Myrtle Beach, S.C.
January 7, 2011
To the Editor:
Why has the Horry County School District not published for the public the costs of major programs such as the Scholars Academy, MAP testing, Early College, the CONNECT program, the Academies, among other large expenditures? Facing a projected shortfall of $20 million next year, citizens must be knowledgeable about current expenditures, if they are to have any meaningful input into how major monies are allocated. How, though, can the public have any meaningful input under our current system of governance which keeps the board of education and the public largely in the dark on major decisions? By keeping the board and the public ignorant, our non-elected, so-called “experts” who know what is best will be able to do with our money and programs as they please.
In the year 2000, the board voted to replace traditional governance with a radical system of governance that was not designed for the public sector but was intended for the private sector and the corporate world. Created in the late seventies by a clinical psychologist with no credentials in representative government or law, John Carver’s trademarked Policy Governance was introduced to public education in the nineties. Used today in less than 1% of the roughly 15,000 school districts nationwide, variant forms exist, but all, including our former board governance and now coherent governance, create policy boards which deprive taxpaying citizens of direct influence on philosophical and monetary decisions by transferring means decisions to superintendents who are non-elected and who represent no one. Boards design results or ends policies and focus on student achievement. Constituent concerns are relayed by the board to the superintendent, making a mockery of board accountability. The ends do not justify the means.
All major means issues should be in the public arena, whether it is the need to emphasize the fundamentals of grammar at every grade level or the purchase of a computerized testing program. Of course, the board should listen to professional recommendations from administration, but deference to professionals undermines the very nature of our constitutionally-established school district and the principles of representative government. Citizens should also play vital roles
Citizens should be able to have significant, direct input into curriculum, programs, and various means initiatives of a school district. This can only happen through traditional governance. Standing committees and subcommittees give citizens greater opportunities to influence board members who must become more intimately involved with all aspects of the district’s operation. Under coherent governance, we have none. The board need not micromanage day-to-day operations and concern itself with such mundane decisions as choosing the color of carpet, but major means decisions should be made by the board and carried out by the district administration.
I have been trying for over two months to obtain the “costs of major programs” which OE-9 of our coherent government polices requires to be published annually for the public. As of this moment, I have received only some information from the Chief Financial Officer who states he believes “the Superintendent complies with OE-9 with the publishing of our Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and the Comprehensive Budget document.” Yet he also admits that “those requirements do not always lend themselves to presenting data in a format which meets all of our desires. Thus, when needed, we manipulate the data we have to try to determine costs of various activities and functions.”
Democratic principles require that the public not only have the “costs of major programs” but that they also have their voices and direct input back by returning to a system of traditional governance. We must put the “public” back into public education.
Sincerely,
Bobby Chandler
722 Pine Drive
Surfside Beach, S. C. 29575
No comments:
Post a Comment