Brushing Teeth and Gathering Signatures
Every morning my wife and I fight with my 2-year-old daughter, Ellie, to get her to brush her teeth. She squeezes her mouth shut and squirms, as we try to find a small crack in her lips to fit the toothbrush into her mouth. We make the toothbrush an airplane coming in for a landing, complete with whooshing airplane noises. Sometimes, it takes my wife and I working in tandem to get Ellie’s teeth brushed. Sometimes, we even use toothpaste. We plead with Ellie, telling her that her teeth will fall out and that she will have stinky breath.
I think about the struggles I have with brushing Ellie’s teeth, as I work to collect signatures for the Voters First petition drive, which seeks to create a bi-partisan committee of non-elected officials to redraw US Congressional Districts.
Let me be clear: My wife and I do not hold people down and force them to sign petitions or turn the petition into an airplane and fly it towards people to sign it (though the latter may be worth a try).
Nevertheless, I do see some similarities between the brushing teeth and gathering signatures.
Many Ohioans don’t understand the need for the Voters First Amendment any more than Ellie understands the need for good oral hygiene. But in either case, not to decide is to decide — to endorse the status quo that has the foxes from guarding the henhouse, drawing districts in secret to ensure wins for themselves and their party. And who wants to support politicians who are rigging the system with crazy-looking legislative districts designed to keep one party in power.
Many Ohioans do not realize that with our current system, the winner of the November election is already determined by the primaries — by politicians who are likely to be too far to the left or the right of the majority of their constituents and out-of-touch with the general public.
Just as making a child brush his/her teeth is obviously a good thing, the Voters First proposal is clearly better than our current system of drawing lines. It’s intuitively more fair, transparent and non-partisan. I’ve collected signatures from people who have only ever voted Republican, as well as from people who have only ever voted Democrat. Regardless of party, people understand that competitive races benefit everybody.
But unlike with Senate Bill 5, which aroused so much passion in people that they actually sought me out to sign my petition, not as many people make themselves available to sign the Voters First petition. Not because they disagree with the proposal, but because they see it as an “innocuous” little problem, which could not be further from the truth. Once I talk to people about the Voters First proposal, they are glad to sign. I explain that rigged districts are a long-lasting problem that affect nearly every piece of legislation. I ask them to look back to SB 5 because it was a perfect example of what happens when extreme and out-of-touch politicians are elected.
All Ohioans need to make signing the Voters First petition their highest priority.
We can do this. We can take back our voice and vote this November, but first we need to circulate petitions and gather signatures to get the Voters First proposal on the ballot.
So just as I remain vigilant about removing tartar, bacteria and general stinky breath from my Ellie’s mouth, I am committed to the effort to collecting the 386,000 by the July 4 deadline to submit signatures to the state. Together we can do it. Now!
By Dan Greenberg, Sylvania Education Association
We deserve to be at the table, not on the menu
Jumbo shrimp. Civil war. Freezer burn. A fine mess.
These are examples of oxymorons, expressions that combine contradictory terms. I discovered a brand-new one when I read a recent article referencing the governor’s yet-to-be-unveiled education overhaul plan.
The plan actually doesn’t belong to the governor so much as it belongs to Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson. Sen. Peggy Lehner, R-Kettering acknowledged that Jackson’s plan contains many provisions that were “also in Senate Bill 5.”
Then she unveils her oxymoronic creation. Jackson’s plan, says Lehner, “…takes the best of Senate Bill 5.”
The best of Senate Bill 5 was than 1.3 million Ohioans signed petitions in less than two and a half months to send a message to the extreme politicians that passed the bill, that more Ohioans voted AGAINST SB 5/Issue 2 than voted FOR the governor who campaigned for it and that the 2011’s election turn-out was the largest in more than 20 years of Ohio election history.
Ohioans in the crosshairs of Senate Bill 5 fought against it because politicians rammed it through the legislature. Instead of being asked about what systemic changes should be made, we were told “This is how it’s going to be from now on in Ohio.” The legislation’s passage helped make We Are Ohio into an effective, dynamic organization that achieved its single goal—the repeal of SB 5.
This is an example of how the relationship between any school district and its teachers should work. Both sides share the same goal; to ensure their students’ success, but neither side can do it alone. They’ve got to work together. Unfortunately, this isn’t the case in Cleveland right now.
Rather than speak with the Cleveland Teachers Union about his transformation plan, Mayor Jackson held back-door conversations with city’s business community. Instead of putting teachers at the table, Jackson’s plan puts them on the menu.
Some his ideas sound strikingly similar to Senate Bill 5. There is a curiously strong focus on collective bargaining, and it is reminiscent of a letter Jackson wrote to legislators in June addressing his requests for the state budget.
The mayor knows that his transformation plan won’t happen without the assistance of the governor and the Ohio General Assembly. “Quite simply,” Jackson writes in this plan, addressing state legislators, “we cannot do it without your help.” The governor got Jackson’s message and is watching.
“I’m counting on Cleveland to deliver the goods,” said the governor in his 2012 State of the State address, adding, “Oh, I’ll work with them. I’ll go door-to-door to every one of their offices.”
What happens in Cleveland will have statewide implications for us all. We must make legislators realize that collaboration is key to the success of our students. We must refuse to be cast as the villain. We as teachers are part of the solution, not part of the problem.
A fine mess indeed.
By Phil Hayes, Columbus Education Association
House Bill 1: FAQ
If you have any questions about House Bill 1, the educational provisions contained in it, or its implementation, please post them here.
Lottery Funds: What happened to the money and how much is going to schools?
Since 1974, the Ohio Lottery has provided more than $16 billion to public education. Annually, lottery profits provide about 4.5 percent of the funding needed for public education. In FY 2008 the lottery provided $668 million to public education.
5.78% Increase: Explain federal and state funding over the biennium.
HB 1 appropriations in Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 represent a 5.78 percent increase over FY 2009 appropriations. Over the biennium (FY 2010 and FY 2011), support will increase by 5.54 percent. These percentages represent both state support and federal stimulus funds.
Federal Stimulus Funds: Can they be used for teacher salaries?
Yes. ARRA IDEA Part B has an exception included for districts who receive a “meets requirements” designation from ODE’s Office of Exceptional Children. If the district is designated as “meets requirements,” it may use up to 50% of IDEA Part B and ARRA IDEA Part B dollars received, in excess of the amount received for the prior year, to replace local and state education funds, provided they are used for activities authorized by ESEA (Elementary & Secondary Education Act). This link to ODE’s website provides the language that is mentioned above. If a district is planning to RIF positions and those positions meet IDEA requirements, the district should consider maintaining the positions and pay for them with ARRA IDEA Part B funds.
ARRA Title I Part A Funds – If a school district can provide documents showing a teaching/specialist position previously paid with state and local funds will be eliminated in the current year due to state and local budget cuts, then it may be able to utilize ARRA Title I Part A dollars if the position is in a Title I school or meets Title I Part A requirements. Click here to download a document from the US Department of Education titled “Non-Regulatory Guidance: Title I Fiscal Issues.” Page 39 of this document goes into detail concerning the information above (pages 37-41 goes into detail concerning Supplement, not Supplant).
School Funding Advisory Council: Makeup of committee, is there OEA representation, and who appoints?
HB 1 creates a 27-member School Funding Advisory Council to review the adequacy of the funding system every two years. Two public school district teaching employees and two non-teaching school district employees are to be appointed by the Governor. OEA will be submitting names of recommended candidates for the School Funding Advisory Council to the Governor for his consideration.
$1,833 in Professional Development Funds: Requirements, mandate, who receives funds, when does it start?
The new funding formula in HB 1 includes a category designated “Professional Development” which is funded at the rate of $1,833 per full-time teacher beginning this school year. That money will be distributed to districts as part of the total state funding package. HB1 requires, beginning in FY 2012, that school districts use these funds to provide teachers with professional development that is aligned with the standards developed by the Educator Standards Board and approved by the State Board of Education. Furthermore, HB1 directs ODE to provide guidance to districts and schools in aligning professional development with the standards. Leaders and members need to be aware of the funding change and be prepared to advocate for appropriate spending of this money by the district.
Praxis 3: What happens to teachers who finished Praxis 2 this year?
HB 1 eliminated the previous entry year program and Praxis III assessment with the new four-year Resident Educator Program scheduled to begin in fall 2011. During the 2009-10 and 2010-2011 academic years, teachers with two-year provisional licenses will be required to participate in the Resident Educator Transition Program with a state-trained mentor. Mentor training will begin in September in all 16 regions (www.ode.state.oh.us keyword: Resident Educator). ODE has requested that educators interested in serving on the Resident Educator Program Development Committee submit their application online here.
Educator Standards Board (ESB) and Peer Evaluation: What safeguards is OEA taking to ensure that we don’t erode unions and sustain membership?
HB 1 requires the Educator Standards Board to develop a model peer assistance program. Ohio has some of the most successful and longest running peer assistance programs in the country, including Brunswick, Columbus, Cincinnati and Toledo. OEA’s policy is that mentor programs and other professional peer support systems, if or when adopted, should be utilized solely for the development of professional expertise. The planning, implementation, and evaluation of such programs must be cooperatively negotiated and developed with the local affiliate. It is critical that, if a local association chooses to bargain a peer assistance program, that it build in safeguards for teachers that protect their job security and ensure effective peer support to address areas for improvement in practice. HB 1 also requires the Educator Standards Board to develop model teacher and principal evaluations. OEA is committed to helping to create fair and comprehensive evaluation systems that include multiple measures of performance and are based on the Standards for Ohio Educators. OEA’s policy is that the sole purpose of teacher evaluation is the improvement of instruction and advocates for a formal evaluation system for every teacher in every school district. Consistent evaluation of on the job performance is the only appropriate way to assess and assure the competency of practicing teachers. ODE has requested that educators interested in serving on the Teacher Evaluation Writing Team submit their application online here.