Correcting Some Errors

Thomas Moore former Croydon School Board member had a Letter to the Editor printed in the Valley News.   Jim Peschke former School Board member responded to Thomas Moore's Letter.   The quoted sentences in black are from Thomas Moore's letter.  Jim's responses are in red.  

Cathy Peschke

“Cutting the Croydon school budget to $800,000 means families would pay $8,000-$9,000 per student for “public” school.” - FALSE

FACT: The amount depends on the school selected.  These numbers apply to Newport, one of the most expensive public schools in the area, and one of the worst performing according to state testing.  Sunapee would be closer to $6,000.  Most charter schools, Prenda, Kai as well as private Newport Montessori and Mount Royal would remain cost-free to the parent.

“...townspeople to pay an extra $100-$200 per year to pay for the original budget.” - MISLEADING

FACT: These small numbers seem compare the original $1.7 million to last year’s budget, not the new $800,000 budget.  Raising the budget on May 7th would increase school taxes on a $300,000 home by over $2,000 per year.

“I say it is unfair to expect parents to come up with $9,000 per child for basic public education!” - If it were only that cheap!

I say it is unfair to expect the town to come up with $17,000 per child for public education.  Tom is not objecting to the cost, almost twice the number cited.  He’s objecting to paying part of this cost out of his own pocket.  He’d rather burden his neighbors with the cost.

“They are shifting the financial responsibility to families raising children or offering them a sub-par alternative.” - FALSE DICHOTOMY

FACT: Evidence shows that microschools outperform many public schools.  That NMS and MRA outperform public schools is well established.

“Most of us have benefited from public education.” - MISLEADING

“Public education” does not mean “public schools”.  Does a child benefit from going to a public school when less money could have been used to send that same child to a better school?  Must include opportunity costs.

“It is our civic duty to share the cost of children’s education.” - Your opinion, not shared by many.

Education is a parental responsibility.

“The board cannot even guarantee the legality of the micro-school proposal.” - DELIBERATELY MISLEADING

This is a made-up red-herring argument.  There is no evidence whatsoever, other than the dreams of people wanting to kill education progress, that the micro-school proposal runs afoul of the law.  This is simply wishful thinking. These microschools already have a contract with the State of New Hampshire to provide education.  Obviously the State doesn’t consider it illegal.

“It will be the death of our community if this reckless decision stands.”

Just like school choice was in 2014, right?

“Next year the deficit spending will be added to the tax rate, making it higher than anybody in town wants.” - FALSE.

Like “bad math” false.  So let’s try some math and see where it takes us.  The budget is $800,000, but let’s suppose Tom is right and we actually have to spend, say $1,000,000 in 2022.  Next year, the board says “Oops, we needed more money.  We’ll budget $1,080,000 (8% increase) for 2023, but we have to repay the $200,000 we had to borrow, plus $20,000 interest (10%).  So now we need $1,300,000 for 2023.

Is this $1,300,000 “higher than anybody in town wants?”  If so, what do you think of $1,700,000?

In the $200,000 deficit scenario, we spend a total of $2,100,000 for 2023 and 2024.  In the tax hike scenario Tom advocates, we spend $3,400,000 over the same period, and this assumes no increase at all for 2023.

You don’t save tax money by spending more of it!

“Families have been moving to our town, and property values were increasing because we had an attractive school choice program and a successful little school.” - PARTLY TRUE

In my time on the board, several families had indicated that they moved here for school choice, which the $800,000 budget preserves.  I do not recall a single family claiming to have moved here because of CVS.  Test scores at CVS are unremarkable.  Low property taxes are a powerful incentive and are proven to increase property values.

“Please join us to reverse this awful decision at 9 a.m. on May 7 at Camp Coniston.” - NO, PLEASE DON’T

The only “awful” decision was to attempt to resurrect the nightmarish $1,700,000 budget.  Stay home if you want to reverse a truly awful decision.

Visit vnews.com to read Thomas Moore's letter,

Do Over Dictators - Democracy schmocracy!

The We Stand For Croydon Students thinks they are entitled to your money and screw the democratic process.  

The following excerpts are from Granite Grok. 

Cathy Peschke 

"It’s rare to read a story about the recent Croydon budget adjustment that doesn’t mention how small the number of voters was, as if it was some kind of anomaly.

The final vote was 20-14.  For comparison, here are the tallies for votes in recent years, at the town and district meetings, where votes were reported in the minutes:  16-8, 38-5, 20-17, 18-15, 20-12, 22-19.

I say ‘ironically’, because requiring even this watered-down version of consent would make it clear that the people calling for the special meeting do not, in fact, object to small turnouts. What they want is a turnout that is just small enough that they can use majority rule to confiscate property, where consent — approximated by the ‘super-duper majority’ contemplated here — would prohibit that.  Which is to say, they don’t have a problem with small turnouts, just with what they see as the wrong turnouts."

To read this entire brilliant story by Ian Underwood, click here.

If you want lower taxes and education reform we suggest you stay home May 7. 

The Truth About Taxes

There is a great post on Granite Grok about property taxes and public education.  Below is just a snippet of the article by Patrice Myers who has a degree in education. 

Cathy Peschke 

My point is, why should we be forced to pay for something that we don’t agree with, that isn’t producing good results. A system that thinks that parents/grandparents are “in the way,” and is not accountable for their actions?

Why should we pay for a broken, unserviceable system?

It’s time to starve the beast (the government school system – NOT the municipal) and withhold the funding that, when we pay it, gives our consent to their irresponsibility. Not to mention the constitutional questions regarding the system of taxation in this State.

To read the rest of the story click here. 

Croydon residents, if you believe schools have a spending problem and not a funding problem please consider staying home May 7th. 

Why Disruption in Education is Essential

The following Letter to the Editor appeared in the Concord Monitor.  Click the title to be directed to the LTE  in the Concord Monitor. 

Cathy Peschke 

Opinion: Why disruption in education is essential

Every year, small towns across New Hampshire grapple with ways to keep their budgets in check. This usually entails minor adjustments and revisions that tighten up spending, but don’t dramatically alter the character of town or school operations.

This spring, residents of the town of Croydon adopted a novel approach, setting the school budget based on a simple per-pupil formula multiplied by a total student population. The final number, $800,000, came in at less than half of the board’s original $1.7 million-plus figure. This budget was disruptive, as it was meant to be.

As one of 20 vilified residents who voted in favor of the budget overhaul, I’ve heard many concerns about this approach, from the reasonable “can we deliver on this small budget?” to the absurd “the kids will end up in prison because they didn’t get enough art class.”

Among the cacophony of hyperbolic scenarios, one comment sounds quite reasonable: “This budget amendment seems abrupt and severe. Why was it necessary to cut the budget this way?”

It’s a good question, and it deserves a good answer.

Public education spending has gotten completely out of control in New Hampshire. When recently polled at a school board meeting, not a single board member felt the previous $1.7 million budget was appropriate. All felt it needed to be reduced. Each board member suggested a small reduction.

So why not try incremental reductions instead of large cuts? Because incremental reductions in education spending don’t work.

I have personally fought this battle in Croydon for over 15 years, but it plays out every spring in town halls across the state. Some cut proposals get shot down immediately. Others make it through the vote, producing a brief respite from the waste typical of public schools. Unfortunately, any progress gets undone as soon as voters become complacent.

The cut-reverse, cut-reverse cycle is why New Hampshire schools find themselves with bloated budgets despite years of temporarily successful budget cuts. Even with our best efforts, the gravy train keeps rolling.

There is one glowing success of permanent education reform: school choice. This program took eight years to enact, defending against rabid resistance culminating in a lawsuit from Big Ed’s acolytes in Concord. Croydon prevailed in classic David versus Goliath fashion. School choice is now a reality in our town, and an option state-wide.

Our school choice initiative not only won the legal battle, it won the hearts and minds of residents. Many of its most vocal opponents became supporters in just a few years. How did this happen?

It happened because school choice was a disruptive, not incremental change in education. Enacting school choice did not involve tweaking an existing system, it altogether scrapped much of it. The entire structure of post-4th-grade education in Croydon was reworked to implement the new model.

Both promoters and opponents of school choice understood one important point. Once the public got a taste of school choice, they would never tolerate a return to the old ways. School choice, with its many benefits, is here to stay.

Croydon’s $800,000 education budget was designed to be small enough to require systemic change, yet large enough to make implementation practical. Ian Underwood, that dreaded Free Stater we’ve all been programmed to fear, made a case for the specific number of $10,000 per student based on high quality, functional, existing schools.

That this number, higher than some schools spend, is considered “unworkable” says much more about the mindset of public education finance than it does about Mr. Underwood’s “Bond-villain” plans. Any school district that demands over $22,000 per student in an area where other schools demand less than $9,000 is ripe for restructuring.

We’ve tried incremental reform, and it has failed. It’s time for a paradigm shift in public education. The amended $800,000 budget accomplishes this in a responsible manner. It will provide higher quality at a much lower cost. As with school choice before, the public will not tolerate a return to the tax-and-spend ways of yesteryear once they’ve enjoyed the benefits of the new budget.

The education establishment’s response to Croydon’s realigned budget is a “do-over” repeal vote scheduled for May 7th. Time will tell whether enough voters attend and cast ballots to restore the old model.

In either case, residents taking charge and enacting higher quality, cost-saving school budgets is an idea whose time has come. The old ways of making change at the town level don’t work anymore, and the public knows it. Expect to see more of this kind of citizen action in the future.

Jim Peschke 

Schools are Not Free

"The more subsidized it is, the less free it is. What is known as "free education" is the least free of all, for it is a state-owned institution; it is socialized education - just like socialized medicine or the socialized post office - and cannot possibly be separated from political control." - Frank Chodorov, "Why Free Schools Are Not Free"

Schools have become an entitlement and those that use them have become very greedy and ungrateful.  $10,000 per student is generous anything above that is just greedy.  We have poor families subsidizing wealthy families.  Do your part for more responsible spending in government schools stay home May 7. 

Cathy Peschke 

Spring Clean Up

Grantham is having their spring clean-up May 7, 9-12. Who would like to join them and pick up garbage along the streets of Croydon that day?

Cathy Peschke

Have You Even Read About Prenda?

Have you even read about Prenda, or are you only getting your inform from the We Stand With Croydon Students crowd?    Three teachers in town have a direct conflict of interests, they want to protect the school budget because they are teachers, at least one of them boasts being a proud teacher union member.

If you believe in the individual you can't support unions, at least I can't.  This country was founded on individual rights, unions are the anthesis to the individual.    Good employees don't need unions.  Bad employees are protected by unions.  If you stand for freedom, you stand for the rights of individuals.  Union dues are just another form of tax and slave/master type situation.  Employment laws protect individuals there is no need for unions. 

Teacher unions' serve teachers not students.  There are plenty of books to read about how the teachers' unions have destroyed public education in America.  With test results being mediocre at best and Newport Schools ranking in the bottom 20% why not give Prenda a chance?  As a parent the first thing you did was research it yourself and not have someone else tell you about the program, right?  A person especially would not want to hear from teacher who is trying to protect their own racket. 

Giving the $800,000 budget a try is a huge David and Goliath moment.  It could be the end to excessive spending and poor educational results in public education. 

Click the title to read about Prenda and do some more research yourself. 

Cathy Peschke

Recovering Bright Futures

Every student deserves a Recovering Bright Futures Program.

The Department is partnering with Prenda schools for a new and exciting grant opportunity 

to support your students and families who have experienced learning loss and who have 
may have experienced significant stress and disruption as a result of the COVID-19 
pandemic – Recovering Bright Futures. 

The Recovering Bright Futures Program offers School Districts and communities the 

opportunity to provide students with access to Learning Pods starting this fall.

Learning Pods may be new to many, but throughout the pandemic and across the country,

they have served thousands of students in a small-group, multi-age and trauma sensitive 

learning environments. Learning Pods are particularly helpful to students who have 

experienced learning loss and will thrive with more individualized attention.

Learning Pods as an option for those students who might benefit from this unique, 
supportive educational environment. The Department will also directly support the 
creation of Community Learning Pods, especially for families who do not have a 
District Learning Pod available to them.

The Department will offer grants to School Districts to support the creation of District 

Learning Pods as an option for those students who might benefit from this unique, 

supportive educational environment. The Department will also directly support the 

creation of Community Learning Pods, especially for families who do not have a District 

Learning Pod available to them.

School Districts interested in the Recovering Bright Futures Program will received 
grant application packets separately.

What is a Learning Pod?

Learning Pods involve, small, in-person, multi-age groupings of students in a trauma sensitive 
environment that allows children to stabilize, rekindle curiosity, and accelerate learning 
so that they might catch up with their peers. Generally, a micro or learning pod has 
between 5 – 10 students in grades K-2, 3-5 or 6-8 groupings. One New Hampshire 
elementary education teacher, who taught in a Learning Pod this year, described it as 
outstanding and noted that her own child was thriving using this learning system. The 
learning system, which is aligned to the New Hampshire academic standards, 
focuses on empowering learners through three different mastery and project-based learning 
modes each day: Conquer, Collaborate and Create.

To read the rest of the information click here.