As usual the Haverhill School Committee would have you believe the previous administration has left them in the dark about this important issue.  Feigning shock and dismay were the usual suspects, Wood and Bevilacqua, with Ms Danehy attempting to be the voice of reason.  Unfortunately, while I do recall sitting in a school committee meeting where Dr Buchanan addressed our lack of Highly Qualified Teachers and the plan to change this – I have been unable to pinpoint the date of that meeting to provide video proof.

As a district we are behind in the percentage of Highly Qualified Teachers allowed by the state.  They posted their numbers here.

What everyone’s forgotten in this fiasco is highlighted in this question by the Eagle Tribune:

Asked how many teachers are not considered qualified by the state to teach the subjects to which they are assigned, Scully told The Eagle-Tribune he did not have an exact number but said it’s “a small minority.”

There is a difference between “Highly Qualified Teachers” as laid out in the NCLB requirements and teachers qualified by the state to teach the subjects to which they are assigned.

Mr Sierpina outlines some of the challenges Haverhill faces in meeting this requirement:

School Committee member Ray Sierpina, who headed Tilton School before retiring two years ago, said yesterday that Haverhill is actually doing quite well to post a 91 percent compliance rate regarding highly qualified teachers. Typically, there’s a hold on hiring in June, so by the time Haverhill is ready to hire teachers, those who have all the credentials to be considered “highly qualified” have taken jobs elsewhere.

Further exacerbating the issue is the complex hierarchy of teachers based on tenure and dual certification where teachers are shuffled around to teach subjects they haven’t taught in a while because their current position is being eliminated.  Therefore a “highly qualified art teacher” who suddenly finds themselves teaching math for the first time in a decade would lose their highly qualified status until they demonstrate competence in mathematics.   This teacher would be covered by a temporary waiver.

Out-of-Field Teaching
Though the Department allows teachers to spend 20% of their time teaching out-of-field, NCLB requires a teacher to demonstrate “a high level of competency in each of the [core] academic subjects” in which he or she teaches. Hence, a teacher who is certified but teaching out-of-field will not be considered highly qualified in the out-of-field subject area until he or she has demonstrated subject matter competency in that area.

So while the newspaper and parts of the school committee would have us believe our students are in the hands of completely incompetent instructors and no one knew.  In reality the students are being taught by qualified teachers – and 91% highly qualified teachers!  The 41 Haverhill teachers who are not currently considered highly qualified undoubtedly have waivers for the year in which they are completing Master’s Degree programs, taking certification courses or otherwise proving their competence in a subject they haven’t taught in some time.

Perhaps if we want 100% of our teachers to be Highly Qualified Teachers 100% of the time we need to restructure how education works in our state.  Giving pink slips to a significant portion of teachers every year, constantly changing who teaches which subjects, cutting more and more programs and shifting responsibilities isn’t working.

Back a few years ago someone wanted to open a tattoo shop in the downtown section of Haverhill.  Hackles were raised over allowing “Those People” into town.  Similarly, zoning and prudishness ran a lingerie shop out of the downtown around that time.  Being one of “those people” who would have happily supported those shops instead of the bars and dollar stores currently occupying the downtown area I was disappointed by my fellow Haverhill denizens.

Then we have the lovely rock pile which absolutely brings more tax dollars into town than the successful and popular Friend’s Landing restaurant.  So happy we razed that building, drove out the clientele and built that great condo complex.  Oh wait – we didn’t build anything.  The owner blames the economy but I wonder if the clientele weren’t simply victims of being “those people.”

Zoning makes headlines again as Haverhill attempts to loosen restrictions at the industrial parks to bring new business into the area.  Of course “those people” need not apply.  In this case “those people” are the smaller businesses, euphemistically dubbed “low employment” companies.  Companies like the Canine Fun Time indoor dog park.

These companies are not welcome in Haverhill unless they are willing to settle downtown.  With a viable parking solution at least four years away – adding new traffic downtown is untenable.  The buildings downtown are also not amenable to every business type.  Of course these companies could work towards a zoning exemption but the $5,000 to $10,000 fee is a barrier to many smaller businesses.

I understand the Mayor wants booming large industries akin to what was here when Lucent was prosperous but business has changed much since then.  Even successful businesses have fewer on site employees than ever between economy induced downsizing and telecommuting increases.

So while we wait for a savior, Haverhill keeps pushing away people who want to grow our city.  We also forget our lives are made of more than work and sleep.  We need places to shop and play.  And we need “those people” to help us do so.  There are more of “those people” around than you think!

Our family moved to Haverhill in 2002 and the lack of a decent recycling program should have been my first clue that something in town was amiss.  Trash removal is expensive.  Trash storage is expensive.  Capping a landfill is expensive – have we forgotten about this additional trash related cost? A mandatory recycling program combined with the new trash pickup rules limits the amount of trash added to landfills and makes people more aware of the waste they are generating.  This is a good thing.

I wish I lived on a planet where people did good things simply to do good things.  Instead I live on a planet filled with people who only do good things because there’s either something in it for them or they need to avoid negative consequences.  In the case of recycling and being more responsible about what is thrown away the negative consequence is a fine.

Our current recycling program has only been in effect for a couple of weeks and already a member of the City Council is looking to push Haverhill backwards into our pre-recycling days.  From the linked article:

Ryan said he believes the city’s new single-stream recycling program might be the cause behind the new changes in city ordinance. He said he’s planning to discuss if the city was able to afford the program to begin with and not “quietly stick it to the homeowner and business owner.”

“It’s a great program if you can afford it but we can’t afford it,” he said.

I don’t see how we can afford to not recycle and how allowing the community to continue to throw everything in the trash is cost effective long term.  We moved here from Brockton where we were allowed to put out two barrels of trash each week and as much recycle as we wanted each week.  If you went over your two barrels you could purchase special bags at the grocery stores to put your extra trash in.  To my knowledge these trash rules did not ruin anyone.

I see the fight about trash as more than just monetary.  Putting these rules in place forces people to look differently at their habits and culture.  This kind of introspection makes people uncomfortable.  To realize that for decades you’ve been a wasteful person who is actively harming the environment can be painful.  I’m not going to advocate for living completely off the grid as the Amish do – but I am going to advocate for being as responsible as possible for the choices we make and the items we procure and later dispose of.

I’m a realist and a bit selfish.  As people we have a fixed set of planetary resources that are stretched to meet the needs of an ever growing population.  As an American, I live in a horribly consumer centric and disposable society.  If consumers can’t grab it off a shelf, use it, and toss it into a barrel – then they don’t buy it.  This gratuitous wastefulness needs to stop.  The only way to curb the constant trash is through making people think with their pocketbooks over the problem.

Culturally, we don’t look very far into the future at the situation we’re passing down to future generations.  Look at the oil use or the national debt if you’d like examples of how obsessed we are with right now – to the detriment of next year or the next 10 years.  Trash is just another example of our shortsightedness but our community trash use is something we can change for the better with these rules.

Adopting the rules also adds to our city’s overall financial health through paying less to the trash companies and receiving monies for our recyclables.  Yes, change is uncomfortable and for some more expensive – but we all benefit from a cleaner, healthier and more responsible city.

As Haverhill prepares to spend $2 million from the State to put artificial turf in Haverhill Stadium they still haven’t solved the budget issue surrounding the caretaker’s salary.  In this article from the Eagle Tribune, questions are raised about the penny wise and pound foolish attitude of laying off the only person responsible for maintenance of the field at Haverhill Stadium.

I remember this discussion from the budget debates in June.  Haverhill Stadium is an oddly funded and maintained property.  There’s an independent commission to oversee the Stadium but the funding is supposed to be split between the City and the School Department because they are the chief users of the property but the School Department has a lot of weight in decisions regarding the property.  Somewhere along the way the City stopped paying its share of costs associated with the Stadium and because they use it for so many sporting events and for graduation, the School Department has picked up all the bills.

Now that budgeting is so painful there’s no more money to keep handling the City’s share.  Since the article doesn’t mention it – I’m guessing the State’s not going to pull the funding because of a missing caretaker.  This was the biggest issue raised by the School Committee during talks: will the lack of maintenance cause the State to revoke the monies?  Now that the answer seems to be “No.” or perhaps now that the funding is already in City coffers the maintenance staff can be safely eliminated.

The stadium will be lovely when the grand opening happens but like so many local attractions will decay rapidly.  I hope they manage to fix this issue but there are dozens of these little problems all over the City that no one is addressing.  We shall see if Tuesday’s City Council meeting results in anything more than a strongly worded letter and if this issue remains unresolved after the August 19 School Committee Meeting.

The three school committee members who partake of the health insurance benefit available to them have agreed to switch to the Value Option Plan.  Finally.

Although I need to wonder how much this (from the linked article above) factored into their decision:

Prior to the School Committee meeting, Fiorentini produced a legal opinion from City Solicitor William Cox that the mayor could switch the School Committee members into the new plan without their consent. In summary, the legal opinion says the city must make health insurance available to members of the City Council and School Committee that want it, but that the mayor has the authority to decide which health care plan is offered.

Nothing like making the change voluntarily now that they know their existing plan won’t be available forever.  And I really love how conscientious everyone is about making sure the details are available and that everyone is happy with the plan.  Do these folks realize the rest of the working world simply gets a notice that their insurance has been changed and to change doctors and plan accordingly.  The notice generally also outlines the increases in premiums, co-pays and prescription costs as well.

The whole health insurance situation is untenable and I wish as a society we had a better method of dealing with it but the reality of health insurance is that it is the most expensive benefit employers offer.  Companies across the country have made cuts to health care and people across the country have had to make adjustments to their lives because of those cuts.  As much as I sympathize with individuals who will face rising costs because of this – as a tax payer I am also a shareholder in the business of the City of Haverhill.

Things had just settled down after last year’s sick time scandals when we start this summer with two more pieces of poor press for our firefighters.  We have the EMTs who decided re-certification was a waste of their time and the firefighter spending 4 months in jail without anyone having a clue.  None of this helps the firefighters, their union or the overall public opinion of our town!

Then I find the official Haverhill Firefighter’s IAFF homepage and scrolling down there is a tasteless cartoon about the Mayor’s Office.  I get that there will be animosity between the Mayor’s office and various departments – especially at budget times – but that’s a cartoon best pinned to a wall in a locker room and not posted on the internet on the official union website.

Now we add controversy over moving the Fire Chief’s job out of civil service and add to that the Firefighter’s Union being one of the last holdouts on health care concessions and I’m having a really hard time seeing these guys in a sympathetic light.  We’ve also learned that the jailed firefighter seems to have gotten quite the break after he caused an accident in 2005.

Now we have this article about the Mayor looking to finally hire some new firefighters to fill positions and hopefully stop the overtime bleeding.  I’m disappointed but not surprised at the bitterness in the comments over the thought of adding a woman firefighter to the ranks.  Everyone assumes these females are not qualified firefighters.  Of course they may not want to accept positions here based on anticipated hostility in the work environment.

Our firefighters are people who generally only come into our lives in a moment of need and vulnerability.  Their poor press lately is not confidence building in this regard.

July 17th marks the first day of the 2010 Farmer’s Market season.  Come support local farmers and other businesses at GAR Park each Saturday from July 17 through October 30th.  Market hours are 9am – 1pm so there is plenty of time to browse.

According to the official Farmer’s Market Website this year musical entertainment will be provided through a grant from the Haverhill Cultural Council!

See you at the Farmer’s Market!

At Wednesday’s special meeting, the three finalists made their presentations, answered questions and provided resumes and other materials to the committee.  When the public interviews ended the committee cast but a single vote without any discussion.  The resulting ballots were 4 for Scully, 2 for Sarkisian and 1 for Gilman.  By the voting criteria established at the previous School Committee Meeting: James Scully is the Interim Superintendent in Haverhill.

I didn’t know much about James Scully but I did know exactly what I wanted for the students and our city in an interim superintendent and in this interview process.  I’m pretty sure we’ve gotten neither.

Haverhill needs a strong leader and yet we’ve brought more controversy than strength to the Superintendent’s office.  Mr Scully’s tenure as Superintendent in Lawrence is tainted in controversy.  He could point to his successful lawsuit against Lawrence to end that controversy but it was a settlement and not a trial – meaning Lawrence found it cheaper to pay him than to fight him.

As a retired principal of Consentino Middle School, Mr Scully mentioned many times the favorable opinions written of him in the press.  I decided to go looking for them and instead found allegations of impropriety, his experience with quadruple bypass, structural problems at Consentino with the roof and boilers, an article about a bear sighting near the school and debate over an extended day program.  I only found one supportive opinion piece and it defended his decisions in Lawrence – not Haverhill.

I don’t mean to be overly negative because Mr Scully did make many excellent points during the public portion of his interview.  He discussed publishing standards and using data and graphing to chart student progress and identify weak areas long before we all became slaves to the MCAS.  Mr Scully stressed the importance of parental and community involvement.  He stressed the importance of being ethical, professional and accountable.

Mr Scully said many times over the evening that his first priority would be to the students and that he would not break his promise to put them first.  I’m skeptical and I will certainly be watching!

During Thursday’s School Committee Meeting we learned that Mary Malone, principal at Consentino Middle School, would replace Dr O’Brien. The vote to confirm her appointment was 5-2.  The two dissenters surprised me but the comments made by Mr Magliocchetti infuriated me.

While I understood Mr Sierpina’s concerns regarding Ms Malone’s lack of Superintendent experience I believe this would be why she applied for an Assistant Superintendent position.  Its the age old question of how do you get a job without experience and how do you get experience without a job.  Ms Malone’s strong performance as Principal will serve her well as she steps into her new position and her intimate knowledge of the district and its people will prove to be an invaluable resource to both the Interim Superintendent and the permanent hire who follows.

Mr Magliocchetti’s comments regarding Ms Malone were shameful.  His entire problem with promoting her revolved around the difficulty involved with finding someone to replace her at Consentino.  The crux of his comments were that she had done such an excellent job as Principal that she should be punished for this by not being allowed to advance her career.  It will be equally hard to replace her should she decide there is no future in Haverhill for her – forcing her to apply outside the district to further her career.  Likewise, the principals Dr Buchanan did not name who are interviewing outside the district probably also feel their futures are uncertain and their support by the school committee is nonexistant.

Interestingly enough, the outgoing Superintendent of the Hamilton-Wenham district selected an Assistant Superintendent to serve under Dr Buchanan without the controversy and negativity that surrounds this process in Haverhill.  From the article:

The three finalists have been announced in the search for an interim superintendent of schools.  Of the nine candidates interviewed the Eagle Tribune has revealed the finalists:

They are: Karen Sarkisian, superintendent of Whittier Regional Vocational Technical High School for 18 years before retiring in 2008; James Scully, a former Lawrence superintendent who was principal of Consentino Middle School in Haverhill for five years before retiring in 2008; and Euthemia Gilman, head of the city’s Silver Hill Horace Mann Charter School.

I wish them luck when they are brought before the School Committee for public interviews on June 16th.  I’ll be in the audience for that meeting and encourage you all to come watch the process first hand or tune in and catch them on Channel 9.  Each candidate will have a 45 minute interview and the first candidate’s interview begins at 7:30.

The selection process generated a fair amount of controversy regarding the decision to grant an interview to Wilfredo Laboy. Again I am annoyed at the Eagle Tribune’s use of the word secret to describe the process:

A search committee of Haverhill school officials interviewed Laboy in secret yesterday. He and several other applicants for the job are being interviewed behind closed doors this week.

First, how secret can the meeting possibly be when its posted publicly that interviews will be conducted and the newspapermen are camped at the location watching the candidates come in and out?  Second, I really would like to present the staff of the Eagle Tribune with a thesaurus and ask them to consider these words when next describing a private interview or meeting: discreet, private, sequestered, exclusive, confidential, closed door, isolated, or secluded.  The English Language is rich as are the nuances of meaning even among synonyms.  Stretch yourselves and your writing and be mindful of the difference between denotation and connotation when doing so.  My sixth grade teacher imparted that lesson upon me and I’ve not forgotten it – neither should you.  Unless perhaps your purpose is to drum up controversy and suspicion needlessly in an attempt to sell more papers – to which I say shame on you as there is plenty of newsworthy material to be found without making things up.