Note: Edited and updated, 3:45 pm, March 31, 2011:

School Committee member are squabbling with each other over the best way to deal with the budget target of $50.7 million dollars set by Town Manager, John Curran. This target is 1.4 million dollars below the amount sought by the school committee. There have been several recommendations to make up what the school department sees as a less than ideal budget, including charging $200.00 per student, per year bus fees and charging rental fees for music instruments. This view is very inconsistent with that of persons elected to look out for the taxpayer as they administer the school department.

New debates have sprung up over a reorganization plan for central administration that calls for a combined position of Superintendent of Finance and Human Resources as well as two new staff positions funded with $60,000.00. This reorganization would save $100,000.00 dollars. Marie Blanchette stated that she is against this plan because the $60,000.00 could be used to fund nearly 2 teaching positions. That sounds a bit high, Marie. I could believe one position, but not two.

Kim Conway suggested cutting out money from capital funding. That is money dedicated to the maintenance and repair of publicly owned buildings. This misappropriation and inappropriate use of what are supposed to be dedicated funds has been a regular tactic of the school committee as they frequently take capital fund money and apply it to general use activities. This attitude is both disrespectful of taxpayers and a major factor in the poor condition of our school structures and the need to spend over $54 million to build the new Parker Elementary School. How many people have to fall through rotting floors, down crumbling stairwells, or sit in moldy rooms for 6 or more hours a day before she understands that protecting the infrastructure is as important as preparing lesson plans.

Her callous attitude about protecting valuable, scarce resources is unacceptable and totally out of line with reality. Her demands for idyllic classroom sizes are out of touch with reality, and they do not reflect the economic demands already pressing heavily on the backs of taxpayers. Considering the condition of most of our schools, the $120,000 in teacher cuts already proposed should be added to the $250,000.00 capital budget along with a further $250,000.00 in even more teacher cuts.

I haven’t heard or read of any effort by any member of the school committee to get teachers to put aside the $990,000 dollars in pending step increases that they are due under the terms of their current “negotiated” contract. I haven’t heard a member of the school committee suggest meeting with teacher union leaders to end sick leave buyback and convert sick leave and vacaton time to an earned time bank, with use it or lose it requirements similar to those experienced by non-government workers. I haven’t heard anyone on that committee work to end tenure and shift to retaining the very best (and generally the youngest, most enthusiastic and less costly) teachers, while letting go those who cannot or who will not work up to expectations, let along beyond them.

I do believe in contracts being honored, but I also live in the real world. I find it difficult to be sympathetic with respect to teacher cuts, when such a large sum as the next scheduled step increase could be used to pay to keep current teacher positions active by meeting with union representatives and negotiating a deal. The one common thread in all unions is that they like to eat their young rather than mentor them as future replacements. Teachers, like everyone else, cannot have their cake and eat it too. It is past time for the School Committee to stop enabling a belief by these teachers that they can and do what they were elected to do – protect the taxpayer’s interest. If you aren’t willing to do that, why should the taxpayers reelect you?

I work in the world of medicine and recall a time, not long ago, where every MRI shift in every facility was manned by no less than two technologists per scanner per shift out of genuine safety concerns. Children’s Hospital used to staff 3 technologists per scanner, per shift.

One technologist would perform the scanning duties, including the administration of contrast, while the other sat with the next patient to interview that person regarding potential conditions that could cause great harm, including death. There were good reasons for such a structure. By having two technologists on, more time was available for a proper interview to rule out or identify deadly conditions such as pacemakers, insulin pumps, aneurysm clips or other implanted devices that, when exposed to either the magnetic field or rapid switching of gradients amplifiers. That additional time was also beneficial in building a bond of trust between technologist and patient that would later serve to help deal with true claustrophobics or overly needy drama queens (yes, men can and often are drama queens when it comes to health care).

Then there is the dreaded possibility that comes with the administration of any contrast agent: anaphylactic shock resulting in brain injury, death or other severe complication. Even with a drug as safe, overall, as Gadolinium is, a patient, on rare occassion, but still well too often to accept, dies while the drug is being administered. Here, a second technologist was once thought to be vital in simply being available to assist in performing CPR and taking other emergency actions at the direction of the attending physician. Today, most facilities have only one technologist who must recognize the condition, begin CPR, call for help, resume CPR while simultaneousely moving the patient out of the magnet to prevent injury to potential rescuers from the forces of the magnetic field (which are always on and very strong):

Considering that volcanic activity and earthquakes seem to have a relationship to warm climate periods, could this be at least a partial explanation for natural global warming? Did you know that the Sea of Japan earthquake tilted earth’s axis sufficient to actually shorten that one day? And think about the amound of greenhouse gases on volcano can throw into the atmosphere. Krakatoa changed weather patterns globally for no less than 5 years after it erupted. At this point, I’d like to thank my teachers for givng me a basic education, but more importantly, the desire for a life of learning. It’s not the size of a classroom that matters so much as the size of the teacher’s belief in the importance of working to get that message through that is the most significant challange facing teachers today. It’s significant and difficult because to get the student to buy in, the teacher must act and speak from the heart in order to be convincing.

Two technologists per magnet shifts are rare, if they exist at all today, and that is due to the realities of the economy. As time has gone by, government interference in the markets, through the setting of reimbursement rates for Medicare and Medicaid, has enabled insurance companies to lower the cost of testing reimbursements to hospitals and stand-alone facilities for services rendered as they simultaneous hike the patients’ share of the costs associated with these specific tests for services approved. We do more with less every day in life and death situations because we have no other choice and because we are not allowed the luxury of an endless revenue stream – tax monies. Increases in classroom sizes are challanging and stressful, but so is working solo through events that are life altering or life ending. So, when faced with additional challanges necessary to get us through this bad economic era, keep a tight grip on your head, buck up and simply put quoting the great philosopher, Bill Belichick, “Do your job!”. Or, do something else.

Schools, and other government agencies, have no other choice but to do more with less; just as people working in the manifold layers of the private sector have been doing for more than a decade. If you aren’t willing to work to cut step increases at a time when non-government workers aren’t receiving them, then you must be willing to accept larger class sizes and less support from aides. If you aren’t willing to work with the various teacher unions to obtain payment increases for health and retirement benefits, then the teachers deserve higher student numbers per teacher. If you aren’t willing to consolidate school administration to get more bodies out of the office and into the classroom, then, you deserve more students per teacher. If you are not willing to take a leadership position to protect the assets of the taxpayers and to act as an advocate for them as their elected representative, then, you deserve neither your job, nor any serious consideration regarding your complaints. Where there is a will to accomplish something, there is a way to make it happen. My suggestion to the school committee is to act like leaders and make it happen.

You might want to start by authorizing and paying for a full forensic audit of your assets to find potential or actual leaks that are siphoning off valuable resources. Without a forensic audit, no one on that committee can claim that the school department is free of waste, fraud or abuse. Until you can prove that to be the case, the school department should be given no additional funding, period. You are supposed to be a taxpayer advocate; not a member of the school department staff. Let’s try acting like we understand that.