School OK’s ‘Race’ Funding Agreement

January 18, 2010

Catskill Central School District is hoping to participate in a competitive federal funding program called Race To The Top, or RTTT, with Board of Education members approving a Memorandum of Understanding on the matter at Wednesday’s meeting.

CSD Superintendent of Schools Dr. Kathleen Farrell told board members the plan requires “certain corresponding” activities by the district, but that there is “a huge amount of money available.”

According to the program’s Web site that funding pa ckage — nationwide — is $435 billion, with New York’s potential share reportedly at $700 million.

In order to seek the funding, NYS Governor David A. Paterson has to submit an application to Washington showing that school districts in New York are on board for the program’s requirements.

Farrell indicated that districts across the state are thus currently addressing the proposed RTTT MOU relatively simultaneously in order to provide the state with the necessary documentation to apply for a share of the funding.

The competitive nature of the funding apparently comes from each state having to show what it will do to improve its educational system and practices in order to match with Washington’s educational vision, ergo the name Race To The Top.

Farrell indicated that of the 23 school districts served by Questar III across the state — which includes those in Greene, Columbia, and Rensselaer counties — only one has not yet signed onto an MOU for the RTTT.

She also noted that the procedure “requires signatures from a lot of people,” and indicated that Catskill has not yet obtained all the necessary ones, but is proceeding with the MOU resolution to have all in place when necessary.

The resolution approving the MOU was passed on motion by board member Andy Jones, seconded by board member Kevin Allen, with board member Michael Bulich voting against the measure.

Bulich suggested he feels the strings attached to the program are not worth the money, and also expressed concern that the funds are not currently tangible at the federal level.

“This isn’t money that’s already there,” he commented.

Bulich also indicated he has concerns that the funds may turn out not to be an outright grant, in that the district could end up having to pay it back, ostensibly if the rules later deem a procedural non-compliance from federal standards that might be at odds with existing New York ones.

Farrell said, however, it is her understanding that the money is in place.

“The funding is allocated,” she said, “then each district has other pieces they have to put into place.”

Farrell said if the funding is not there, then the district is not required to adhere to the plan.

Bulich suggested that, as a bureaucracy, the size of the federal government sometimes leads to complications, and indicated he is worried about loss of home rule, meaning the ability for districts and taxpayers to make decisions for themselves.

“They’re going to circumvent the power of the local school board,” he said.

Farrell said that, in many areas, the federal government already has that power and indicated it exercises it with regularity.

“They mandate certain activities now,” she said. “They have the authority to do that, rightly or wrongly.”

She noted that when funding is attached to those mandates — which, perhaps, is somewhat rare — it becomes especially expedient to act.

Farrell also explained that, in New York State, collective bargaining is one of the items that will need to be worked out within the RTTT program.

She said the federal program standards involve the use of data and how tenure is determined, adding that while the “use” itself is mandated, the “how” it is to be used will be determined in the future by negotiation and collective bargaining.

Farrell explained that in much of what currently transpires, the educational field is now “very heavily data driven.”

She indicated that while there may be issues that still nee d to be worked out, data driven mechanisms appear to exist, to a degree, as the methodology of the times.

Farrell suggested the trade off may present periodic problematic issues, but that the financial incentive is worth the effort of solving them.

“To pass the money up, it’s hard,” she said.

Bulich disagreed, stating, “It’s not hard for me,” and later voted no during the ballot.