Hazleton Area School District- Poor Performance Continues For Years

In today's Standard Speaker veteran reporter Mia Light writes a story that Hazleton Area School District students failed to meet standardized testing benchmarks according to results released by the Pennsylvania Department of Education.

The Pennsylvania System of School Assessments test is administered every spring to every Pennsylvania student in grades 3 through 8 and grade 11 in reading and math; students in grades 5, 8 and 11 are assessed in writing; and students in grades 4, 8 and 11 are assessed in science.

The test scores, from the 2010-11 school year, are part of the data used to determine whether schools have achieved Adequate Yearly Progress under the federal No Child Left Behind Act.

Other data used to determine AYP includes percentage of student population that takes the test, school attendance rates and graduation rates.

In the Hazleton Area School District, where data from the 10 individual schools are combined to determine whether the district as a whole achieved AYP, the results were split 50/50 - results met the mark in five district schools and failed to make the grade in five others.

Hazleton Area schools that made the AYP grade include Freeland Elementary/Middle School, McAdoo-Kelayres Elementary School, West Hazleton Elementary/Middle School and, by default, Arthur Street Elementary School and its annex.

The state Department of Education classifies Arthur Street and the annex as a "feeder school," which means it contains only students below third grade and does not get tested for AYP. Because Arthur Street and the annex feed into schools that are held accountable for third grade PSSA results, the Arthur Street school and annex receive AYP results based on overall district results. Because the district's third grade met the thresholds in math and reading overall, Arthur Street and the annex are identified as having met AYP.

The five district schools where the AYP requirements were not met include Drums Elementary/Middle School, Hazleton Elementary/Middle School, Heights-Terrace Elementary/Middle School, Valley Elementary/Middle School and the high school.

At Drums, AYP was achieved in attendance and test participation but not in academic performance. Students there did achieve AYP in math and reading overall, but students in the special education sub-group failed to meet the mark in mathematics, which cast an AYP failure on the school's final grade.

According to the Department of Education, this is the first time the Drums school did not meet all AYP measures. In the first year of not meeting AYP, a school is placed in "Warning" status, meaning it fell short but has another year to achieve the standards before any consequences are imposed.

In July the Times Leader ran a story about teachers' ratings in area school districts.  As part of the federal stimulus reporting the teachers ratings were released by the Pennsylvania Department of Education according to school district.  The federal stimulus program poured billions into education and required measures be taken to reform the decline in student test scores witnessed nationwide.

The following charts, produced by Gary Visgatis and Mark Guydish of the Times Leader, show that teachers in the Hazleton Area School district received a 100% approval rating but student acheivement was not one of the measures used to evaluate teachers.

On July 16, 2011 the Standard Speaker published an article written by Mia Light about An investigation is under way into why test scores at several Hazleton Area School District buildings in the 2008-09 school year were "statistically atypical" and highlighted in a state report that questioned whether they were earned fairly.  Subsequently HASD personnel suggested that a reporting error may have skewed that data although a full report has never been filed or reported to the public.

Hazleton Area School District was ranked 402nd out of 498 Pennsylvania school districts in 2011 by the Pittsburgh Business Times. The ranking was based on five years of student academic performance on the PSSAs for math, reading, writing and three years of science.  The HASD was rated 368 out of 500 in 2007 by the same publication and went down to 401 out of 498 in 2010.

Hazleton Area School District board members and administrators need to stop the intense bickering, partisan degradations, and outright bullying of each other and get back to educating our children.

At the same time 94% of all Pennsylvania school districts made the grade on performance standards according to Mary Niederberger and Eleanor Chute of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.  These facts should be an eye opener for the public.

When Did Politicians Last Surprise Us — By Doing What's Right?

Credit the headline to Thomas Friedman, a three-time Pulitzer prize winner, but more on that later in the post.

In an Opinion written by Mark Guydish of the Times Leader he drives home a great point about the necessity of transparency in government. He attacks House Majority Leader Todd Eachus for his "utterly uninformative remark" regarding legislative staff costs to the taxpayer's of Pennsylvania.

Eachus said “Our personnel office uses industry-wide best practices and standards, much like other public or private organizations, for salaries, ranges and job classifications. Beyond that, we don’t discuss details of our personnel decisions.”

When did the hiring practices and procedures of public officials become proprietary information? Is Eachus worried that Houses of Representatives in other states will steal Pennsylvania’s “best practices,” thus taking away our House’s competitive edge? Are we – despite having the most bloated legislative staff in the nation – at risk of a legislative staff gap?

Todd’s utterly uninformative remark was pathetic party-line self protection. In a legislature where $100 million goes toward staff, the names and salaries of staff members already are public. Sadly, you have to ask for them, and as former legislative aide turned reformer Tim Potts noted in an e-mail: “Technically, all staff work for the caucus leadership, not for the legislators.” Which means legislators can say they employ no staff, and be telling the truth.

Back to Thomas Friedman. He penned an Opinion for the New York Times about politicians doing what's right. Freidman was talking about the mosque in New York. The Standard Speaker picked up this column where the headline reads "The real divide is among Muslims." Friedman describes what he feels is missing in our leadership today by using Nelson Mandella as an example of rising above the crowd.

When the post-apartheid, black-led South African sports committee moved to change the team's name and colors, Mandela stopped them. He explained that part of making whites feel at home in a black-led South Africa was not uprooting all their cherished symbols. "That is selfish thinking," Mandela, played by Morgan Freeman, says in the movie. "It does not serve the nation." Then speaking of South Africa's whites, Mandela adds, "We have to surprise them with restraint and generosity." I love that line: "We have to surprise them." I was watching the movie on an airplane and scribbled that line down on my napkin because it summarizes what is missing today in so many places: Leaders who surprise us by rising above their histories, their constituencies, their pollsters, their circumstances — and just do the right things for their countries.

I tried to recall the last time a leader of importance surprised me on the upside by doing something positive, courageous and against the popular will of his country or party. I can think of a few: Yitzhak Rabin in signing onto the Oslo peace process. Anwar Sadat in going to Jerusalem. And, of course, Mandela in the way he led South Africa.

Eachus has been missing the point of leadership for a long time. He wants to hide behind House Rule 14 which he and his peers made to say that Per Diems are legal.

He doesn't want to disclose what the legislative salaries, ranges and job classifications. Why Todd? We must continue to ask Why? Here is a man who campaigned against midnight pay raises. Here is a man who campaigned against WAMS.

In this Opinion article from Robert Swift he informs us that WAMS are still available for incumbent protection.

It used to be that you knew a WAM when you saw one. A grant announced by a lawmaker to pay for repairs to a municipal building, the purchase of Little League equipment or a hometown festival. In recent years, you could get a good idea of the amount allocated for WAMs by checking the "community revitalization" spending item under the Department of Community and Economic Development.

That spending item is zero-funded in the new state budget, but WAMs have migrated to other repositories: "community conservation and employment" funded at $24 million and "urban development' funded at $10 million.

As WAMs have spread out so has the debate about what they are. The market-oriented Commonwealth Foundation has identified what it calls governor's WAMs. Some suggest that spending where officials can exercise discretion about who the recipients are constitute WAMs.

In this press release Rep. John Yudichak is transparent about the fact that legislatvie leadership accounts have $200 million in funds. Previously John Yudichak stated the Legislature "has to put more on the table," including long-hoarded leadership accounts, which he figures at about $200 million and calls "a padded reserve to buttress leaders."

In John Baer's column in the Philadelphia Daily News Cut services? Raise taxes? Let's try something newhe highlights some ideas that are right for Pennsylvanians.

Any WAMs, says Rep. Gene DePasquale, D-York, "should be first to go . . . clearly before cuts to health care, education or environmental protection."


Rep. Bryan Lentz, D-Delco, calls cutting WAMs "a good suggestion."

Back to Mark Guydish's Opinion. Amidst exposure of ingrained corruption and outcries for true reform, such a move is a no-brainer.

Which makes Eachus’ statement insulting to anyone with intelligence.

Interbranch Commission on Juvenile Justice Recommendations

Rarely do I post an entire article but I believe theTimes Leader won't mind the trackback to its article and the importance needed to get the message out.

Mark Guydish
HARRISBURG – Call it the state’s “Justice To-Do List.”

The Interbranch Commission on Juvenile Justice’s report is more than 60 pages, but the commission included a summary of recommendations.

Here’s the list, simplified:

•Create a statewide Juvenile Justice Victim Advocate Office.

•Restore the Victims of Juvenile Offenders program funding to 2005 levels.

•Create a Luzerne County Victims of Juvenile Crime Restitution Fund.

•Re-examine the Code of Judicial Conduct’s ethics and reporting provisions.

•Revise Judicial Conduct Board Internal Operating Procedures.

•Review the role and independence of the JCB staff in relation to the JCB members.

•Revise JCB annual reports.

•Revise the JCB website.

•Ensure judges and lawyers are aware of ethical responsibility to report misconduct.

•Review the state Constitution to ensure the JCB is accountable.

•Create educational programs to ensure lawyers and the public understand what constitutes attorney misconduct.

•Revise the attorney disciplinary board website.

•Increase attorney continuing legal education ethics requirements.

•The commission endorsed training standards adopted by state associations for district attorneys and juvenile defenders; the groups should develop continuing legal education courses for prosecutors and defense counsel.

•Continuing legal education should be mandatory for juvenile court judges.

•Emphasis should be placed on the importance of work in juvenile justice.

•The proposed standards for prosecutors in juvenile court should be implemented and resources to achieve them funded.

•Create a state funding stream for defense of indigent juveniles.

•Create a Center for Juvenile Defense Excellence.

•Ensure access to counsel by all indigent juveniles, restrict the right to waive counsel and require stand-by counsel for those who do waive the right but decide they have legal questions.

•The Chief Juvenile Probation Officers Association and all county probation departments should adopt standards of conduct and rules prohibiting partisan political activities by employees.

•The Court Administrator of Pennsylvania should conduct a national review to determine best practices for hiring policies.

•Continue State Supreme Court oversight of the Luzerne County juvenile justice system.

•Ensure adequate resources for the Juvenile Court Judges Commission to collect and analyze data.

•Enhance data collection and sharing among relevant agencies regarding the juvenile justice system.

•Require judges to state on the record how a juvenile disposition furthers the goals of state law.

•Study ways to reduce or eliminate shackling in juvenile courtrooms.

•Implement the Juvenile Detention Alternative Initiative model.

•Modify the standards governing the use of secure detention.

•Expand as a pilot program the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory risks/needs instrument and employment of valid research and other evidence based risk assessment.

•Create a form advising juveniles of appeal rights.

•Develop Internet-based resources explaining how the appeals process works and how to get assistance.

•Expedite appeal reviews.

•Create a statewide office to assist in juvenile appeals.

•Enhance the allowance of nunc pro tunc (now for then) relief.

•Encourage county commissioners to attend the Academy for Excellence in County Government.

•Enhance understanding of roles and obligations of county court and executive officials.

•Discontinue zero-tolerance school policies.

•Enhance understanding of roles, obligations and cooperation among educational, law-enforcement and juvenile justice stakeholders.

•Keep the juvenile justice status of students confidential.

•Review educational curriculum for children in placement.


Mark Guydish, a Times Leader staff writer, can be reached at 829-7161

Deep Impact Auditor General and City Of Hazleton About To Collide

Yesterday Mark Guydish of the Times Leader wrote an Opinion piece concerning the pension situation facing Hazleton. His assessment came on the heels of an article written by Steve Mocarsky after Todd Eachus wrote a letter critical of Mayor Lou Barletta's financial moves concerning the pension funds in Hazleton.

Let's take a step back from all the rhetoric spewed in this episode of Guydish's Taxpayer Victim's Unit. A little homework usually provides the necessary education to make an informed decision.

There is a law called the Third Class City Code. If we go back to the Depression era we will find that the code was created in 1931. It is found in Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes more commonly known in the legal circles as Title 53 Municipal and Quasi-Municipal Corporations.

In looking at 53 P.S. §895.102 one will find definitions relating to pensions. A "Pension Fund" is defined as "the entity which is the repository for the assets amassed by a pension plan as reserved for present and future periodic retirement payments and benefits of active and retired members of the pension plan". A "Pension plan or system" is defined as "the various aspects of the relationship between a municipality and its employees wtih respect to retirement coverage provided by a municipality to its employees". A "Plan document" is defined as the law, ordinance, resolution, or related documents which governs the various aspects of the retirement coverage provided by a municipality to its employees, including periodic retirement payments and benefits, administration, and funding".

Do you see a pattern in the definitions? Pension payments are not only the monthly stipend provided by the plan according to the barganning agreement but also explicitly includes "BENEFITS."

The issue at hand is whether the City of Hazleton used money provided for by law, specifically Act 205, to be collected for pension payments to also be used for benefit payments. Auditor General Jack Wagner has ruled against the City of Hazleton and the Mayor believes his ruling to be incorrect according to the language of the law written above.

From the press release on the Auditor General's website. Auditor General Jack Wagner said today that an audit of the City of Hazleton’s police and firefighter pension plans found that the city improperly spent more than $1.5 million of special municipal pension tax revenues to pay for retirees’ health-care benefits....

Act 205 of 1984, the state law authorizing collection of the tax, requires that revenue from the tax be used exclusively to fund a municipality’s pension plans. Neither Act 205 nor any other state law permits using the tax revenue to pay for post-retirement health-care benefits or to buy back unused leave.

Wagner noted that Hazleton had properly exercised its right to pay retirees’ health-care benefits from general funds before 2003.

If the definition of a Pension Fund is the entity which is the repository for the assets amassed by a pension plan as reserved for present and future periodic retirement payments and benefits of active and retired members of the pension plan" how does Wagner find solid legal ground for his determination?

In the Auditor General's determination he opines that the City erred by using Act 205 money to fund retiree's health benefits. AG Wagner believes that the money can solely be used to defray the additional costs which are directly related to the pension plans of the municipality. If we go back to the definition of the "Pension plan or system" the defining words are too broad to limit retirement coverage solely to the monthly stipend.

The trouble with AG Wagner enforcing his determination lies in the travesty to the citizens of Hazleton. At this point there is no expense to the citizens of Hazleton nor the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in the solution Lou Barletta found for his vexing pension issue. AG Wagner could force Hazleton into bankruptcy because its taxing ability is limited to 30 mills at the present time. The other option is for the Mayor and City Council to implement layoffs in the fire and police department to make up for the deficit that would be created by a payback.

If a law were passed it would have zero-impact on city residents and employees. If it isn't passed everyone would face a "Deep Impact."

If the Public Employee Retirement Commission(PERC) does not have a problem with Barletta's solution why does Todd Eachus? If the Senate voted 49-0 to support a legal remedy why is it that Todd Eachus has a problem?

From Steve Mocarsky's article: Eachus said he’s busy working to try to balance the state budget, which he said is “facing the largest deficit since the Great Depression” – $3.2 billion – and trying to find a fix for the city’s problem right now is impractical. Uhhh Todd, who got us into the largest deficit since the Great Depression? You and Governor Rendell. And are really too busy to help the people in your district?