P-G: Mt. Lebanon High School project could go to bid

Final approval from the Commission earlier this month meant the planned $113.2 million renovation of Mt. Lebanon High School could go out to bid, but members of the Mt. Lebanon school board decided they wanted one more outside review of the $113.2 million high school renovation plan.

The board voted unanimously Monday night to award a contract to the law firm of Babst, Calland, Clements and Zomnir to review volume 1 of the bid specifications at a cost not to exceed $3,500, the spokeswoman for the district said.

The review will be conducted this week and a vote on the bid documents will be taken at a special school board meeting Monday.

Read the full article:

• http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11055/1127668-55.stm (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette)

School Board to Give New School Superintendent a Raise and Contract Extension (Updated 2)

Update 2010-10-18: As expected, the school board voted at tonight’s meeting to extend the superintendent’s contract by one year and raise his salary by 4.5 percent. The first vote was unanimous; the second 8-1, with James Fraasch dissenting.

[There’s been a lot of discussion about whether giving the new school superintendent a raise and a contract extension is a good idea, given the school district’s well-publicized problems of late. The Blog-Lebo portion of that discussion has occurred, so far, as an off-shoot of a completely unrelated story. But it’s clear that there’s interest enough in the topic to merit a story of its own, so here it is. —Tom]

On Monday, 11 October, 2010, the school board revealed at its discussion meeting that it intends to extend the contract of the new school superintendent, Dr. Timothy Steinhauer.

Steinhauer was hired by the school board on 8 June, 2009, to replace superintendent John Allison, who had left the school district after receiving an attractive offer from Wichita Public Schools in Kansas.

Steinhauer’s contract was to expire on 30 June, 2013, but the school board, expressing praise for Steinhauer and his performance, intends to extend it by one year at the school-board meeting on 18 October, 2010. The extended contract will expire on 30 June, 2014.

“I have been pleased with [Steinhauer’s] performance... We have suffered from a little uncertainty in the superintendent’s position in the previous couple of years, and I hope that by the contract extension and other provisions we can secure the position for Dr. Steinhauer, for the foreseeable future,” said Ed Kubit, president of the school board, during Monday’s discussion meeting.

The school board also intends to give Steinhauer a 4.5% raise, increasing his starting salary of $140,000 per year to $146,300.

What do you think?

I’ve already revealed that I’m taking a favorable view of the raise and contract extension, a view I expect many people to find surprising. Based on the emails I’m getting, I know many of you don’t agree with me. So if you have something to say, either way, now’s your chance: Let’s hear it.

Updated 2010-10-17 15:20 with quotation from Ed Kubit, school board president.

Updated 2: School District Signs 5-Year Contract with Teachers’ Union

Updated 2010-08-25 23:09: added link to announcement from school district.
Updated 2010-08-26 09:20: added link to the P-G's coverage.
Updated 2010-08-26 11:46: added link to school-board director James Fraasch's coverage.
Updated 2010-08-26 18:51: added link to the Trib's coverage.

School-board director Jo Posti is reporting on her blog that the school district has signed a 5-year contract with the teachers' union:

Tonight, the Board voted unanimously to approve a contract the MLEA ratified earlier this evening by its membership...

Teachers will work an additional 15 minutes per day and the school year will be extended to 184 days with teachers' total work years being extended from 194.5 to 197.5 work days...

Compensation will provide an average 4.15% salary increase with the first year's average being 3.57% which would not require any change to the budget we've already approved. This increase includes step increases, something to keep in mind when evaluating competitor districts' contracts, some of which are being reported in the news by salary increase only. This percentage includes both raises and step movement through the salary scale, with an average raise of $3,005 per year including step movement. We anticipate an average 1.44% annual savings due to the efficiencies detailed in the new contract, netting an overall average salary increase per year for all costs at 2.71%.

I'm sure we'll be hearing more about the new contract in the coming days. For now, however, see Mrs. Posti's blog and the school district's announcement for an overview of the terms.

Read more:

• Mt. Lebanon Signs Five Year Teachers' Contract (Center Court, the blog of school-board director Jo Posti)
• School Board Approves New Teacher Contract (Mt. Lebanon School District)
• Teachers, Mt. Lebanon schools reach agreement (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette)
• New Teacher Contract Approved (School-board director James Fraasch)
• Mt. Lebanon teachers will pay more for insurance, work longer (Pittsburgh Tribune-Review)

School District Changes Graduation Requirements To Require PSSA Proficiency

As discussed earlier (and again) on Blog-Lebo, the school board has discussed changing the district's graduation requirements to place more emphasis on the PSSA exams. This change was recommended by the district's superintendent, Dr. Timothy Steinhauer, who said it would help motivate students to take the tests more seriously.

Last night, in a 6-2 vote, the school board adopted the change. On her blog, school-board director Jo Posti writes about it:

Last night, the Board passed a resolution to [revise] graduation requirements to include proficiency on the eleventh grade PSSAs with a 6-2 vote (Cappucci and Birks against, Fraasch absent)... This change adds a requirement that our competitor districts already require, provides remediation to students who require additional support in mastering subjects, and allows for a variety of methods to fulfill that remediation requirement should it be necessary. It will also, in my opinion, provide better motivation for students to demonstrate their capabilities to the best of their ability on a state-mandated test that is used to fulfill NCLB requirements for proficiency.

As I've written earlier, I think this change was inevitable. As long as other school districts work to maximize their test scores, our district will be forced to do likewise to remain competitive.

Read more:

• Revised Graduation Requirements (Center Court, Jo Posti's blog)
• Mt. Lebanon adds test to graduation requirements (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette)
• Mt. Lebanon makes passage of state test graduation requirement (Pittsburgh Tribune-Review)

Updated 2010-08-23 09:25: added link to Tribune-Review coverage. —Tom

School Board Discusses, Again, Changing the Graduation Requirements to Boost Test Scores

Recently on Blog-Lebo, we had a lively discussion about a proposed change to the school district's graduation requirements. The change would require students to score "proficient" or better on the state-mandated PSSA exams to graduate.

The proposal was discussed further at this Monday's school-board meeting, where it was presented as offering remediation to students who were having trouble with the tests.

Some, including school-board director Mary Birks, saw the proposal in a different light, however: as a means to boost the school district's declining rankings by putting more pressure on students. The Post-Gazette:

School director Mary D. Birks spoke strongly against the proposal, calling it "reactive in nature" and designed to boost the school district's placement in the Pittsburgh Business Times rankings.

It's a tricky issue. School-board director Jo Posti writes on her blog about the subtleties of the proposal and Monday's discussion:

Some may look at this change as a response to Mt. Lebanon's rankings among other high-performing districts in the area. In a way, it is. If we're being compared to other districts by the Pittsburgh Business Times and others on the basis of PSSA scores, we obviously want our students to approach the tests with the same level of attention that they approach final exams or SATs. Final exams and SATs are tests that many students feel a more direct impact from, though. There's currently no incentive to perform well on the PSSAs. As a student, your grade isn't impacted, your college career isn't affected and the PSSAs taken during eleventh grade are one of a multitude of stress-inducers during a milestone year.

My understanding is that there are two groups of students who do poorly on the tests: those who are genuinely struggling and those who are doing well but blow off the tests because the tests don't affect college prospects. This proposed change is designed to motivate that second group to take the tests seriously.

In effect, then, this change will require the second group of students to work harder for a benefit that mostly goes to the school district itself. Is that fair?

Again, it's not so simple. While the test may not affect the students' prospects directly, it may do so indirectly. The school's reputation probably does carry over to the students. Enhancing that reputation, then, benefits the students – all students, not just those in that second group.

Also, and this is something school-board director Dale Ostergaard pointed out on Monday, adopting this change will eliminate a source of confounding and make our scores more directly comparable to those of other districts. As a result, we may be better able to isolate and improve weak areas in our educational programs.

In any case, I don't see how the school district can avoid adopting the change. As long as other schools do things to boost their scores (and they do), we will be forced to do likewise to remain competitive.

This change in graduation requirements is up for vote at the regular meeting of the school board on Monday, 16 August, 2010.

Read more:

• Mt. Lebanon considers remediation for test-takers (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette)
• PSSAs as a Graduation Requirement (School Board Director Jo Posti)

Letter: Senate Bill Would Require “Super Majority” Vote to Raise School Property Taxes

In this letter to the editors of Blog-Lebo, Sue Dixon writes about a Pennsylvania Senate bill that would require school boards to make a two-thirds majority vote before raising property taxes. —Tom


Senate Bill Would Require “Super Majority” Vote to Raise School Property Taxes

Dear Editors,

I spoke to Senator Rafferty's office today and they said this bill was sent from the Education Committee to the Appropriations committee on June 29th, 2010. Since legislators are on recess until September 20th at 1:00 p.m., nothing is happening with this bill until they return. I have found that legislators are very easy to work with and you can make changes in how your government is run through legislation. If this bill doesn't move forward before the end of November it will be unable to move forward because this will be the end of the legislation cycle for this year.

Senator Rafferty's office said that a few school board members (Senator Rafferty’s office did not say which school district the school board members were from and they could be from anywhere in the state) have contacted them saying this bill would hold their budgets hostage and they wouldn’t be able to pass budgets.

Everyone in this state should be contacting their legislator and the Senators on the Appropriations Committee to share their opinions regarding Senate Bill 553 moving forward. I have provided the Press Release, the Bill in its entirety, and the contact information for all of the Senators on the Appropriations Committee.

Sue Dixon
Mt. Lebanon

---

For Immediate Release on June 8, 2010

Senate Education Committee Approves Rafferty Measure (Senate Bill 553) Requiring Super Majority Vote to Raise School Property Taxes

The Senate Education Committee today approved legislation sponsored by Sen. John Rafferty (R-Montgomery) that would require a "super majority" vote for school boards to raise taxes.

Senate Bill 553 would amend the Public School Code to require all millage property tax increases to be approved by a two-thirds majority vote by the members elected to the board of school directors.

"Taxpayers are rightfully concerned that property taxes continue to increase, as does school spending," Rafferty said. "Many tax increases are being passed by a single vote. I believe there should be a compelling need and strong support by the board before property taxes go up."

Rafferty said his legislation would provide greater taxpayer protections and ensure that school boards of directors first seek to control spending before raising taxes.

"Taxpayers have repeatedly told us that they want a stronger say in taxing decisions," he said. "My bill will provide an added protection against tax increases because it will raise the bar when it comes to voting for an increase."

"This is an important move to rein in property tax increase and control spending," Rafferty added.

---

The exact wording of this bill follows:

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF PENNSYLVANIA
SENATE BILL No. 553
Session of 2009

INTRODUCED BY RAFFERTY, FERLO, BROWNE, WASHINGTON, EARLL, WAUGH, WONDERLING AND BOSCOLA, MARCH 5, 2009

REFERRED TO EDUCATION, MARCH 5, 2009 - REREFERRED TO THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE, JUNE 29 2010

AN ACT

Amending the act of March 10, 1949 (P.L.30, No.14), entitled "An act relating to the public school system, including certain provisions applicable as well to private and parochial schools; amending, revising, consolidating and changing the laws relating thereto," in school finances, providing for millage rate increase. The General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania hereby enacts as follows:

Section 1. The act of March 10, 1949 (P.L.30, No.14), known as the Public School Code of 1949, is amended by adding a section to read:

Section 602.1. Millage Rate Increase.--The millage rate of tax in effect in each school district on the effective date of this section shall not be increased in any succeeding year unless approved by a two-thirds majority vote by members elected to the board of school directors.

Section 2. This act shall take effect in 60 days.

---

APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE

Officers
Corman, Jake , Chair
Tomlinson, Robert M., Vice Chair
Costa, Jay , Minority Chair
Stack, Michael J., Minority Vice Chair
Pileggi, Dominic, ex-officio
Mellow, Robert J., ex-officio
Scarnati, Joseph B., III, ex-officio

Majority
Argall, David G.
Baker, Lisa
Browne, Patrick M.
Brubaker, Mike
Gordner, John R.
Greenleaf, Stewart J.
Pippy, John
Rafferty, John C., Jr.
Smucker, Lloyd K.
Vance, Patricia H.
Waugh, Michael L.
White, Mary Jo

Minority
Boscola, Lisa M.
Farnese, Jr., Lawrence M.
Logan, Sean
Musto, Raphael J.
Stout, J. Barry
Tartaglione, Christine M.
Wozniak, John N.

Letter: School District Website Reflects Poorly on the District and the Community

In this letter to the editors of Blog-Lebo, Elaine Gillen, who runs the website lebocitizens.com, argues that our school district is neglecting its online presence, for all to see. —Tom

School District Website Reflects Poorly on the District and the Community

For several months now, I have been asking the School District to update its website. At a June 14, 2010 school board meeting, I pointed out the deficiencies on the sadly neglected School District’s Balanced Scorecard, the District’s five-year strategic plan. It has yet to be updated.

Starting with Dr. Timothy Steinhauer’s “Welcome to the Superintendent’s Website,” which is embarrassingly labeled “Welcome to Superintendent John Allison's Web Pages,” Dr. Steinhauer encourages us to take a look at the website. The goal, we are told, “is to provide visitors with useful, up-to-date information about our District.” He further suggests to visit his blog and read his latest board report. That would be December 2009.

The School Board President’s reports are a little more up to date. The last report posted had been February 15, 2010 – until I had requested an update. Now there is one from July 19, 2010.

Hang on folks, because it gets better. On the District’s home page, there have been numerous spelling errors. The latest one prompted an enlightening email exchange. When I first received Dr. Steinhauer’s response (click the “email exchange” link in the previous sentence to read it), I thought it was odd that he used the word, “Monitor.” I am being encouraged to visit it in his welcome letter, but when I check for information, I am monitoring it?

My second thought was how the District does not have spell check built in their website software. Shouldn’t we have software with spell check? Then it dawned on me. The School District doesn’t need spell check since they have taught generations of children how to spell. Yet, we get an explanation as to why there are spelling errors from time to time. As one resident said at a recent school board meeting, “I don’t want an explanation” as to why it is happening.

The School District website is available for the world to see. What an embarrassment to our community. It is a reflection of who we are. From time to time, it contains spelling errors and is in desperate need of updating. Why are we getting excuses? Why must we lower our expectations of the School District? We get out-of-date websites, lower test scores, plans that don’t meet zoning requirements, and higher taxes. And explanations.

Elaine Gillen
Mt. Lebanon

What Kind of Leadership Do We Need on the School Board?

Solving our school district’s spending problem isn’t going to be as easy as “just” changing the school board. That’s because the school board operates within an environment that fosters waste.

When you have a reliable stream of over $70 million that flows from the taxpayers every year, people are going to want some of it. And when you have a small, volunteer board that decides who gets to be on the receiving end of that stream, people are going to want to manipulate that board. Thus a whole industry of advisers and special interests has grown up around school districts.

This industry has great influence over the environment in which our school board operates. It’s this environment we must change if we want a better school district, a school district where our money is spent on what actually provides the best education instead of on what our trusted partners tell us.

Yes, changing the school board will probably help. At the least, a fresh board would not suffer from the divisions that weaken our current board. But a fresh board would still have to operate within that same exploitative environment.

Without a special kind of leadership on the board, the kind that can see this environment for what it is, I doubt that any board would do much better than the current board. I’ve met the people on the current board, and I think they’re good people, trying to do a good job. Maybe the problem, then, is that they’re too good, too trusting.

Maybe what we need instead are leaders who are wary enough to recognize when they have been dropped into an exploitation machine – and who are strong enough to fight it.

Our current board already has some fighters on it, but they are outnumbered. What we need are fighters in every seat.

More than that, we need leaders within our community to challenge the advisers and special interests that have intertwined themselves with our school district. We need to detach these self-interested parties from our decision-making processes. Until we do that, any school board is going to have a hard time spending our education dollars wisely.

For now, however, I’d settle for few more fighters on the board.

Auditor's Report Uncovers Problems at the School District

Update: The performance audit can be found on the Auditor General's site: Mt. Lebanon School District Performance Audit Report.

The local news media are reporting on the Pennsylvania Auditor General's recent audit of the Mt. Lebanon School District. The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review:

[Jack] Wagner, [Pennsylvania Auditor General], found the district failed to have an adequate policy to address board members who do not file financial disclosure forms from approximately August 2004 to June 2006; failed to update its agreement with Mt. Lebanon Police Department dating to 1996; and failed to implement a policy or procedure to quickly identify contracted bus drivers who are either charged with or convicted of criminal offenses.

A Post-Gazette article focuses on a single issue from the audit report:

Former Mt. Lebanon school director Mark Hart failed to file a statement of financial interests for the 2005 and 2006 calendar years, constituting a violation of the Ethics Act, according to a June 2010 performance audit report of the school district released by the auditor general's office.

Read more:

• Report: Mt. Lebanon School District falls short in policy, procedure (Pittsburgh Tribune-Review)
• Former Mt. Lebanon school director cited in audit (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette)

School Board Approves 10.5% Tax Hike and Creates Task Force to Reduce Future Costs

Tonight, the school board voted 6-2 to approve a final budget of $79.4 million for the 2010–2011 school year. The budget raises school real-estate taxes to 26.63 mills, an increase of 10.5 percent. Voting for the budget were Directors Birks, Cappucci, Ostergaard, Posti, Remely, and Rose. Voting against were Directors Fraasch and Stipanovich.

Those supporting the budget said it represented many hard decisions, all carefully considered. They emphasized that the district held the line on normal operating costs: the large increase, they offered, was the result of unavoidable pension costs and debt service on the $75-million bond for the high-school project.

Those opposing the budget argued that it was wrong for the board to tax its way out of a spending problem. They pointed out that this year’s cost increases were foreseeable, and yet the board did not adequately prepare for those increases in previous years. They also suggested that the economy has forced the community to tighten its belt, so why shouldn’t the school district tighten its belt, too? Why should the school district, they argued, be able to offload its financial problems when everybody else must make ends meet the hard way?

After this discussion, the vote was taken. The budget passed. Nobody seemed to feel good about it.

On a hopeful note, the board voted unanimously on a different motion, one to approve the formation of a “task force” to reduce operating costs. To make meaningful reductions, the logic goes, the board needs more time than the traditional budgeting process provides; the task force solves this problem by looking into the budget on an ongoing basis. When next year’s budget comes due, the board (one hopes) will finally have the options it needs to make those “hard decisions” we keep hearing about.

In the meantime, this task force represents the acid test for those school-board directors who talk about controlling costs but don’t do much cost-controlling. If they are serious about their commitment, they will give the task force what it needs to be effective – and then let it do its job.

The next few school board meetings are where the task force will be defined. They will determine whether the task force is real or not.

Let’s see what happens.

It’s Happening: Mt. Lebanon School District vs. Zoning Hearing Board of Mt. Lebanon

A few days ago, the Zoning Hearing Board released its decision and findings of fact that denied the Mt. Lebanon School District the variances it had sought for its planned reconstruction of the high school. Now, the School District has appealed the decision to the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas.

In Mt. Lebanon School District vs. Zoning Hearing Board of Mt. Lebanon, the School District asks the Court to grant both of the denied variances (one for lot coverage, one for parking spaces) and sustain that the lot coverage and parking spaces, as planned, are permitted as a matter of right under Mt. Lebanon Zoning Code.

A copy of the appeal was served upon the Mt. Lebanon Zoning Board on April 27, 2010.

Update (5/2/2010): Added the following article from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette -- Zoning flap gets appeal in Mt. Lebanon

Zoning Hearing Board Releases Its Findings on High School Project

The Zoning Hearing Board has released its findings about the zoning variances that the School District had requested for the high-school project. At 8 pages, it’s worth a read.

The short story is that the variances were denied because the School District was unable to present a compelling case for them.

Part of the School District’s problem seems to have been a lack of preparedness. “When asked about the square footage of the existing building and structures that contributed to the overall lot coverage, neither the Appellant nor its Consultants provided any clear response to the Board,” wrote the Zoning Hearing Board.

Another part of the problem was that the School District was not convincing in its argument that it had made reasonable efforts to comply with zoning code. The Zoning Hearing Board wrote, “The [School] District provided testimony that other options were investigated and that the proposed design was the sole option to meet the educational needs of the [School] District. Despite that testimony, no other options were presented to the [Zoning Hearing] Board to support this position or to prove, as required by the Ordinance, that the Subject Property could not be developed without the variances.”

Additionally, the Zoning Hearing Board rejected the School District’s (novel) argument that the variances should be allowed because the planned reconstruction made the property less nonconforming: “In the simplest terms, Appellant seeks to take an existing nonconforming building..., tear down a portion of it, and rebuild a new building elsewhere on its property. While the net effect may be slightly less lot coverage than the existing configuration, it will still be in excess of the maximum permitted coverage because of the creation of a new building, regardless of the repair, renovation, or modernization of that portion of the existing nonconforming building which remains.” (Emphasis original.)

In light of the findings, what seems mysterious is not that the requested variances were denied but that the School District ever thought it was going to get them. If you’re going to ask for variances, you had best be able to show that you tried in good faith to get along without them first. If the School District couldn’t make that case, they had to know, going into the hearing, that the Zoning Hearing Board would be unable to overlook the failure. Did it really come as a surprise, then, that the variances were denied?


Read more:

• Zoning Appeal No. 1651; Mt. Lebanon, Pennsylvania (Zoning Hearing Board)

KDKA Covers Mt. Lebanon School Taxes and High School Project

Mt. Lebanon's school taxes and high school project, always hot topics in town, are now attracting the attention of Pittsburgh-area television media. In a report aired earlier tonight, KDKA's Ralph Iannotti takes a look at both topics. His report touches on the petition movement, the effect of higher taxes on real estate sales, and the school district's new budget, which includes a planned property tax increase of 10.7 percent.

Video: Mt. Lebo School District To Raise Taxes (KDKA)

Updated 2010-04-21 00:01 to note that proposed tax increase is 10.7 percent, not 10.8.

School District Makes Act 34 Booklet Available

This morning, the Mt. Lebanon School District made its Act 34 Project Description Booklet available to the public. The document is about 40 pages in length and declares a maximum project cost of $113 million. The document declares a corresponding total millage increase of 3.4 mills, of which 0.35 mill is expected to be returned in cost savings, for a net increase of 3.05 mills.

Updated 2010-01-29 11:16: $113 million is the declared maximum project cost, not building cost. Thanks to David Huston for pointing out the mistake. —Tom

School District's Preliminary Budget Reveals a Sobering Reality

At last night's school-board discussion meeting, the agenda was packed. But one topic stood out: the preliminary budget for the 2010–11 school year. In short, it's looking grim.

Property taxes for the district are projected to increase by about 14 percent, from 24.1 to 27.5 mills, this year alone, with similar increases expected for the next few years. The increase is nearly 40 percent larger than the school district's most-pessimistic forecast from last April.

What explains the unexpectedly large increase? Salaries are up by 2.5 percent; fringe benefits by 17 percent. A big part of the increase comes from the district's newly increased pension-funding requirements. With the state government paying less, our district's share must increase from 4.8 percent to 8.2 percent. (Our share is expected to increase again, climbing to 10.7 percent, the following year.) And there's the high-school renovation: it's in there, too. But part of the explanation is that we weren't pessimistic enough in our past projections.

How bad is it? Janice Klein, Director of Finance, ended her presentation of the preliminary budget soberly: "Unfortunately, balancing the budget [takes] a huge millage number... There's really nowhere else to get the money other than through real-estate taxes... I know that [the budget] wasn't very pretty, but that's where we are right now."

Okay, so our property taxes are going up again. What's the big deal? The big deal is that our school district can no longer afford its current spending habits. These tax increases, as large as they are, aren't going to be enough to pay for everything the district wants. Something has got to give.

Addressing the need to start cutting, Board President Ed Kubit said, "We are looking at very serious discussions ... on how we're going to be able to afford a lot of these things. We need to sit down and talk about programs, and understand the value of those programs. Staffing positions. Closing schools. We need to have those very difficult discussions to decide what we are going to be able to afford as a district... We are going to have to very carefully look at our budget not just this year but over the next four to five years, as well."

Indeed, something has got to give. And now the board knows it.

UPDATE: School-board director James Fraasch has posted a summary of the January 11th meeting.

School Board Members OK Playground Project

School board members in Mt. Lebanon approved reconstruction of the playground at Washington Elementary School, which includes security gates which will be closed during the school day.

The $150,000 construction project was approved April 13. Contractors will be on-site beginning in June, said Facilities Project Manager Rick Marciniak. The work should be complete in time for the opening of the 2009-2010 school year.

As far back as June 2008, the board received comments from parents who were divided over whether the security features were needed. At the time, school Principal Emily Kirkham said she favored the extra security features. The plans include security gating at Lawncroft at Mellon, along with steps at the upper playground, and gating between the Bognar Building and Washington school.

Link: www.thealmanac.net/ALM/Story/04-15-ML-School-Board-playground-B

Mt. Lebanon Schools Compete in “Odyssey of the Mind” Regional Tournament

On March 7, almost 200 Mt. Lebanon students competed in the Western Pennsylvania Odyssey of the Mind Tournament, held in Moon Township. Twenty-seven teams of students from Washington, Markham, Foster, Hoover, Lincoln and Howe Elementary Schools, Mellon and Jefferson Middle Schools and the High School participated in Odyssey, competing against teams from school districts throughout western PA. A team from Markham, two teams from Mellon and two from the High School earned the honor of proceeding to the State Finals to be held in Williamsport on April 18.

Odyssey of the Mind is an international creative problem solving competition for students, kindergarten through college. Participants present creative solutions to problems ranging from designing and building small vehicles, constructing balsa wood structures, and humorous and dramatic presentations of team-created plays and music. This year, students created and performed stories about the lost labors of Hercules, presented the origins of “new” superstitions, created self-mobilizing mechanical creatures, complex vehicles and balsa-wood structures.

Mt. Lebanon first entered the Odyssey of the Mind program seven years ago, with two teams from Washington and Howe Elementary Schools. This year, Mt. Lebanon had more teams competing at the tournament than any other school district. In Mt. Lebanon, Odyssey of the Mind is an out-of-school program open to all children, sponsored by school PTA’s in the elementary and middle schools, in which a group of 5-7 children and a volunteer parent coach practice creative spontaneous and strategic thinking throughout the winter. Each March, teams present their creative-solutions to panels of judges, who evaluate the teams on their creative achievements. Odyssey teams organize in October of each school year. Interested parents and students should look for sign-up notices in September. For more information, contact your school’s Odyssey coordinator, or John Herman at 412-561-4549.

Civil (and Civic) Disobedience

This blog isn't "all School Board, all the time," but this week it certainly seems that way.

Almost lost in the hubbub comes the news that Alan Silhol was elected this week to serve as the new President of the Board. Congrats to him! I think.

He, along with the rest of the members of the School Board, received the following letter this week. I've deleted the identities of the authors, who are Mt. Lebanon residents, but in every other respect there is nothing confidential or private about the text. It was forwarded to me by a current member of the Board who, like many (I assume, judging from recent traffic statistics), has been reading this week's posts with interest. I am posting it here for the single reason that it highlights the kind of ugliness, vituperation, narrow-mindedness, and unreason that should have absolutely no place in Mt. Lebanon -- at any level, let alone in communications with neighbors who serve the town as School Directors, Commissioners, or other board volunteers. Does anyone still think that Mt. Lebanon is a shining beacon of civic mindedness? We have our high points, to be sure. But we have the same lows that you see everywhere else, and this is one of them.

Before you read further, sit down and prepare yourself for some nasty language. The italics are my comments.

To the Mt. Lebanon School Board:

In any endeavor of community life, discussion and exchange of ideas is a beneficial and worthwhile effort.

Unfortunately, this is not one of those endeavors.

Thus, we consider useful and advantageous the continuing School Board discussions on and investigation into the question of whether to build a new high school or do extensive renovations on the present one. Full investigation will produce a valuable and genuine answer to the problem and continued commitment to top-quality education.

We believe, however, that "full investigation" does not include investigation by anyone who disagrees with us.

We also consider deleterious anything less than one of the two solutions being sought. Patchwork would be not only undesirable and unacceptable, it would be irresponsible and reprehensible. And patchwork – indeed, not even well-thought-out patchwork – is what is being advocated by School Director James Fraasch.

Deleterious? Undesirable? Unacceptable? Irresponsible? Reprehensible? Go ahead and disagree with the proposal. But this is over the top. Put down the thesaurus (or learn how to use it wisely) and step away from the keyboard. You might hurt someone.

Mr. Fraasch advocates a $10 million to $15 million plunge into the depths of dubious cost-benefit recklessness, apparently preferring to take the easy way out instead of facing up to the responsibilities he accepted when he was elected to the board. His window-dressing contentions that Mt. Lebanon taxpayers can’t afford a significant tax increase to pay for continued excellence in education are dubious. He would spend $10 million to $15 million now, then step back and watch as other systems fail in an old building which has served its purpose but is now beyond senior citizen status.

The only thing that Director Fraasch has done is seriously question the assumptions of the renovation/reconstruction project so far, which are based on the premise that the taxpayers of Mt. Lebanon can, in fact, afford a $100-$150 million (or more) capital project. Fail to face up "to the responsibilities he accepted when he was elected to the board"? What craziness is this? If I sense for a second that my elected representatives are not carefully scrutinizing their operating assumptions regarding how my tax money is being spent, then I'll vote in a heartbeat to toss them out of office -- thanks but no thanks for your "work" -- and hope that every one of my friends and neighbors joins me.

Other School Directors have been hard at work on the renovation/reconstruction project. All of us appreciate that. At last Summer's First Friday events, several of the Directors were there to talk about the project, and I, along with many other people, welcomed the opportunity to talk about it. But there is absolutely no reason for any member of the Board to go along just to get along, especially if, in his judgment, the work so far comes to a mistaken conclusion. For your reference, below I include a clip from the devastating presentation of Richard Feynman to the commission investing the Challenger disaster. Feynman's elegant deconstruction of the cause of that tragedy showed that it was a classic case of getting along to go along. This was not rocket science, understandable only by a Nobel laureate. Anyone paying attention in high school physics should have seen the problem. The Challenger disaster dwarfs our high school project at every level of significance. Is James Fraasch a Feynman? No. But this isn't rocket science. Given the financial stakes, why dismiss his position out of hand?

Just what will convince Mr. Fraasch that full replacement or extensive and all-encompassing renovations are needed? Will it be the collapse of a ceiling on a room full of students? Will it be the destructive and interruptive failure of a swimming pool that is more than 50 years old? Or will it be, finally, the eventual and inevitable realization that construction delayed is construction that will cost future generations even more than present calculations?

This is a straw man argument. Criticize the proposal for what it says. Don't criticize it for what it does not say. The proposal has to do with what lies within our means; it does not deny that the facility needs major work.

His further argument, that 75 percent of Mt. Lebanon residents have no children in school and thus should not bear increased school district taxes, is disingenuous. Even accepting that figure, one must recognize it is not unique to Mt. Lebanon. And one must also recognize that better community property – a new high school, for instance – increases the value of each property owner’s land and home.

On that point the proposal is quite accurate. Mt. Lebanon has a significantly higher proportion of fixed and middle income residents than surrounding communities do. Our demographics are not the demographics of Upper St. Clair. Sure, a new high school might increase my property value -- but higher taxes would reduce it. Have you talked recently to young families trying to decide whether to buy a house here? I have. Yesterday, in fact. You know what they say? They're scared to death by the tax increase that they assume is coming with a major high school construction project.

Finally, one must recognize, most of all, that the important thing about debt – public or private – is revenue/debt ratio. A family with a large income can carry more debt than a low-income family. Similarly, a school district such as Mt. Lebanon can afford to carry much more debt than other districts with lower revenue.

This is the nuttiest point of all, but maybe (given my self-identified liberal leanings), its soak-the-rich attitude regarding taxation isn't such a bad thing. Just so long as I'm not one of the rich ones. This statement is the most pernicious and misleading thing in the letter, the assumption that Mt. Lebanon is just chock full of wealthy families who are more than happy to pay whatever it takes to keep-up-with-Upper-St.-Clair. For every wealthy family in town, there is a middle-income family. Would you like to meet some of them? The people who live in modest houses, struggle but still proudly pay Mt. Lebanon taxes, and prize the fact that they have access to the schools and community resources that the town and its citizens have created? I would be happy to introduce you to them; they're my neighbors, and in all likelihood, they are yours.

James Fraasch is willing do what much of Mt. Lebanon does only in private, to think about what is in the best interests of all of Mt. Lebanon, not just one athletic team, or one municipal service, or one profession, one neighborhood, or one child. Ranting about that effort and calling the proposal "reprehensible" turns our world upside down. We're supposed to be selfish in private and generous in public. (Actually, we're supposed to be generous all the time, but we usually concede that it's OK to be selfish in our own lives.) Decrying his failure to protect what a few rich souls deem unassailable is the antithesis of the mythical Mt. Lebanon community spirit. Attacking him personally, using the tone and the language displayed in this letter, is a form of assault. No one will be prosecuted or sued over it, but in a metaphorical sense that omission is a shame.

We urge the School Board to reject Mr. Fraasch’s patchwork fantasy and get on with the realistic work of providing a first-rate education in a first-rate facility.

The text of the letter ends there.

In a sense I regret spending so much time here and in the comments defending the proposition that public debate should be civil and respectful, because doing so takes time and energy away from talking about the merits of the alternatives, including but not limited to James Fraasch's proposal.

But it is important to defend what has been called "the public sphere" against threats to its integrity, and to try to understand where those threats come from so that they can be deflected in the future.

Here, I think that the threat is based on fear.

The letter above is full of anger, and I suspect but cannot prove that its anger stems from from anxiety that James Fraasch may actually be right: Mt. Lebanon *cannot* afford a massive borrowing right now. I'll speculate a little bit: The anger reflects a specific fear, that our sense of municipal prestige is at risk if we are not able to spend money as freely as we have in the past. If you look at the high school project primarily in terms of your property value, then a new building is a status symbol, not a temple for education. There is no simple solution to this problem, except to point out again and again that the issue before us is the substance of our educational program and value for our investment. Mt. Lebanon does not need the best of everything.

Trouble in Pleasantville

Today's Pittsburgh Tribune-Review carries a story about School Director James Fraasch and his proposal to restructure and postpone the anticipated Mt. Lebanon High School renovation project.

The story is here.

Some people will say that this story doesn't belong in the Trib; the Trib, they say, likes to pick on Mt. Lebanon any time that the paper gets a whiff of controversy here.

Wrong. Mt. Lebanon is doing a fine job of generating its own controversy. The Trib is simply there to document it. According to the Trib, when asked for her comment on Director Fraasch's proposal, School Director Jo Posti said:

"I have many questions about the assumptions on which Mr. Fraasch bases his proposal and look forward to having them answered so I can better evaluate its merits," said board member Josephine Posti. Her immediate reaction to delaying the project, though, was to consider it "irresponsible and impractical."

One school director calling another one -- even indirectly -- irresponsible and impractical?

In the words of the late, great Slim Pickens, in Mel Brooks' classic Blazing Saddles, "What in the wide, wide world of sports is a-goin' on here?"

Even if the other School Directors don't agree with the merits of James Fraasch's proposal, and even if they have questions about it, there is a well-mannered way to express civil disagreement. "Irresponsible and impractical" isn't it.

I'm beginning to think that the members of Mt. Lebanon's School Board just don't get along. Great. We are looking down the barrel of the biggest economic crisis in nearly a century; the taxpayers of Mt. Lebanon are about to be asked to sign off on a $100-$150 million investment (or not -- give James Fraasch's proposal your full attention, please!) and the inevitable, unavoidable accompanying tax increase; and we have name-calling in the newspaper when someone says "maybe that's not such a good idea."

Said Michael Douglas in The American President: "We have serious problems to solve, and we need serious people to solve them."

Two points on the merits:

One -- The high school building needs to be repaired. That train has not even boarded, let alone left the station. There is no need to rush to judgment. Sure, we could try to borrow a vast amount of money today, build a new school, and worry about the payments later. The United States tried that tactic recently. It didn't work out so well.

Two -- More important than the quality of the building, and much more important than whether the quality of the building has the same shiny tone that you see in the new Upper St. Clair high school, is the quality of the educational program. I don't want to hear about test scores and state educational standards. I want to hear from teachers that they are encouraged to challenge students; I want to hear from students that they are being challenged; I want to hear from alumni that when they got to college -- even the best colleges -- they were as prepared as anyone for the rigors of the next level.

I don't care if people choose to live in Upper St. Clair because they'd rather send their kids to school in a new building. If that's what they value, I'll help them move.

I care a lot if people choose to live in Upper St. Clair (or choose to send their kids to private schools) because the education there is better than the education in Mt. Lebanon.

And one point for the volunteer politicians, who, as I've written here before, usually deserve our thanks and praise for the thankless jobs that they do.

If you can't get along in private, at least get along in public.

To help present and future Directors manage their differences, here is a ready-made quotation that can be cut and pasted and dropped into conversations with constituents, reporters, and colleagues. It is useful and applicable regardless of the issue, regardless of its merits, and regardless of who is speaking and listening:

"Everyone on the School Board shares the twin goals of ensuring the best possible education for our children and managing the finances of the school district in a responsible and fair way. I appreciate the hard work and initiative of my colleague and look forward to constructive discussion of this and all other proposals. These are challenging economic times, and no thoughtful option should be categorically off the table. Our constituents demand that, and we're obliged to listen to them."

Fuel Costs Prompt Some 4-Day Work Weeks

The Mt. Lebanon School District switched to four-day weeks in summer 2005 as one of a number of energy-saving measures recommended by a consultant, said Superintendent John Allison. The district closes on Fridays the last two weeks of June and all of July. Employees work 10-hour days the rest of the week.

In 2007, the district spent $40,000 less for utility costs in June and $65,000 less in July compared with 2004, Dr. Allison said. He added that Mt. Lebanon has seen another benefit from the four-day work weeks -- higher morale among those employees who must work in the summer.

"It really seems to be a real positive physically, emotionally. Everybody seems a little more fresh having those few weeks with those three-day weekends." He said he provided information about the savings to other superintendents in the Allegheny Intermediate Unit at their last meeting.

Link: www.post-gazette.com/pg/08192/895938-54.stm