Sunday, November 11, 2007

D&C's Editorial Is Only "FAIR"

Actually, that gives them a lot of credit. In fact, the editorial opinions of the D&C are usually pretty poor. The editorial criticising the Brooks intercept plan was typical.

As is so often the case, I found it difficult to understand the D&C's position on the FAIR plan as stated in the editorial.

First, the primary criticism of the plan seemed to be that it is too pessimistic with regard to the growth of the area economy. That's funny, I would have thought that being conservative on economic assumptions was a good idea for government. Pie-in-the-Sky (or Ferries-on-the-Lake) has not worked out that well for us.

Next, I found amusing that the D&C called for further belt-tightening by the County government. What should be cut; please D&C tell us, since the D&C editorialists usually complain whenever any County program is threatened with cuts. Meanwhile, they included one brief sentence on school spending; this despite last week's Roch. Business Journal report showing that 47 of the 50 highest paid public officials in Monroe County are school officials, and the Comptroller's report showing school taxes rising twice as fast as inflation.

Finally, I was amazed at the facile way in which the editorial board dispensed with the support of the plan by Sandra Parker of the Roch. Business Alliance and the Center for Governmental Research. The D&C generally treats the RBA and CGR as the Oracle at Delphi on governmental matters. But on this point, they don't know what they're talking about?

I don't get it.

Actually, I do. Parker and the CGR didn't get the memo; the D&C doesn't want to support Ms. Brooks or anything she does that will really cut the county deficit. They know that the only real answer is consolidation of local government. Nothing else is acceptable.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Repoman and may I add , Lee Strong:

I have been reading your back and forth regarding the FAIR plan. May I simply request you both to STOP, SIMPLY STOP! Each of you tries to play "gotcha" with the other. While it may be fun sport, in the final analysis your words =-regardless of which side you're on-are without meaning to anything about education that does matter. While you both engage in your debate ( which appears to be more about your political rivalry than the FAIR plan) consider this:

1. I have heard about the crisis in education for some 30 years. Indeed ,in the elctions of 80;84;88;92;96;2000;2004 and apparently "ad nauseum" candidates -democrat and republican- promise to be the "Education president". Elected , each one will fix the problem. Yada, Yada, Yada.

2. In the 1980's here in Rochester, increasing the money of teachers was touted as the golden key to quality education. Salaries were raised substantially for City of Rochester School District teachers. According to union chief, Adam Urbanski, the increase would result in radically improving the product. Yet some 20 years later the following has taken place:
a. Suburban teacher unions used the city increase to argue for their own pay increase, and
b. the high school graduation rate for the city school distrcit remains at an embarassingly low level.

Uinon leaders, teachers, politicians and journalists use education for their own ends. That is both shameful and apparently just the way it is and will be.

Permit me to speak some truths that I have come to, based on my experience: 1. A child's educational success coresponds directly to the level of emotional development of the child's parent. Money- either in the district, or the home is NOT the deciding facor. Of course, life is easier with money. However, making sure a child gets up at the same time every morning, has a breakfast, goes to school, dresses properly, acts respectfully, comes home on time, does his/her homework/ goes to bed at the same time - and most importantly learns to value education- that is the key to success , and that is all about parenting.
2. We are so unwilling to speak truth that we are willing to allow generation after generation of children to live in homes where the above requirements are not met. Babies and children are allowed to live in homes where the "parent", female and/or male- never developed. These "parents" have arrested development cognitively, and emotionally. Of course violence, drug and alcohol addiction are also part of the mix. We simply look the other way, or send a "child protective" worker to the house to create a report.

No amount of money, no fancy buildings, FAIR plan or no FAIR plan in itself is going to change the dire reality that exists for so many kids. Until we decide that all children by right of birth deserve to live with caring adults willing to do the hard work of parenting, fundamental change will not take place. We have spun our wheels for thirty (30) years. My hunch is we will continue to do so.

There are alternatives. Unfortunately for the kids, we all would rather play games while "Rome burns"