CPD IN THE NEWS

PHOENIX -- The head of the state's restaurant industry is gearing up to convince voters to quash an initiative that would boost the state's minimum wage to $12 an hour by 2020.

Steve Chucri, president of the Arizona Restaurant and Hospitality Association, said Wednesday the campaign against the measure will be based on showing them how much wages in Arizona have gone up since voters enacted the first minimum wage law in 2006.

Prior to that, Arizona employers had to pay only what was mandated in federal law, which was $5.15 an hour. The ballot measure pushed that to $6.75, with a requirement for annual adjustments based on inflation.

That has pushed the current state minimum to $8.05.

"The public will say, 'Enough's enough,'" Chucri said. And he said polls done for the industry in the spring show people believe that $12 is "too much."

The comments come as Arizonans for Fair Wages and Healthy Families is planning to submit its petitions for the $12 wage plus required paid leave today to the secretary of state's office.

Spokeswoman Suzanne Wilson said organizers have collected more than 250,000 signatures. That is 100,000 more than are needed to qualify for the ballot.

But Chucri said he's not convinced his organization will even have to fight the battle in November. He questioned whether petition circulators, both volunteer and paid, were careful to ensure that those who signed are qualified to vote in the state.

Arizona has become the latest battleground over what can be considered a living wage.

Several states have enacted their own laws, often through legislation. Most recently, California Gov. Jerry Brown signed a measure that will take that state's minimum, now $10 an hour, up to $15 by 2022 for large employers; small companies will get another year to comply.

Chucri said part of the campaign against the ballot measure will be to remind voters here that Arizona already has a minimum wage that's higher than what federal law requires.

And that same law requires annual revision. Chucri pointed out that has meant a boost every year except for two when the rate of inflation was too small for even a nickel more, the bare minimum adjustment.

The difference, though, is not great: That $8.05 an hour is just 80 cents more than the federal minimum.

What Chucri also faces is that $8.05, assuming it's a family's sole source of income, translates out to $16,744 a year.

For a single person, the federal government considers anything below $11,880 a year to be living in poverty. That figure is $16,020 for a family of two and $20,160 for a family of three.

That's part of what has driven similar living wage efforts elsewhere in the country. But Chucri said the idea of a $12 minimum won't sell here.

"That is too high of a wage for a place like Arizona,'' he said.

Chucri said part of the campaign against the ballot measure will be the argument that higher wages mean fewer jobs.

"Restaurateurs are going to survive,'' he said. But what they will do, Chucri said, is simply hire fewer people.

He pointed out the push toward automation already is underway.

At Panera Bread, customers place their orders through computer screens and then can pick up what they want. And even at more traditional sit-down place like Applebee's, orders can be placed through tablets at each table.

Chucri conceded, though, that is happening even in places where the minimum wage is not going up. What approval of this measure would do, he said, is hasten the day.

"I don't think it's a matter of 'if,' '' Chucri said. "It's a matter of 'when.' ''

He would not say how much his group and other business organizations intend to spend to kill the measure.

The most recent campaign finance reports show campaign organizers have raised more than $342,000. Virtually all of that comes from Living United for Change in Arizona. But Tomas Robles, former executive director of LUCHA, said much of that is from a grant to the organization from The Center for Popular Democracy, an organization involved in efforts to establish a $15 minimum wage nationally.

Another $25,000 came from The Fairness Project which has its own efforts to push higher minimum wages on a state-by-state basis.

By Howard Fischer

Source

Daily Kos - October 2, 2014, by Laura Clawson - Pennsylvania's charter schools are rife with fraud and mismanagement, as anyone who reads local newspapers knows. But a new report from the Center for Popular Democracy, "Integrity in Education, and Action United" details just how big the problem is. Pennsylvania charter school enrollment and funding is growing rapidly and without adequate oversight, and according to the report, there's been at least $30 million in fraud by charter school officials since 1997. For instance:

In 2012, the former CEO and founder of the New Media Technology Charter School in Philadelphia was sentenced to prison for stealing $522,000 in taxpayer money to prop up a restaurant, a health food store, and a private school. Media coverage of parent complaints of fiscal wrongdoing initially uncovered the fraud. Nicholas Tombetta, founder of the Pennsylvania Cyber Charter School, has been indicted for diverting $8 million of school funds for houses, a Florida condominium, and an airplane. In 2005, a former business associate of Tombetta surfaced allegations of fraud, which led to the investigation. Dorothy June Brown, founder of Laboratory, Ad Prima, Planet Abacus, and Agora Cyber charter schools, will be retried this year for allegedly defrauding the schools of $6.5 million and conspiring to conceal the fraud from 2007 to 2011. Two administrators plead guilty and testified against Brown in her first trial. In 2009, the Pennsylvania Department of Education conducted an audit of Agora after receiving complaints from parents of Agora students.

You'll notice that in each of those cases, it was complaints from parents or a tip from a business associate that led to investigations. Pennsylvania should be doing more to uncover wrongdoing before it's so blatant that parents are screaming about it. In Philadelphia, there are 86 charter schools and only two auditors. What's more, charter school auditors in Pennsylvania don't actively look for fraud; the report calls for expanded local audit authority, fraud risk assessments for all charter schools in the state, and targeted fraud audits. The report's authors also call for a moratorium on new charter schools until these oversight goals are met.

Source

DENVER - President-Elect Donald Trump has threatened to pull federal funding from cities that don’t tow-the-line on immigration.

 “We will end sanctuary cities that have resulted in so many needless deaths,” he said on August 31. “Cities that refuse to cooperate with federal authorities will not receive taxpayers’ dollars.”

 That threat has raised concerns in cities like Denver and Aurora, where police departments have said they won’t enforce federal immigration law, because they don’t have the resources and because that's the federal government’s job.

 Denver Mayor Michael Hancock says that doesn’t mean the cities don’t cooperate.

 “We follow the law,” he told Denver7. “We still cooperate with agencies and ICE (Immigration and Custom’s Enforcement) but we won’t do anything unlawful or unconstitutional.”

 That means Denver won’t detain someone for ICE officials once their adjudicated sentence has been served.

 When federal courts began to rule in 2014 that cities lack the authority to hold inmates in local jails beyond the term of their sentence, Denver modified its policies in regard to detainers, to conform to constitutional standards, as did numerous state and local agencies throughout the United States.

 When asked if Denver is a sanctuary city, the mayor replied, “Denver never adopted a formal policy to be a sanctuary city.  What we are is a very welcoming and inclusive city.”

 The inclusive city of Denver received $175-million from the federal government in 2015.  Much of it was spent on transportation, affordable housing and other forms of public assistance.

 Hancock said he doesn’t think the federal government will withhold money from Denver and other big cities, but Denver City Councilwoman Robin Kniech, who chairs the Finance Committee, said, “We accept the possibility of that risk.”

 Kniech said federal funds are important but not more important than people.

 “We, as a city council, discussed that yesterday, how strongly we support our residents and our obligations to those residents.  If that’s the risk, we will face that risk.”

 Kniech said Denver has seen the federal government turn its back on financial obligations for many reasons.

 “Whether it’s due to government shutdowns or other political shenanigans in Congress, we have to have contingency plans in place,” she said.  “We work to mitigate the impact on our residents.”

 Kniech said if they have to face that challenge, “I’m confident we would use all the tools in our toolbox to help protect our residents.”

 The councilwoman said she is interested in collaborating with other cities and towns.

Kniech is a member of the Board of Local Progress, which includes people who serve on city councils and county commissioners, who are committed to the values of inclusiveness and a stronger economy for their most vulnerable constituents.

 “I have been working with colleagues in Austin, Texas, New York City, Los Angeles and other cities all across the country who are standing up to these threats just as Denver is,”  she said.  “I’m confident we have a national movement.”

 The mayor’s staff pointed out that between 2006 and 2013, the State of Colorado adopted and enforced a law (SB 06-90) which required the state to withhold certain grants from any city that had adopted “sanctuary” policies, and defined the term to mean: “Local government ordinances or policies that prohibit local officials, including peace officers, from communicating or cooperating with federal officials with regard to the immigration status of any person within the state.”

 During that time, no state grants were ever withheld from the city, because Denver was not deemed to have adopted a “sanctuary” policy within the meaning of that statute.

 Other Colorado cities concerned

 Aurora received $11-million from the feds last year.

 When asked if they’re concerned about a loss of federal funds, Lori MacKenzie, a spokeswoman for the city, said, “We don’t want to speculate because it’s simply too early to know what will take shape at the federal level.”

 Trump’s threats are also a concern to the city of Boulder.

 In an emailed statement, Boulder Communications Director Patrick von Keyserling told Denver7 that Boulder’s City Council asked staff to conduct research into the impacts of declaring Boulder a sanctuary city.

 He said no decision has been made, but acknowledged that the issue of declaring sanctuary is one that has legal and financial implications.

 “The city’s research will take into account the potential loss of federal dollars, impact on existing city services and programs and staff’s ability to serve Boulder residents, as well as our community’s strong commitment to social justice,” he said.

By Lance Hernandez

Source

by Kyle Serrette, Director of Education Justice Campaigns, Center for Popular Democracy

John H. Reagan High School is located in northeast Austin. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, Reagan’s student body became increasingly poor as middle-class families left the area. In 2003, a student was stabbed to death by her former boyfriend in a school hallway. The incident made headlines and scared away neighborhood families. Students left Reagan in droves. Enrollment dropped from more than 2,000 students to a new low of 600, and the graduation rate hovered just below 50 percent. In 2008, the district threatened to close Reagan. In reaction, a committee of parents, teachers, and students, brought together by Austin Voices for Education and Youth, formulated a plan to turn Reagan into a community school. The district accepted their plan.

Today, five years after adopting the community school strategy, Reagan is graduating 85 percent of its students, enrollment has more than doubled, and a new early college program has made it possible for Reagan’s students to earn two years of college credits from a nearby community college while still attending high school.

Reagan High School, or any community school for that matter, doesn’t immediately look different than any other school — that is, until you spend some time there.

At 3.8 million square miles, the United States is a big place, with almost 50 million primary and secondary students attending more than 98,000 public schools in 14,000 school districts.

Many things unite our vastly different 50 states, but our approach to education is not one of them.

It is fair to say that the United States does not have one approach to education. Rather, it has thousands of pedagogical approaches that fit into roughly the same structure (elementary, middle, high school).

If the universe of poorly funded public schools in the United States were the night sky on a clear night, you would find some really bright stars and a lot of jarring empty space. The problem with a scattershot approach to education in such a vast country is that there’s no effective way to share successful practices.

Thousands of schools in poor neighborhoods fail generation after generation, while other schools with the same demographics and challenges have found ways to succeed and break the cycle of failure. Today, if you are a business, nonprofit, or any type of entity, it is quite hard to figure out if a school wants help or what kind of help it needs. Most schools lack a clear analysis of what they need to help improve outcomes, and if they do have a clear understanding of needs, most lack a point person to manage partnerships.

Unfortunately, there is also no sound system for sharing successful strategies from schools that are getting it right. This is analogous to a heart surgeon developing a revolutionary life-saving approach and only telling people she bumped into about it. Yet that’s basically how our education system works in the United States.

While poor schools have taken many paths to transform themselves into successful schools, one particular path has worked again and again. There are 5.1 million children enrolled in approximately 5,000 community schools in the United States, and those numbers are growing quickly. In New York, mayoral candidate Bill de Blasio promised to create 100 community schools. As mayor, he has fulfilled that campaign promise and recently announced a plan to grow that number to 200 by 2017.

Philadelphia mayoral candidate Jim Kenney announced a plan to open 25 new community schools during his first term. This past December, Ras Baraka, mayor of Newark, announced a plan to scale up community schools with a tentative commitment of $12.5 million from the Foundation for Newark’s Future, the organization created to manage the $100 million that Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg donated to the city in 2010 to reform the city’s floundering school system.

Community schools are not a new concept. John Rogers, community schools historian at UCLA, tells us they have existed at least since the turn of the 20th century in many forms, but always with the same objective of addressing inequities at both the school and community levels. Jane Addams’s Hull House in the 1890s is an early example: “There were kindergarten classes in the morning, club meetings for older children in the afternoon, and for adults in the evening more clubs or courses in what became virtually a night school. The first facility added to Hull House was an art gallery, the second a public kitchen; then came a coffee house, a gymnasium, a swimming pool, a cooperative boarding club for girls, a book bindery, an art studio, a music school, a drama group, a circulating library, an employment bureau, and a labor museum.”

Long before Reagan became a community school, it housed a daycare for the babies of student mothers so they could continue their education. That daycare still exists today with approximately 20 babies enrolled, but there’s more. When school social workers noticed that student moms at Reagan were missing classes to take their babies to doctor appointments, the social workers applied for and won a grant to have a mobile clinic visit the campus once a week. Now student moms can make appointments for their babies to receive checkups without leaving school. Reagan also allows parents to eat lunch with their babies in the daycare and attend parenting classes. Students in Reagan’s Pregnant and Parenting Teen Program now have a remarkable 100 percent graduation rate.

Discipline problems historically have plagued Reagan. Students were frequently suspended, and chronic attendance issues landed students and families in court, which then imposed fines that families could not afford. Dropout rates were high.

Today, a full-time bilingual social worker works to diagnose chronic attendance problems and connects students and their families with supports, with service referrals rather than fines. A student-led youth court has been developed in partnership with the University of Texas–Austin Law School. The youth court and a restorative justice program together have dramatically reduced discipline issues. Today, Reagan is a top Title I high school in Austin.

While there is a fair amount of variability within schools that have implemented this strategy, thousands of schools have gotten it just right. We wanted to understand what distinguished them from the others.

Here’s what we found those schools shared in their strategic plans: 1) culturally relevant and engaging curricula; 2) an emphasis on high-quality teaching, not high-stakes testing; 3) wraparound supports, such as health care and social and emotional services; 4) positive discipline practices, such as restorative justice; 5) parent and community engagement; and 6) inclusive school leadership committed to making the transformational community school strategy integral to the school’s mandate and functioning.

It all seems intuitive. Schools that form strategic partnerships with businesses, nonprofits, local and federal governments, universities, hospitals, and other organizations to meet core unmet needs are usually successful over time. In most strapped schools, a principal doesn’t have time to find the appropriate partners, let alone conduct an analysis of needs. This leaves schools with a random partner strategy, which is no strategy at all. The community school strategy puts one person in charge of determining the school’s ever-evolving needs. The cost incurred to create this position and the work it supports — around $150,000 — pays for itself and then some.

Nine years ago, when Baltimore’s Wolfe Street Academy elementary school became a community school, 90 percent of its students were living in poverty, 60 percent spoke a language other than English at home, and its mobility rate was high at 46.6 (less than half of its students attended for more than three years). Wolfe Street Academy ranked 77th in the district in academic measures, and only half its children reached reading proficiency by fifth grade. It had no library and only sporadic parent or community engagement.

Today, Wolfe Street ranks second in the city academically, its mobility rate has dropped to 8.8 percent, 95 percent of fifth-grade students are reading proficient, and its average daily attendance rate is 95 percent. It has a library, a book club, and volunteer help from a retired librarian. Forty parents attend a morning meeting every day before school while the students eat breakfast. They share school and community news, both good and bad. This transformation at Wolfe Street has taken place even as more students living in poverty have arrived and as the number of students speaking a language other than English in the home has grown.

During one of Wolfe Street’s annual needs assessments, it determined that its curriculum was not dynamic enough to give the school a chance to achieve its academic goals. In response, Wolfe Street formed a partnership with the Baltimore Curriculum Project, which now provides staff with professional development and supports the school with teacher recruitment and retention.

When the assessment revealed that many of its students had never visited a dentist the school partnered with the University of Maryland Dental School to hold free oral health screenings for all the students. A partnership was formed as well with the University of Maryland’s School of Social Work as a way to respond to what the assessment revealed about the daily impact of trauma on their students’ lives. Now licensed social workers and multiple social work interns are available and offer case management and referrals.

We are in the enviable position of knowing what works. And now, with the recent passage of the federal education legislation Every Student Succeeds Act, funds are explicitly available for the essential elements of community schools, such as community school coordinators, needs assessments, and after-school programming.

A United States where every public school is a community school would be a very different place — it would be a school with the community inside it. Your bank, local architect, grocery store, hospital, and other institutions we associate with being part of the broader community outside our schools would be deeply integrated into them. The tax code could be designed to accelerate and incentivize partnerships with schools. The lines between the inside and outside of schools would blur.

And if you imagine a United States in 2050 where all 98,000 schools have a clear sense of their individual needs and are able to communicate these needs effectively to potential partners, this might be a game changer.

With a new granular understanding of every school’s needs, we could scale partnerships and connect schools with similar needs or pair schools that could benefit from each other’s strengths. We could analyze needs and assess intervention strategies between schools and across districts, cities, states, and the nation.

If you can imagine the world back when it wasn’t connected by the internet and experience again how everything changed when we finally were connected, that is the level shift our schools would experience if every school were a community school. A networked school system would exist, and our atomized system of disparate schools would fade away as a relic of the past.

Source