About process

'Can't argue with the truth, sir.' 
'In my experience, Vimes, you can argue with anything.
Terry Pratchett, Jingo  

One of the first challenges when you move to a new place is learning how things work: who has what authority; who gets to decide what to do what; and how are those decisions made.

In my own life, it was the state's proposal to plow an airport access road through my own neighborhood at the time that sent me into learning, rapidly, how things work. Issues since then--most notably the proposal to put a slots parlor into Green Island--have been further opportunities for learning.

The same thing is true when one joins a public body: how does one get things done? What is the process? Where are the levels? And what are the things over which your public body has control and does not.
And so one learns about filing items, having subcommittee meetings with public discussions with extensive reports from administration, making decisions in public meetings within the purview of that public body.

And then we have a week like the past one...

Worcester has 46 schools all over the city; we also have a handful of other buildings. Many of them are in--it being a city--very congested areas, some of which are state routes. Many of them were built prior to the dependence on cars for travel. 

Back in 2020, the City purchased property adjoining Roosevelt Elementary, due to Council advocacy, it appears. I don't know, as there was no public discussion, and nothing was brought to the School Committee. In fact, my first learning of this happening was my reading of it in the Telegram & Gazette.
The city retains the property, as no transfer via vote of both Council and Committee has taken place.
There appears to be conviction by some on Council that someone agreed that the schools were somehow going to complete a parking lot after the property was purchased. Again, I would not know, as that didn't come to the Committee; there is nothing in writing, not even in the article itself.

I think it's important to note that this "nothing in writing; oral agreement" may sound familiar, as it is of a piece with what we found of the controversy with Roman Catholic Diocese of Worcester over teaching comprehensive health courses in the building. We have read that the parish told the principal "there was an agreement" that no such courses would take place in the building. Offline internal agreements without regard to curricular responsibilities, budgetary responsibilities, public process, or purview was of a piece with leadership of the previous superintendent. 

If in fact, of course, there was a sense that this parking lot was going to constructed from "school funding," it can only come out of the school capital budget, as it is a one-time expense of this magnitude; legally, that is required to be a capital expense. It can only come out of the $4M total--$3.5M in facilities spending, $500K in equipment for the entire 24,000 student, 50 building system--which is the bottom line voted by the City Council every year in their budget allocation.
So it has been for fifteen years.
And every single councilor should, of course, know that. The division between operational and capital funding is a very basic principle of public budgeting, and the bottom line of the Worcester Public Schools capital budget is set by Council vote every year.

On November 2, 2022 City Council agenda, Councilor Russell filed an item in Council, asking about Roosevelt parking. Procedurally, that is under School Committee purview, so it was sent to the Worcester School Committee, which sent his petition to the Finance and Operations subcommittee meeting jointly with the City Council Education subcommittee. That was our recognition that, while parking on school property is under our purview, expansion was necessarily a capital budget item, which would then need to involve Council, given the limited district resources available annually.

That joint committee meeting took place on November 21, 2022, Councilor Russell was specifically invited to attend and did. Additionally, the full subcommittee--Councilors Nguyen (chair), Colorio, and Toomey--were in attendance for the entire meeting, which was hybrid (Councilor Nguyen, who chairs Education was both sick and remote (and came! Thank you!), which is why I have the gavel). The video of that meeting is here . 

The section on Roosevelt as well as the windows at Worcester East Middle School, both in Councilor Russell's district, is in the second half of that meeting; it begins about 53 minutes in (sorry, the Council has a terrible video sharing system, which allows for links but not links to parts). By all means, watch the video of the meeting. If you do, you'll note the following:

• Councilor Russell speaks first on the issue as he sees it. I know this because I was the one who gave him the floor. 
• Deputy Superintendent Brian Allen then addresses the WPS capital budget, the only place the district has for spending of this kind. All capital projects--any one-time land/buildings/equipment spending that will last us for several years over a cost of $1000--has to come from this source. That is, as it has been for FIFTEEN YEARS, a total of $4M, of which $500K is spent on equipment, and the remaining $3.5M is spent on ALL of the Worcester Public Schools' 50 buildings and accompanying properties. 
  
  And can I just say? This is all simply a statement of fact. That is what is the case currently.
  
  
• WPS Facilities Director Jim Bedard then addresses the way in which the capital budget works over the course of the year. Every May, the School Committee receives a recommended capital budget for the following year. That, however, is subject to things that come up.
  Now, things might come up in any system of the size of Worcester. When you add, however, fifteen years of the capital budget being a total of $4M, and the chronic underfunding of the operating side of facilities for at least a decade--and that one's on the state, let's be clear--you have a much more significant level of things "come up." 
  Like last fall? It was the failure of five boilers.
  Five boilers gone means five schools with no heat or limited heat.
  We aren't going to not fix the boilers in fall because we said in summer that we wanted more parking (or whatever). Health and safety always come first.
  
  
• As a result of the above and further discussion, Councilor Nguyen, as Chair, filed the following item (this is right from the Council minutes of the meeting)

Request City Manager work with the Superintendent of Public Schools to provide City Council with report concerning the feasibility of increasing funding to the Worcester Public Schools capital budget.

The above is a request coming from the Worcester Public Schools, via the Worcester School Committee, through the appropriate subcommittee process, for a request in the allocation for the WPS capital budget. It is a direct request of the City Manager to work with the Superintendent on increasing the budget, in part due to issues like Roosevelt parking. It is an "ask" as the phrase goes.

As is Council process, that Chair's order was reported out on the Council agenda on December 6, 2022.

The above was all done in public. It is all tracked via agendas and minutes, and it is all on recorded video. Most of those involved were in the room at the November meeting. There was a formal request from the relevant chair of the relevant Committee to the Manager to address, not simply a single one-off parking concern, but the larger underlying issue of the capital budget, as it was clear from the discussion that this is a much larger issue than any single parking lot.

So when, as I have heard, Councilors are tasked in a neighborhood meeting about Roosevelt and traffic, they do in fact have the answer:

• yes, the city (and it's the city) owns property adjoining the school
• professional engineering puts the cost of a project as has been proposed at $3.5M, which a quick check of the state's GIS wetlands map will explain:
  
  
  
  You aren't "throwing some gravel down" on that one
  
  
• that is a capital project
• the total capital budget annually of the Worcester Public Schools is $4M, of which $3.5M is for buildings and grounds projects

...from there one can do the math, though I'd also add the enormous, massive backlog of work on our buildings that needs to be done.

School Committee Finance and Operations met jointly with the Council's Education subcommittee last Monday, as is longstanding May practice, to discuss the FY24 budget. The meeting was scheduled and agreed to by all elected officials weeks ago. The week before the meeting, we were told Councilor Colorio couldn't make it; the day of the meeting, we were told Councilor Toomey couldn't make it. Councilor King filled in. I'd suggest watching the full meeting, if you want to know where the WPS budget is.
School Committee member Jermoh Kamara, who had likewise been at this same meeting in which the topic came up, asked about this. Deputy Superintendent Allen noted that the district is looking both at Burncoat Middle/High and Roosevelt, which together were sent out for engineering. He aligned this with the discussion the School Committee has had of not being an accelerated repair project, but also not being of the smaller dollar amount that the district can actually cover.
EACH of those projects is $3.5M, which is the total capital budget for buildings and grounds for the Worcester Public Schools.

It thus was really quite something at last Tuesday's meeting for there to be Councilors, some of whom are named above as having been in the room for relevant discussions, to argue that the Worcester School Committee and the Worcester Public Schools administration somehow aren't doing their jobs, for there to be an administrative answer that no request had been received, and for all responsibility city and council side to be denied.

I went back and forth about saying anything about this at all, frankly. Maybe it'll blow over, again. It's an election year, which means it's political silly season, and those running for office struggle to maintain perspective, particularly if we face challengers; sometimes things crop up and go away again.

I'm driven to post this (lengthy, are you still reading?) post, though, for two reasons:

1. The truth matters. Yes, even in public government, and even when it might not be popular.
2. The state school committee code of ethics says school committee members owe their administration full responsibility in doing their job, and accountability for that. What happened last week at Council (note that the meeting was chaired by Vice Chair Colorio) was frankly way out of bounds on that.

The Worcester Public Schools budget bottom line is before the Council on Tuesday. They're hearing a bottom line that is projected to be $1.4M over the state required minimum, on a $469M budget in which 90% of the increase is coming from the state.
Somehow, despite all of the above, we may well hear about this again. If we do, please remember the above.