on the OSV boycott

 

"It wasn't being vindictive, it was being consistent" says Mayor Petty about the unanimous WPS OSV boycott vote from the Worcester School Committee

— Talk of the Commonwealth (@CommonTalkPod) April 19, 2023

Since last Thursday's vote of the Worcester School Committee to no longer send our students on field trips to Old Sturbridge has caught some attention, I thought it might be wise to refocus our attention on why this was both proposed and passed. 

I've set the below video to my comments--for the item was mine--last week:

The Worcester School Committee has very carefully laid our our concerns with the relationship between Old Sturbridge Village, Inc, and its charter schools in this letter dated March 10 to the State Auditor, the Attorney General, the Office of the Inspector General, and the Ethics Commission. If this is of interest, I recommend reading the letter itself, but in sum: 

• OSV Executive Director Jim Donahue has, both in public letters to membership and in employee meetings at the Village, made it clear that the schools are a source of revenue for the Village. As we have cited several times, in the FY22 Annual Report of the Village, Donahue wrote: 
  
  The Academies will provide reliable, contractual revenue to the museum, safeguarding us against fluctuations in uncontrollable factors that impact admission revenue such as weather and public health. 
  
  Providing reliable revenue to a private organization is not the purpose of public education funds. The Massachusetts Department of Revenue clearly states: 
  
  Public funds cannot be used for private purposes.  
  
  If there is both a private and a public purpose, the private purpose cannot be the primary one; that would invalidate the spending. Donahue's own words would appear to indicate that this is intended as a revenue stream primarily. 
  
  
  
• The Department very carefully guides charter school boards in their selection of a management organization, should they choose to have one. They are directed to follow the same public bid process they would for any major purpose. They also are directed not to have overlap between the charter board and the management organization, as that would clearly constitute a conflict of interest. 
  Of the 17 founding members of the new Worcester charter school, 11 have ties to OSV itself or the OSV charter school, and one more to the company that will provide the charter school's curriculum.
  The Board is not independent, and the ethical conflict is clear.
  Since the letter, the Board has had its first meeting, and it did not spend any time deliberating, let alone follow the public bid process, before appointing OSV as the management organization.
  
  
  
•  OSV currently holds a lease with the Roman Catholic Diocese of Worcester for the former St. Joseph's School on Hamilton Street. The lease has the following clause: 
  
  Neither Lessee nor any of its employees, servants, agents or invitees shall make any use of the [building] which would be inconsistent with the doctrines or teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, as determined by the Roman Catholic Bishop of Worcester in his ecclesiastical capacity of Ordinary of the Diocese of Worcester in his sole discretion
  
  There are of course significant conflicts, not only in what may or should taught in the building with what the Bishop of Worcester may feel appropriate, but even the basic civil rights protections a public entity like a public charter school must hold for staff and students are brought into question with such an agreement. As noted in the letter, this is not simply about Catholic teaching, but the particular bishop, who has a history locally regarding his perspective on these issues. 
  As yet, we have no evidence any successor lease has been negotiated. 
  
  
  

As of us who direct money, whether publicly or privately, must do so according to our best judgment. Massachusetts elected officials also much follow the state public finance laws and guidance; the state ethics laws; and both state and federal civil rights laws. If, in our estimation, those are not being followed by an organization to which we would direct funds, we are, as Mayor Petty notes above, being consistent to discontinue such spending. 

Boycott

It felt as if the website editors were having some fun this morning...

On tomorrow night's Worcester School Committee agenda, I have placed the following item: 

To request that the Administration arrange for an alternative LEAP trip in lieu of the current trip to Old Sturbridge Village; further, request that the Administration ensures that no Worcester Public Schools funds voluntarily are allocated to Old Sturbridge Village, Inc. or its affiliates.

I am not going to say too much about this here now, lest I predeliberate ahead of the meeting, but I'll note news here, here ('though that is a little confusing), and here.  

And if you haven't reviewed the request for an investigation filed by the Worcester School Committee, you can find that here. 

And as I was saying...

 while the Statewide Virtual Charter Board in Oklahoma unanimously voted down the application for a religious charter school, don't expect the issue to go away.

Liberty of the truth

Statue of Mary Barrett Dyer by Sylvia Shaw Judson
in front of the Massachusetts State House. The quote on the base reads, 
 “My life not availeth me in comparison to the liberty of the truth.”
Dyer was hanged in 1660 on Boston Common not far from where her statue sits today.

In the midst of the flurry of news surrounding the Diocese of Worcester ending the Worcester Public Schools' lease of the former St. Stephen's Elementary, where La Familia currently is, a reporter asked me if I thought it was due to the district's continuing to teach comprehensive health education in the building, something we know the diocese did not wish to have happen ('though it was not, of course, actually barred by the terms of the lease). 

One can't say, of course, what internal calculations the Chancery made before exercising the clause in the lease that allows them to end it early. I do want to note, again, though, that it raises a very grave question regarding the lease the now-approved Worcester Cultural Academy Charter School has with the diocese.
That lease--currently a lease between Old Sturbridge Village itself and the Diocese--we're told contains the following clause:

Neither Lessee nor any of its employees, servants, agents or invitees shall make any use of the [building] which would be inconsistent with the doctrines or teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, as determined by the Roman Catholic Bishop of Worcester in his ecclesiastical capacity of Ordinary of the Diocese of Worcester in his sole discretion.

It's worth noting how very particular this language is: it does not put what happens in that building under Roman Catholic canon law, or under Roman Catholic teaching as overseen by the Vatican. This is particular to the Bishop as ordinary of the Worcester diocese. 

OSV (and dual charter school) Executive Director Jim Donahue at the time this was made public said:

Once the school is approved, we will review the terms with the Diocese once more to ensure they are acceptable to them and to us.

I would say it is now fair to speculate as to what would be "acceptable" to the Diocese, given their decision of last week.

That this wasn't of graver concern to the Department in their approval process (despite it being brought to their attention) displays a disturbing lack of understanding of the current context of the separation of church and state when it comes to public schools.

Last year's Carson v. Maine Supreme Court decision, rested on the question of the use of vouchers--which are public education dollars--going to religious schools. Maine had barred that; SCOTUS found that this was discrimination. But as many (including me) noted at the time, this opened the question of religious charter schools. In fact, that is where the Oklahoma Attorney General went. 

While Article 103 of the Massachusetts State Constitution bars state funding:

for the purpose of founding, maintaining or aiding any infirmary, hospital, institution, primary or secondary school, or charitable or religious undertaking which is not publicly owned and under the exclusive control, order and supervision of public officers or public agents authorized by the Commonwealth or federal authority or both

which makes us a non-voucher state, the state allowing a charter to operate only "under the doctrines and teachings of the Roman Catholic church" as determined by the local bishop would certainly seem to open a door some are eager to, even as it is barred by the state constitution.

The Pilot piece quoted above was quick to tag the Massachusetts provision as part of the Know Nothing efforts of the Blaine amendment era, but also notes that the separation of church and state goes back farther than that in Massachusetts. And it should, with good reason. 

The Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution is often said to stem from a reaction to the legacy of religious wars in Europe. But here in Massachusetts, we have a legacy much closer to us on the dangers of state making provision for religion. 

I opened this post with a photo of the statue of Mary Dyer that sits next to the public entrance of the Massachusetts State House. Dyer was hanged by the Massachusetts Bay Colony on Boston Common in 1660 due to her preaching, after continually being warned not to, the Quaker faith. 
She did not adhere to the state faith. And she was killed by the state for it.
By our state, Massachusetts. 

Testimony on the MSBA before the Joint Committee on Ways and Means

 Offered today at the State House

My name is Tracy O’Connell Novick, and I am here in my capacity as a member of the Worcester School Committee, where I serve as the chair of the Standing Committee on Finance and Operations. I’m also the mother of two Worcester Public Schools graduates and one current high school junior.

We are profoundly grateful in Worcester, that after over a decade of advocacy, Governor Healey’s budget will fund the third year of implementation of the Student Opportunity Act. The ability of districts like mine to properly staff our schools—short, by the state’s own measures, by literally hundreds of teachers—has begun to ease. We have begun to take stock of the funding for instructional supplies and technology, and the impacts of decades of underfunding of facility maintenance.

It is about this last that I am here today, however. 

Worcester has had a strong partnership with the Massachusetts School Building Authority. Schools across our city have benefited from the Accelerated Repair program, with the life of our buildings extended by new roofs, new windows and doors, and new boilers. 

No such work will take place this year, however, as there is no Accelerated Repair program. Due to the rightful recognition of the rising costs of construction, the MSBA lacks the funding for the Accelerated Repair program this year; there is as yet no plan for it to return. 

Thus, Union Hill School and Wawecus Road School will not have new roofs this coming year, as we were unable to submit them. Within just my own district, this will create a ripple effect of boiler and roof projects that will not move forward, something my and other districts will have to scramble to patch with our limited local funding. 

Worcester likewise has benefited from the Core Program, with a new Doherty Memorial High School rising on Highland Street even as I speak. But Worcester has 24,000 students; the new buildings, even after Doherty’s opening, will house only a fifth of our students. Of Worcester’s over 11,000 elementary students, less than 600 attend school in a building built since the turn of the millennium. Worcester once again did not have a new Burncoat High School accepted into the Core program this past year, and so we are currently planning to spend millions of dollars to shore up the building to meet its reaccreditation requirements. 

The city’s funding for all of this is limited, of course, for precisely the reasons that make the district so heavily dependent on state aid to run its schools. It is, however, further hampered by the inflationary increase in the cost of the new Doherty project. The city has been hit with $21 million dollars in increases due not to changes in the building, but to pandemic influences on the economy. This is money the city cannot spare. 

Please note that everything I have outlined for you impacts other districts across the state: my peers throughout the Commonwealth likewise have buildings that will not have accelerated repairs this year, have not been accepted into the core building program, are facing inflationary increases in new buildings. 

In every case, the Massachusetts School Building Authority simply does not have the funding to cover this.

As such, we would ask the following:

1. Uncap the MSBA. The MSBA currently is capped at $800 million. While that is an increase due to the Student Opportunity Act, it is inadequate for the needs of the state.
2. Once you have done that, bring back the Accelerated Repair program. Not every school building needs replacement or a full renovation, but many projects are too big for a district to tackle alone.
3. Consider a middle option between Accelerated Repair and the Core program. Some buildings have good bones, but need full electrical work or other major projects.
4. Finally, dedicate state ARPA funding to cover the cost of inflation. The federal government foresaw that there would be rising costs as part of the pandemic. While it absolutely should not be left to local municipalities to cover these inflationary jumps, nor should it come out of the inadequate coffers of the MSBA. 

A early April reading round-up

please enjoy this Boston daffodil

Despite the ongoing temper tantrums of a particular billionaire, I do continue to share things I think worth reading over on my Twitter feed (which is also on the bottom left if you read this on a full screen), but here's a bit of a recent round-up of things I found worth reading:

• You might remember that among the disasters of the previous presidential administration was an update on Title IX guidance regarding sexual misconduct. We have been waiting (and waiting and waiting) for the Biden administration to issue an final update on the rules; this week saw another round of pleas to get that done soon.
  
  
• What the U.S. Department of Ed actually released this week in terms of trans kids and sports got a round of confusing headlines, at least initially. I (as always) recommend Chalkbeat and K-12 Dive on this. The press release from USEd is here; the notice of proposed rulemaking is here.
  
  
• This New Yorker piece on Hillsdale College--which, yes, is influencing K-12 education--is a worthwhile read.
  

  when DeSantis and other Republican politicians try to articulate what they’re for—what exactly they want education to look like—one name comes up repeatedly: Hillsdale College.

• Excellent, in depth, round up of the various efforts to loosen child labor laws across the country from the Iowa Capital Dispatch. As Jack Schneider and Jennifer Berkshire outlined in The Nation last month, this is directly related to public education.
  
  
• If you didn't read the ProPublica piece on Justice Thomas, please do.
  
  
• A good reminder from Wellesley that important decisions are made at New England town meetings this time of year, and you should attend them if you are a voter who doesn't, for example, want millions of dollars randomly cut from your school budget.
  
  
• There have been some efforts related to the bookbanning/diversity and equity blowback in Massachusetts, but so far, the school committee elections are supporting those against bans and in favor of supporting all kids. You might also listen to this piece from WGBH on this push.
  

“And the wild things roared their terrible roars and gnashed their terrible teeth and rolled their terrible eyes and showed their terrible claws.”

This week, I met a student named Max.

This student, as he proudly told me, was named after the character in "THIS book," and from his desk he pulled out: 

Where the Wild Things Are, by Maurice Sendak. 
"Oh," I said, "are you Max?"*
"Yes!" he said.
And I said, "at the end of that book, when he comes home, his supper..."

And we said it together, "IS STILL HOT."**

Why do I tell you this?
Because books matter for many reasons, but one of them is that they connect people. To Max, I was a random grown-up in his classroom, but the minute I recited the last line of the book he's been connected to since birth, I was possibly okay to him. I didn't know Max, but I knew Max's book. And that mattered.

I've been thinking about this a lot these past weeks, in this time of book bans continuing to grow across the country, and growing oppression of about every group that has ever been marginalized, which I cannot link to a single source on, because there are so many. 
This past week alone: 

• The U.S. Department of Education proposed Title IX rule making that would allow limited bars of trans athletes in K-12 sports 
• Kansas over a governor's veto banned transgender athletes from women’s, girls’ sports
  
• The governors of both Indiana and Idaho signed bans on gender affirming health care
• The Idaho governor also signed a bill forbidding adults from assisting a minor in obtaining an abortion without parental permission
• As hundreds of students across the country walked out of school, and hundreds protested at the Tennessee state capitol, the Tennessee legislature responded by expelling the two young Black representatives, but not the white woman representative, who had protested with the students

...I'm sure I'm missing some. And that is just this week.

What does this have to do with books? 

Because books are one way--not the only way, but one way--that we can experience the life of someone else. 

Maybe you yourself, or even no one you know (you think) has been at a school with a shooting, or has been pregnant as a minor when it wasn't safe to tell your parents, or has needed gender affirming care, or been trans and wanted to play a sport, or any of the hundreds of other experiences we see state legislatures (in particular) outlawing.
But maybe you can read a book that can put you in the position of someone who does.
Books, then, are dangerous. Because books can make you see someone else's perspective. 
And thus books must be removed, as well.

It thus is crucial that we see this book bans for what they are: they are a way of pushing back on the lived human experiences of those within them. We have to fight the bans, just as we fight the laws. In both cases, we have to work, and protest, and create and defend public policies, that protect the people. 

________________________________________________

*my compliments to Max's family, by the way. I adore that a family looked at a tiny person and thought of Max and the Wild Things. Max also took very great pride in his connection to his book, so well done, Max's grown ups! 

**Max then took me on the tour of the books of his classroom, including the Dog Man series by Dav Pilkey, of which he was currently reading the first, but, he was delighted to tell me, his teacher had the newest one (which I see just came out at the end of March, so well done, Max's teacher!).