Lost On The Shore

Follow-Up

I just thought I'd take a moment to post some brief updates to some of my earlier posts.

Save The Bay?

As I posted earlier. we all say we want to 'Save The Bay', but we don't seem at all willing to take the steps necessary.  On Wednesday, The Capital reported that Anne Arundel County engineers had calculated that removing existing pollution and retrofitting stormwater systems to prevent new pollution in county waterways would cost about $5 billion - that's billion with a 'b'. Anne Arundel's current storm drainage fee generates about $300,000 a year.

Today The Sun reports that a fee on new development proposed by the county executive, which would generate about $5 million a year is in trouble.  A competing proposal by environmentalists which would levy an annual fee on all property owners and raise about $30 million is not under consideration.  Republican Councilman C. Edward Middlebrooks agreed that more resources are needed but suggested that the fee proposed by the county executive might be a dreaded "TAX".

Well, of course it is.  Taxes are the way we collectively raise money to address common needs.  It always amazes me how those who champion 'personal responsibilty' don't feel we should be responsible for addressing the effects of dumping our wastes in the public air and waterways. 

As I said in my earlier post, Marylanders like to say that we love our environment and want to 'Save The Bay', but our actions would indicate otherwise.

How Much Is Enough?

In an earlier post I discussed how educators expect all of their budget requests to be fully-funded, without question.  Governor O'Malley has had the nerve to propose a freeze on the inflation index in the Thornton Plan, which would reduce education funding by the state by about two percent. 

Now the inflation index used for the Thornton Plan bears little relation to the CPI index published by the Federal Government; for the current year, it's 5.7%.  State spending on K-12 education has increased from $3.12 billion in 2003 to $5.16 billion in the current fiscal year, an increase of about 65% in five years.  That's a lot of money.

Every problem with education can, in the eyes of educators, be solved only by throwing more money at it, but they balk at telling us what we will get for it in terms of performance.  Apparently educators' performance can't be measured.  Compare that to the proposal by Comptroller Peter Franchot that an additional $30 million be allocated to his office for improved information technology and some additional staffing.  With that, he says, he can collect an additional $200 million in unpaid taxes over the next four years.  Sounds like a good investment to me.

Special Session

It seems clear that our Governor is going to call a special session of the legislature.  The Washington Post reports that the Governor has decided to call a special session to consider his tax and revenue proposals, perhaps beginning as early as late October.  I think this is a risky move for him.  The result could be passage of one or two items on which there is general agreement (at least among the democratic majority) and the rest will be discussed to death.  This could leave us with the worst of both worlds, a higher sales tax but no income tax reform, no property tax reductions, no low-income tax credits and, of course, no slots.  Let's hope he gets some solid proposals together before the session so there can be a fair and open debate on the proposals. 

How Much Is Enough?

(Classroom scene in the District of Columbia about 1899.  No, I'm not in the photo.)

Governor O'Malley has done the unthinkable - he has proposed cutting funding for the Thornton Plan by about $135 million by freezing the inflation index for two years.  Needless to say, the education establishment immediately attacked the proposal.  Alvin Thornton himself said that the drop would 'possibly lead to a drop in student performance.' 

Never mind that the state will spend more than $5.2 billion on education in fiscal 2009 and that O'Malley's proposal includes initial funding for the Geographical Cost of Education Index, a part of Thornton which had been previously unfunded.

What is it about education that causes educators to believe that every last penny of their request must be fully funded or there will be dire consequences?  They would have us believe that their profession is so arcane and mysterious that we should just hand over the money and not ask any questions.  When Ike Leggett in Montgomery County had the temerity some months ago to suggest a cut of about $30 million in the $1.8 billion budget request submitted by the school board, the schools superintendent and the school board mounted an effective political campaign to force him to back off because the school budget is 'sacred'. 

Here in Worcester County where the school budget eats up half of the county's operating budget, the county commissioners never question the school budget, they just cough up the money when the time comes. 

Now I am not anti-education.  Maryland owes much of its wealth and prosperity to its quality education system and the high educational achievement of its workforce.  Without a good education, our children stand virtually no chance in the increasingly competitive global marketplace.

But education is not the only item in the state budget.  There are plenty of areas that could use additional money - roads, public safety, health, public transportation, housing, and environment to name just a few.  There's simply not enough money to satisfy all the perceived needs, and there never will be.

Now, of course, the original intent of Thornton was to provide school programs to help close achievement gaps between minority and poor students and their peers - things like full-day kindergarten, special tutoring assistance and reduced class size.  Where did the money spent so far go?  More than half went to raise teachers' salaries - not necessarily a bad thing, but not what we thought we were buying.  More on this later.