayer savings by allowing residents to approve the consolidation of smaller school districts in the state into countywide school districts.

Mahoney's legislation (H.B. 351) would allow county commissioners to place a referendum on the ballot asking voters if they support consolidating small school districts into a single, countywide school district for the purposes of administration and taxation. The consolidation process would begin if at least two-thirds of voters approve the referendum.

The Fayette County lawmaker said he agrees with Gov. Ed Rendell's 2009-10 state budget proposal calling for the consolidation of school districts in Pennsylvania.
http://www.pahouse.com/PR/051021009.asp

Who all sits on the Herald-Standard Editorial Board might be of interest as a few years back the newspaper undertook a unique program to offer spots to regular citizens who were interested in serving on the board for a specified period of time. While the program sounds interesting, and the citizens appear to be 'vetted,' (some opinion writing capability) who can say the selections might not be based slightly more on political bent than neutrality?

But before we delve into Rep. Mahoney's expressed primary reason for his school consolidation bill - "education that would be consistent across Fayette County," and "a uniform curriculum" we must point out not even those present at the Editorial Board meeting asked Rep. Mahoney a single thing about what his plan does not deal with.

What would one think is central to a bill stated (in the Feb. Press Release) to attempt to "provide taxpayers with expanded real estate tax savings"?

The school district's entire budget.

And everybody knows the basics without lifting a finger to do any research.

The largest chunk of taxpayers' money goes to funding teachers' salaries, pensions, and health care.

According to Pennsylvania statistics, the largest chunk (of taxpayers' monies) of the school district's budget goes to those costs alone.

School district costs

...Education is labor-intensive, so personnel costs (salaries and benefits) account for approximately 70% of most school district budgets. Debt service on bond issues (for building construction) are likely to account for another 10% (more or less). Other costs account for the remaining 20% of a typical budget. These includes transportation, utilities, instructional materials (books, computers) and consumable supplies.

http://sunshinereview.org/index.php/Pennsylvania_public_school_overview

Ed Rendell, Man In Black? By Nathan A. Benefield & Fred D. Baldwin, For The Bulletin Tuesday, February 17, 2009

...The single largest school cost item (about half of every district’s budget) is teacher salaries and benefits. These would become standardized over the newly merged districts. Does anyone believe that salaries will be standardized at any level lower than the highest prevailing in the county?

Nathan A. Benefield is Director of Policy Research with the Commonwealth Foundation (www.CommonwealthFoundation.org), an independent, nonprofit public policy research and educational institute based in Harrisburg. Fred D. Baldwin, a member of the Carlisle Area School Board, is the project manager of SchoolBoardTansparency.org, a Commonwealth Foundation project dedicated to promoting greater transparency in school district labor negotiations.

http://thebulletin.us/articles/2009/02/17/commentary/editorials/doc4998eaecca7d1550046361.txt

However, the Mahoney school district consolidation plan reportedly applies to consolidating the Administrative ONLY end of the school districts. The plan as proposed by Rep. Mahoney won't touch the largest drain on the public - the public employees' salaries, pensions, and health care.

As presented by Rep. Mahoney, the legislator notes his consolidation plan will retain the identities of individual school districts.

Yes, the school/school district can keep its mascots and sports teams.

Yet, the bill is touted as consolidation for "taxation purposes."

HB 351

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/billinfo/billinfo.cfm?syear=2009&sind=0&body=H&type=B&BN=0351

During the Herald-Standard Editorial Board interview, Rep. Mahoney makes it appear his bill is going to address the entirety of the public school system's obscene costs by highlighting some $250 million spent overall on running the several different school districts in Fayette County. The county has 7 such individual school districts.

Mahoney said (clip)

"We have the opportunity to change our course and we have to cross lines," Mahoney said. "We spend $250 million a year on education in this county and it's time to overhaul the system. There is so much waste we could absorb."

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20284711&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=480247&rfi=6

But Mahoney doesn't address in his followup to that statement how on earth individual taxpayers are going to save some 25-30 percent on a school tax bill if his plan leaves out the largest chunk of costs: the largest percentage of the school district's budget spent on teachers salaries, pensions, and healthcare costs?

clip

Mahoney said he believes that homeowners could save 25 to 30 percent on their property tax bills if his bill were to become law and get implemented.

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20284711&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=480247&rfi=6

It simply is not believable an individual homeowner will save 25%-30% on an individual school tax bill when the bulk of the costs of a school (by some resources) nearly half the costs are off the table.

It isn't clear at all how combining or consolidating the school districts for taxation purposes will enable any cost savings of some 25%-30% on individual school tax bills, either.

The school districts will retain buildings, retain non-Administration employees and staff, and retain federal and state funding streams based on school district "population" and per pupil calculations.

That's how the system now operates in Pennsylvania.

None of that is likely to change much in the next ten years either in Fayette County, population of the school district, unless a manufacturing plant or some such locates in the county and increases the population and families move in to take advantage of the availability of new and well paying jobs.

Even then, there would simply be an increase in school population and that would necessitate an increase in teachers and assistant teachers and consultants that seem to always go along with any reorganization plans.

So there is no guarantee those per pupil costs would be reduced in fact it's a safer bet the costs would increase.

SCHOOL DISTRICT CONSOLIDATION FOR "TAXATION PURPOSES"

This area of Rep. Mahoney's bill is sketchy as well.

Note, the bill calls for eliminating individual school districts' governing board of directors. In PA, that's 9 members per district board. In Fayette, with 7 different districts, we're talking about 63 board members.

HB 351 calls for a reduction of school district directors to 1 from each of 7 districts. So 7 school board directors would either be appointed or elected to the county-wide board.

It sounds nice that a school district could keep its identity with school mascots, names, and sports teams. It sounds nice the consolidation would consolidate the bureacracy of 7 school superintendents and however many assistant superintendents and executive level employees on down.

Yet where are the answers to how will local 'autonomy' be retained with 7 school board members in powerful positions vs 63 school board members weighing and deliberating issues - and facing the public in school board elections every 4 years?

Power in the hands of a few is far more dangerous than power in the hands of many.

This is also a matter of accountability. Who will be held accountable when one of the 7 schools in the county-wide district needs a new building. As we have witnessed in the past, school construction is one of the hottest tax issues that captures the attention of taxpayers nearly every election cycle.

So the school keeps its identity, until the building crumbles to bits and rubble. And then what? The 7 board members will vote to build anew, or consolidate actual school buildings. And what will the new building/s be called?

There goes the local identity.

GUESS WHAT CONSOLIDATION FOR PURCHASING SAVINGS HEALTH TRUSTS CAN ALREADY BE DONE

CLIP

Ed Rendell, Man In Black?

By Nathan A. Benefield & Fred D. Baldwin, For The Bulletin
Tuesday, February 17, 2009

...Why would consolidation fail to achieve the cost savings Gov. Rendell hopes for? While measures such as bulk purchasing and cross-district health trusts are sensible cost-savings measures, these can already occur without consolidation. It’s possible that some administrative savings might materialize, but it won’t help that some superintendents will become “assistant superintendents” and others will expect large raises. The notion that larger districts have fewer administrators per pupil runs counter to experience...

http://thebulletin.us/articles/2009/02/17/commentary/editorials/doc4998eaecca7d1550046361.txt

Limits of District Consolidation
Filed under: School District Consolidation — kansaseducation @ 9:17 am
My friends at the Commonwealth Foundation point out the limits of school district consolidation. They cite yet another author on the subject, who offers some wise counsel:

“the notion that creating larger administrative units will significantly reduce the actual number of administrators runs counter to experience. It won’t help that some superintendents becomes “assistant superintendents” if everybody involved expects raises.”

http://kansaseducation.wordpress.com/category/school-district-consolidation/

CONSOLIDATION EQUALS RETRACTION OF OPPORTUNITY FOR PARENTAL CHOICE (Cyber and charter schools)

Nearly missed in the presentation Rep. Mahoney makes to the Herald-Standard Editorial Board is the reference to the legislation's impact on the county by limiting to one only:

Cyber School
Charter School
Alternative School
Vo-Technical School

He added that the county could have one cyber school, one charter school, one vocational technical school and one alternative learning school.

If all goes as planned, Mahoney said he would like to get have the proposal ready for a vote next year and hopefully do a "pilot program" in Fayette County. He said he is now seeking support from fellow legislators, but some aren't too keen on the idea...

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20284711&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=480247&rfi=6

As part of the consolidation of the 7 districts in Fayette, then, the county-wide district would enable only one of each.

Isn't choice a big part of the reason for the availability of charter schools and cyber charter schools?

Is this a back-end run on diminishing the availability of such choices so there are fewer private choices?

ONE OF EACH CYBER AND CHARTER SCHOOL PER COUNTY AND PUBLICLY HELD

During his radio appearance Thursday March 26 on WMBS 590 Let's Talk, state Rep. Mahoney highlighted features of his school district consolidation legislation with regard to establishing 1 cyber school, 1 charter school, 1 alternative school and 1 vo-tech school.

What was astonishing about his remarks were regarding the cyber and charter school for the county.

Rep. Mahoney offered that these would be county schools, in other words, these would not be private schools as is currently enabled under Harrisburg law.

Yet, the language in the bill is wholly unclear on that point.

HB 531

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/CFDOCS/Legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&sessYr=2009&sessInd=0&billBody=H&billTyp=B&billNbr=0351&pn=0382

MAHONEY LEGISLATION AMENDS DUTIES OF SUPERINTENDENTS - AUTHORITY TO HIRE?

During his Thursday (March 26) radio appearance on Uniontown WMBS 590 Let's Talk with host Bob Foltz, state Rep. Tim Mahoney took comment and questions from caller "Rob" who cited Rep. Mahoney's legislation pertaining to the "duties of the Superintendent/s."

Rob noted the legislation references a duty of the Superintendent shall be, and he stressed, shall be, among others, to hire professional, temporary professional, or nonprofessional employees. Rob appeared to have been reading word for word from the legislation (we've inserted the section clipping out the identified duties coming before "to hire).

The caller commented the power to hire anybody - as needed - in the school district - the county-wide district - that's a lot of power - and that's a lot of power for one person. He - if memory serves - asked who would be a check on that?

Rep. Mahoney said we need accountability. He claimed the legislation didn't say the Superintendent would be the person to hire everybody. He was emphatic that the School Board Directors, limited to 7 members, would do the actual hiring and the Superintendent would only sign on to each hiring.

He repeated, somebody has to have the accountability. The Superintendent would have "accountability," Mahoney said.

Rob said the legislation doesn't say the section applies to duties of School Board Directors, but to the duties of Superintendents... he said he was reading right from the bill itself, the word employee was spelled with one "e" when it's normally spelled with two. Check the spelling, and the legislation - the bill says duties of the Superintendent shall be ... to hire... and it's underlined. It's new from your last bill.

What was puzzling, Rep. Mahoney didn't seem to possess a copy of the bill in front of him, or he would have possibly allowed the caller the valid point the language is first contained under the section entitled "Duties of Superintendents."

Section 1081. Duties of Superintendents.--The duties of district superintendents shall be...

to hire professional, temporary professional or nonprofessional employes and such other duties as may be required by the board of school directors.

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/CFDOCS/Legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&sessYr=2009&sessInd=0&billBody=H&billTyp=B&billNbr=0351&pn=0382

Then, with the bill in front of the legislator, Rep. Mahoney might have noticed the section after duties "shall be" specifies "to hire..." was underlined, and he could have addressed that fact, more specifically as to its meaning and intent.

Rob pointed out if Representative Mahoney wanted the bill to specify the School Board Directors shall hire... employe(e)s, etc. the Representative should make those changes in the language to the bill.

However, we're looking at the bill online and notice exactly what precedes the Duties of Superintendents for some direction and the section is preceded with the wording:

Section 4. Section 1081 of the act, amended January 14, 1970 (1969 P.L.468, No.192), is amended to read:

Section 1081. Duties of Superintendents.--The duties of district superintendents shall be

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/CFDOCS/Legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&sessYr=2009&sessInd=0&billBody=H&billTyp=B&billNbr=0351&pn=0382

It really is not clear what the Duties of the School Board Directors are in the Mahoney bill, and would hope such would be clarified more in line with what Rep. Mahoney said the bill encompasses.

EDUCATION THAT WOULD BE CONSISTENT ACROSS THE COUNTY UNIFORM CURRICULUM

During the Herald-Standard Editorial Board interview with Rep. Mahoney nobody asked state Rep. Mahoney about in his words his non-agenda, when he states the "most important reason" for the consolidation of school districts "is that education would be consistent across Fayette County."

clip

In promoting his bill for consolidation of services for school districts, state Rep. Timothy Mahoney said the most important reason for it is that education would be consistent across Fayette County.

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20284711&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=480247&rfi=6

Half-an-hour or so later, Mahoney must have forgetten again how he should suppress his "non-agenda" agenda which anybody with a brain could recognize:

'a uniform curriculum."

As clear as a bell to anybody who hears what state Rep. Mahoney is saying the reason for the consolidation plan is for "uniform curriculum" - the most important reason to consolidate is "education" that WOULD BE consistent in Fayette County.

And elsewhere - eventually - by logical reasoning - and Rep. Mahoney's comment "Fayette County would be a 'pilot program.'

However long the Herald Standard Editorial Board listened to Rep. Mahoney, nobody asks: gee Tim, what do you mean by "uniform curriculum"? That's not just consolidating for administrative efficiency or taxation purposes.

Not one question about who will actually propose and adopt 'a uniform curriculum."

The 7 appointed/elected school directors for the consolidated schools?

Ah no. There's the answer right in the legislation.

The Superintendent...

WHY STATE REPRESENTATIVE TIM MAHONEY'S UNIFORM CURRICULUM IS SCARY

First and foremost. The reason for the consolidation plan Rep. Mahoney imparts to the Herald-Standard Editorial Board has yet to be subjected to intense questioning and scrutiny.

The bill as summarized in the Feb. Press Release says absolutely nothing about education that would be consistent, nor is uniform curriculum mentioned as a reason for the school consolidations.

What this plan boils down however to is not just contained to consolidating in this case 7 local districts down to one for purposes of having 1 Administrative Superintendent instead of 7 and for savings for taxation purposes.

One cyber school per consolidated county wide school district. One charter school. One vo-tech school. One alternative school.

And one 'uniform curriculum' per one consolidated or rather unified countywide school district.

That's what this is about. Yet not one question why the uniform curriculum as able to be determined by the one county Superintendent with board approval? Or won't the board be able to vote otherwise than mandated in the bill?

Take a look at the re-introduced bill's section regarding the duties of the county superintendent.

Text of Mahoney Legislation HB 351

Section 1081. Duties of Superintendents.--

Section 1081. Duties of Superintendents.--The duties of district superintendents shall be to visit personally as often as practicable the several schools under his supervision, to note the courses and methods of instruction and branches taught, to give such directions in the art and methods of teaching in each school as he deems expedient and necessary, [and] to report to the board of school directors any insufficiency found, so that each school shall be equal to the grade for which it was established and that there may be, as far as practicable, uniformity in the courses of study in the schools of the several grades, to hire professional, temporary professional or nonprofessional employes and such other duties as may be required by the board of school directors.

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/CFDOCS/Legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&sessYr=2009&sessInd=0&billBody=H&billTyp=B&billNbr=0351&pn=0382

Notice the use of the word SHALL. So each school (which retains its unique name, mascot, football team) shall be equal to the grade for which it was established and that there may be, as far as practicable, uniformity in the courses of study in the schools of the several grades?

In other words. If in the county school district Brownsville Grade 1 is determined by the Superintendent to be not equal to Uniontown Grade 1, and so on, this bill makes not only offers the ability to make them equal, but insists on such.

Why is that a scary situation? One superintendent for the entire consolidated school district makes this decision and recommendation.

And how will Brownsville Grade 1 and Uniontown Grade 1, and each of the other 5 become equal?

In course of study - curriculum. In other words, the same uniform curriculum, the same textbooks, the same tests, the same everything will be utilized in Brownsville grade 1 and Uniontown grade 1, etc.

Make no mistake about it. This is a throwback to Outcome Based Education, Goals 2000 and an open door to implementing whatever new mandated State and Federal Standards come along. Don't forget No Child Left Behind and its controversial measures.

7 School Board Directors and 1 county Superintendent implementing a 'uniform curriculum' for all students in Fayette County.

How in the world is this retaining local identity or local independence?

We had previously said worse even than that, but this really is as bad, not worse.

Rep. Mahoney has the absolute gall to say he doesn't have an agenda and don't anybody dare claim he has an agenda.

Well, we dare.

And here is why.

REMEMBER OUTCOME BASED EDUCATION GOALS 2000 AND PEG LUKSIK?

While this is not an endorsement of Peg Luksik's candidacy for the Senate seat Senator Arlen Specter now holds, we would be remiss if we did not reference her candidacy at this point.

Peg Luksik Will Challenge Specter In Primary

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/10/peg-luksik-will-challenge_n_173502.html

Conservative Peg Luksik to challenge Arlen Specter
AP March 10, 2009 Posted on Tuesday, March 10, 2009

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2203407/posts

People who read us would likely agree we don't balk at being lumped in with the so-called "fringe," it's like a badge of honor. You're not for one-size-fits-all education? You're for basing state and federal legislative actions on the tenets of the state Constitution and the Constitution of the United States and the expressed provisions of those Founding documents?

You must be the "fringe."

According to the American Spectator writer, Luksik is a "fringe activist."

Can Peg Luksik Save Arlen Specter?
By W. James Antle, III on 3.11.09

The Luksik run could create space for Specter, or it could allow Toomey to portray himself as the pragmatic conservative in between a moderate and a fringe activist.

http://spectator.org/blog/2009/03/11/can-peg-luksik-save-arlen-spec

We cite Peg Luksik to point out Luksik wrote the absolutely and astonishing eye-opening book (with a co-writer) on the real intentions of such uniform curriculum proposals.

Outcome Based Education and Goals 2000 were actually stopped as presented at the time by such fringe activists as Peg Luksik, and many others.

Read the interview from back when, but still pertinent.

The OBE language has been replaced in current education trends and programs, but the mission is still prevalent in the 3 circles Luksik specifically identifies...

http://www.heartland.org/publications/school%20reform/article/12713/OutcomeBased_Education_Remaking_Society_One_Child_at_a_Time.html

Don't think "uniform curriculum" in a one county-wide educational school system is worrisome? Don't think round-table discussions and debates about what all that means are necessary around the county and Pennsylvania where the push is on for the bill's support?

Then sit back and watch as a mere 8 individuals make every single decision for you without your express consent.

GOVERNOR ED RENDELL SCHOOL CONSOLIDATION 501 TO 100

http://www.governor.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_2_24980_2985_368304_43/http%3B/pubcontent.state.pa.us/publishedcontent/publish/cop_general_government_operations/pagov/media/latest_news/09_10_fs_schoolconsolidation_final.pdf

CONCERNS EXPRESSED QUESTIONS ARISE RENDELL SCHOOL CONSOLIDATION

Last Update: 3/9/2009 6:04:00 PM

Rendell's plan to combine school districts not so elementary, Berks educators say
By Greta Cuyler Reading Eagle

LISTEN: Audio of the interview

Gov. Ed Rendell's plan to cut the number of Pennsylvania school districts from 501 to about 100 has some Berks County educators clamoring for details and debating if the plan could actually work.

The governor thinks it would.

Larger districts could operate with fewer employees, and that would save money, he said.

"If you consolidated three districts, you could save two-thirds of the administrative costs and either save that money and use it for property-tax reduction or put the money into the classroom, where it continues to be needed," Rendell said. "People say property taxes are too high, and this will be a great control mechanism."

It sounds great. Who doesn't like to save money?

At this stage, there are few details about how the consolidation would occur, but Berks educators already have plenty of concerns...

http://readingeagle.com/article.aspx?id=126560

SOMETHING MORE TO CONSIDER FEDERAL STANDARDS STIMULUS MONEY, ETC. COMING SOON (?)

This section is a work-in-progress until MORE details can be obtained about a local Fayette County request for federal stimulus monies to help in the plan to build and operate a Vo-Tech school and center for post-secondary education.

Currently, rather than desire to refurbish, renovate, or rebuild on its current North Union location, the Fayette Vocational Technical School has been seeking to build a new building. The proposal includes site selection of acreage designated as Keystone Opportunity Innovatiion Zone.

That publicly recommended location is at the Eberly Campus Penn State University.

(article citation)

Since Representative Mahoney's bill references there would be only one cyber school, one charter school, one alternative school and one vocational-technical school per consolidated county-wide district, it is not a stretch to wonder whether the current plan to house more than a high-school vo-tech at the proposed property is in the works to meet just such a stipulation in the Mahoney bill.

Likewise, Governor Rendell's budget proposals may include just such funding to be directed to such and undertaking.

More to be added.

FEDERAL STIMULUS MONEY FOR EDUCATION PENNSYLVANIA GOVERNOR ED RENDELL BUDGET

Stimulus spells relief for schools
By Brad Bumsted and Bill Zlatos
TRIBUNE-REVIEW Wednesday, March 4, 2009
The stimulus package earmarks $2.9 billion over two years to Pennsylvania. Of that, $1.9 billion could be used to avert layoffs, renovate or build schools. The remaining $1 billion would go to programs for disadvantaged students, special education, school lunches, vocational rehabilitation and educational technology.

Pennsylvania faces a two-year, $6.3 billion budget deficit that Rendell proposes to balance with stimulus money, tax hikes, spending cuts and money from the state's rainy day fund.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/state/s_614359.html

FAYETTE COUNTY VOCATIONAL-TECHNICAL NEW CENTER PROPOSAL

Board supports new vo-tech
Buzz up!By Judy Kroeger, DAILY COURIER
Tuesday, March 17, 2009

The Uniontown Area School District approved supporting a new Fayette Area Vocational-Technical School, but with several contingencies.

By a vote of 7-2 Monday evening, directors agreed to a financial viability plan and potential architectural design for the Fayette Area Vo-Tech contingent upon the vo-tech receiving at least $10 million in federal, state, local and philanthropic funding for the project. Directors did not name a location for the new facility and added a provision that they could choose not to participate, even if the $10 million becomes available.

Solicitor Michael Brungo said directors may have some objections to the project, which was why they added the nonparticipation clause. Directors Kenneth Meadows and Alan George voted against the project. George said he does not object to a new facility, but the district is undertaking its own building project, which he estimates will require $18 million in new bonds and leave the district $78 million to $80 million in debt. George said the vo-tech will cost $28 million to $30 million total, which will be divided among districts that use the facility.

In order for the project to move forward, Albert Gallatin and Brownsville Area must approve it. Laurel Highlands has already passed a motion similar to Uniontown.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/dailycourier/s_616451.html

Net the Truth Online (Wednesday March 26 and Thursday March 27)

Mahoney meets with H-S editorial board
By Amy Revak, Herald-Standard
03/22/2009
Updated 03/23/2009 12:06:06 AM EDT
Email to a friendPost a CommentPrinter-friendly
In promoting his bill for consolidation of services for school districts, state Rep. Timothy Mahoney said the most important reason for it is that education would be consistent across Fayette County.

"A lot of people think I have a hidden agenda, but the only agenda I have is that I want to make Fayette County better," said Mahoney, D-South Union Township. Mahoney reintroduced a bill this year that would establish countywide school districts to be run by one seven-member board elected by population. He said the plan isn't like the proposal introduced by Gov. Ed Rendell, which recommends reducing the number of school districts statewide from 501 to 100, and Mahoney said is a much harder sell across the state.

Mahoney's legislation (House Bill 351) would allow county commissioners to place a referendum on the ballot asking voters if they support consolidating school districts into a single, countywide school district for the purposes of administration and taxation. The process would begin if at least two-thirds of voters approve the referendum.

Mahoney is also interested in forming a countywide police force, a proposal that doesn't need legislative action.

Mahoney said while meeting with the Herald-Standard Editorial Board that Fayette County has traditionally had the highest rates of poverty, unemployment and crime across the state. He said people don't want to discuss consolidation because of "imaginary lines." He added that U.S. Rep. John Murtha, D-Johnstown, won't always be in office, calling Murtha a " job-creating machine."

"We have the opportunity to change our course and we have to cross lines," Mahoney said. "We spend $250 million a year on education in this county and it's time to overhaul the system. There is so much waste we could absorb."

Mahoney said he believes that homeowners could save 25 to 30 percent on their property tax bills if his bill were to become law and get implemented.

Mahoney said he would like to do a two-month, state-funded study after the state budget is adopted later this year that he could use as a selling point to get the county commissioners to put it on a referendum. He said he is looking at consolidation for purposes of transportation contracts, and reducing administration and operation costs.

He clarified that he has no plans to eliminate the identities of individual school districts.

"I foresee one superintendent who takes responsibility for everything and a principal in charge of each school, a transportation person and a buying consultant," Mahoney said.

The bill would allow the referendum to be placed on the ballot for fourth- to eighth-class counties.

Mahoney said he has received some resistance from the Pennsylvania School Boards Association, but he hasn't heard much from the state teachers union. He added that he has gotten good feedback from the members of the public.

"The most important thing is education. Across the county, education would be equal," Mahoney said.

He added that the county could have one cyber school, one charter school, one vocational technical school and one alternative learning school.

If all goes as planned, Mahoney said he would like to get have the proposal ready for a vote next year and hopefully do a "pilot program" in Fayette County. He said he is now seeking support from fellow legislators, but some aren't too keen on the idea...

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20284711&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=480247&rfi=6

Text of Mahoney Legislation HB 351

Section 1081. Duties of Superintendents.--The duties of district superintendents shall be to visit personally as often as practicable the several schools under his supervision, to note the courses and methods of instruction and branches taught, to give such directions in the art and methods of teaching in each school as he deems expedient and necessary, [and] to report to the board of school directors any insufficiency found, so that each school shall be equal to the grade for which it was established and that there may be, as far as practicable, uniformity in the courses of study in the schools of the several grades, to hire professional, temporary professional or nonprofessional employes and such other duties as may be required by the board of school directors.

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/CFDOCS/Legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&sessYr=2009&sessInd=0&billBody=H&billTyp=B&billNbr=0351&pn=0382

Let’s look at a few facts regarding Pennsylvania’s cyber charter schools:

The current year enrollment survey of the PA Coalition of Charter Schools found there are over 64,000 students in 126 charter schools, with over 21,000 in 11 cyber charter schools (almost 1/3, with this percentage increasing each year over the last few years). The cyber charter students are less than 1.2% of the students in Pennsylvania.

In 2005-06 School district expenditures for cyber charter schools were .52% of total district expenditures of $20.8 billion. The median percentage for school districts was .50%, with an average of .61% of total Expenditures. 443 districts (86.6%) spend less than 1% of their expenditures for cyber charter schools.

As these numbers reveal, the financial impact on school districts is minimal. Districts often fail to acknowledge the approximate 25% per pupil savings they receive under the charter school funding provisions and then they receive a 30 or 32.45% reimbursement for prior year expenditures for charter schools - costing the state $161 million in 2007-08, with the administration requesting an additional $36.3 million more for 2008-09. On average school districts receive almost 50% in savings and additional reimbursement for students attending charter schools -- how much more money do school districts need for students fleeing their programs?

Many students enrolling in cyber charter schools are one or more grade levels behind in their academic performance. Cyber charter schools have to make up this deficiency.

Cyber charter schools are spending over 80% of their funds on instruction because they do not need to support large facilities and have lean staffing arrangements. The average for instructional spending for PA school districts is 57.4%. Our school districts spend 45% more than the national average for administration with these expenses rising at almost twice the rate of inflation.

In 2006-07 the eleven cyber charter schools met 90% of their AYP targets. 802 traditional public schools did not make AYP – 156 more schools, a 6%increase; 138 more schools were in warning status, a 57% increase; 63 more schools fell to the lowest status (Corrective Action II), an 80% increase than in the prior year.

Public cyber schools are fiscally and academically accountable to the federal government, the state of Pennsylvania, the taxpayers and their families. They are as accountable as every public school, and in many cases, more so. PDE has established the PA system for cyber charter review and charters are renewed by the department. We have school districts that can not pass these reviews.

http://www.pacyber.org/news/improveed.aspx

Peg Luksik

link to book

Outcome Based Education: The State's Assault on Our Children's Values by Peg Luksik
http://www.ftrbooks.net/psych/education.htm

Updated inclusive of this find Thursday March 26, 2009

Northeast PA Business Journal home : news : news : education Guest Op-Ed: School district consolidation is a red herring

By: Nathan A. Benefield and Fred D. Baldwin 03/03/2009

Where school districts are concerned, the evidence suggests the opposite: consolidating small and medium-sized districts into larger districts would reduce efficiency and increase costs to taxpayers.
Why would consolidation fail to achieve the cost savings Gov. Rendell hopes for?
While measures such as bulk purchasing and cross-district health trusts are sensible cost-savings measures, these can already occur without consolidation.
It's possible that some administrative savings might materialize, but it won't help that some superintendents will become "assistant superintendents" and others will expect large raises.
The notion that larger districts have fewer administrators per pupil runs counter to experience.
The single largest school cost item (about half of every district's budget) is teacher salaries and benefits.
These would become standardized over the newly merged districts. Does anyone believe that salaries will be standardized at any level lower than the highest prevailing in the county?
As long as school board directors can negotiate contracts in secret and vote on them without any chance for public comment, it hardly matters whether the district represents a small area or a large county.
If cost savings is truly a goal for Pennsylvania schools, a good first step would be greater transparency.
The public should have access to greater information about how school districts spend tax dollars and adequate information as contracts are being negotiated. SchoolBoardTransparency.org was launched with just such a goal in mind.
Another good step is expanding school choice options, which cost far less than traditional public schools.
Charter and cyber schools typically cost taxpayers only about 70 percent of the cost of district-run schools, while Pennsylvania's Education Improvement Tax Credit sends students to the school of their choice with scholarships worth less than one-tenth the cost of traditional public schools.

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20272562&BRD=2231&PAG=461&dept_id=447593&rfi=6

Related

Teacher salaries and benefits are by far the largest expenditure in every school district, averaging around 82 percent of the entire budget.99 Benefits packages by themselves take up roughly 25 to 30 percent of the compensation budget100, and health insurance is typically the second-largest item in the annual budgets of school districts, just behind salaries and wages.101

http://www.mackinac.org/article.aspx?ID=1399

Connellsville signs on to cyber school
By Judy Kroeger
TRIBUNE-REVIEW NEWS SERVICE
Friday, March 13, 2009
To prevent students from dropping out of high school, Connellsville Area school directors agreed Thursday to provide cyber school services through Lincoln Interactive.

Tammy Stern, director of secondary curriculum, said the immediate focus of the program will be dropout recovery and that eight students at risk of dropping out are interested in completing their education through computer lessons.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribunereview/news/fayette/s_615867.html