[Speed Gibson,
Friday May 16, 2008 at 3:21pm]
Too Close to the Problem
One of the outcomes of the District 281 Strategic Planning process was the recommendation for a "Citizens Financial Advisory Commission." Superintendent Mack eagerly presented a set of By-Laws for such a group, adapted from another school district. The approach illustrates how we can sometimes be too close to a problem.
As I drove home, I saw a great example of this, a personal pet peeve of mine. Approaching some construction that closed one lane, I first saw the usual "ROAD WORK AHEAD" sign. A few hundred feet later came the "RIGHT LANE CLOSED" sign. I'm sure the road crews mean well and think this is a natural progression of information. They're wrong. They're too close to the problem.
The "ROAD WORK AHEAD" sign is useless. You see the orange diamond in the distance and know from that alone that yes, there is road work ahead. But you can't pick a lane or a detour until you get close enough to read the next sign. They should have put a "RIGHT LANE CLOSED" sign up front, saving the need for a second sign and giving the driver the necessary time to switch lanes accordingly. This is something a "drivers advisory committee" could spot, as the transportation folks continue to miss it.
Here, the Superintendent assumes such a committee will best function as a direct adjunct to the district staff. I disagree. He's too close to the problems, whatever they may ultimately be. And the proposed committee would be too close to him, to wit:
It's five top level staff including the Superintendent vs five citizens, picked by the Superintendent remember. It is chaired by staff, with agendas and materials provided by the staff. The citizens are way over-matched, no matter their qualifications. Resistance is futile. They will be assimilated into the Borg.
Having been part of the Visioning subgroup that identified this concept, I can state that independent assessment was the goal, which I believe our working papers made clear. That means the citizens have to run it. It also begs the question of who should appoint the citizens, the seven cities perhaps.
As it happens, the District is getting some new financial analysis software soon that will facilitate comparisons with other districts and general norms. The Superintendent is eager to get started using it which may explain the haste to create and desire to control the group.
We sorted this out a bit at the "Strategic Planning Report and Next Steps" meeting last night and will get another look at Monday night's Board meetings.
As I drove home, I saw a great example of this, a personal pet peeve of mine. Approaching some construction that closed one lane, I first saw the usual "ROAD WORK AHEAD" sign. A few hundred feet later came the "RIGHT LANE CLOSED" sign. I'm sure the road crews mean well and think this is a natural progression of information. They're wrong. They're too close to the problem.
The "ROAD WORK AHEAD" sign is useless. You see the orange diamond in the distance and know from that alone that yes, there is road work ahead. But you can't pick a lane or a detour until you get close enough to read the next sign. They should have put a "RIGHT LANE CLOSED" sign up front, saving the need for a second sign and giving the driver the necessary time to switch lanes accordingly. This is something a "drivers advisory committee" could spot, as the transportation folks continue to miss it.
Here, the Superintendent assumes such a committee will best function as a direct adjunct to the district staff. I disagree. He's too close to the problems, whatever they may ultimately be. And the proposed committee would be too close to him, to wit:
[Article IV.A] Members shall be appointed [...] through Board appointment. [...] The Superintendent or designee will provide a list of recommended candidates to the Board. [...]The roster per Article IV.B is:
- Board Treasurer (Committee Chair)
- Board Representative
- Superintendent
- Director of Finance
- Assistant Superintendent or [designate] to represent Human Resources
- Five Citizens who have a background in Finance
It's five top level staff including the Superintendent vs five citizens, picked by the Superintendent remember. It is chaired by staff, with agendas and materials provided by the staff. The citizens are way over-matched, no matter their qualifications. Resistance is futile. They will be assimilated into the Borg.
Having been part of the Visioning subgroup that identified this concept, I can state that independent assessment was the goal, which I believe our working papers made clear. That means the citizens have to run it. It also begs the question of who should appoint the citizens, the seven cities perhaps.
As it happens, the District is getting some new financial analysis software soon that will facilitate comparisons with other districts and general norms. The Superintendent is eager to get started using it which may explain the haste to create and desire to control the group.
We sorted this out a bit at the "Strategic Planning Report and Next Steps" meeting last night and will get another look at Monday night's Board meetings.
Jean Luc Picard never gave in to the Borg. I don't think we should either.
What is needed is independent review of questions like: should we outsource the bus operations as many other districts have? Here, the outsiders have the advantage, not beholden to the current internal operation. Another district using a private firm might equally ask: should we insource? In either case, we need an unbiased answer, which an independent committee can better provide.
Also, you may remember that the "experts" inside 281 somehow muffed their health care benefits, having to raise premiums dramatically in many cases. I have to believe that an external committee like some of us envision, i.e. with business experience, would have been highly skeptical of insourcing this.
You know, it seems to me that the District does hire a lot of outside consultants. I think they did that with health insurance, and on the whole, I don't know if they were all that well served. But at the end of the day, whether or not outsiders are consulted, the final decisions will be made by the administration of 281 and it's elected board.
I don't know if I have an opinion, one way or the other about the value of this proposed board. It certainly isn't any sort of universal solution to the problems the district faces. Nor does it seem to me to preclude the use of outside consultants, where appropriate. But the district is often criticized for a lack of transparency in it's finances. Apparently, the district has paid attention to this concern, and made this modest proposal which may turn out to be a step in the right direction. I don't know if it makes sense to criticise a proposal that addresses some of the outstanding concerns, just because it doesn't address all of them.
The funny thing about the 281 Cares folks is that they talk about inefficiency, but with all the access they had, all the documents they received, all the opportunities they had to question Stan Mack and others (opportunities which they ducked, incidentally) they were singularly unsuccessful in finding any. Surely in a district as large and as complex as 281, someplace, somewhere, they must be using an 80 watt bulb where a 60 watt would do?
As Dennis Prager once observed, the concepts of quality education and over-funding education are not mutually exclusive.