In what world does it make sense to balance the budget for a public school system by cutting schools from the poorest neighborhoods with the worst performance scores and the highest at-risk student populations in the system?
In what world does it make sense to balance the budget for a public school system by instituting cuts at only half its schools, with the majority of the slashing affecting schools from the poorest neighborhoods with the worst performance scores and the highest at-risk student populations?
The very idea that an elected body charged with representing the educational needs of the community's children would intentionally work against its best interests is revolting, and would no doubt leave the public with a sick feeling in the pits of their collective stomachs. But this public school board has singled out the community's poorest schools as a source for trimming the fat from its budget and left the schools in the affluent areas untouched.
That, you good people of Lafayette, should be grounds for revolt.
In our progressively-minded city of Lafayette, where such a move by our school board should no doubt spark public outrage, we should be seeing protesters filling the school system's halls demanding the heads of each board member who approved such a reproachable set of cuts.
But that's not happening.
That very scenario has played out in our community, as recent as Monday, when the Lafayette Parish School Board bullishly pushed through its version of the school system's budget for the 2014-15 fiscal year, finally ending a six-month standoff with Superintendent Pat Cooper.
Those six months have consisted of 19 budget meetings and countless hours of disagreement between the board and Cooper, who has fought - and continues fighting - the board over its method of balancing the school system's $23.5 million deficit.
Photo by Robin May
Four of the six LPSB members responsible for the budget cuts targeting the school system's most disadvantaged students. In front are Tehmi Chassion (left) and Greg Awbrey. Behind them are Tommy Angelle (right) and board President Hunter Beasley.
In some circles Cooper has been painted the bad guy because of this prolonged fight with the board. But if there's ever been more proof against that characterization, it can be seen in the red lines found page after page in the budget passed by the board on Monday.
Those red lines amount to $6.3 million in cuts, all handed down by six board members: Tommy Angelle (District 2), Greg Awbrey (District 6), Mark Allen Babineaux (District 1), Hunter Beasley (District 8), Tehmi Chassion (District 4) and Rae Trahan (District 9).
These board members were presented with countless budget alternatives over the last six months, all offering the board options to avoid sweeping cuts. The biggest alternative to fill what ultimately became about a $6.8 million deficit after all the fat was trimmed called for using the school system's reserve, or "rainy day" fund, which rings in at $73.6 million. The board has a policy that requires enough of a reserve fund balance to cover all the school system's expenses for three months. Since that would only require $64.8 million in fund, the board had the option of using $8.8 million to plug the gaps in the budget.
But it would not do it.
Instead, it's elected to do it its way, despite the unquestionable harm it will impose on nearly all of the school system's disadvantaged students.
"This budget issue is not just about numbers in a report. Real lives will be affected tonight." - Erica Williams, a District 4 school board candidate running against Tehmi Chassion.
The board's decision to let the disadvantaged students bear the brunt of the budget cuts is illustrated in the employees/positions eliminated from certain schools in the district.
While the In-School Suspension Facilitator position was eliminated from all 44 schools in the district, the lone example of across-the-board cuts, the board has decided to shelter 22 of the school system's 44 schools from any further cuts.
Surprisingly, the schools freed from the cuts consist of the best and the most affluent schools of the system. That's not the case for the other 22 schools, the ones targeted by the board's cuts. These schools, for the most part, are not in Lafayette's nicer areas. The students of these schools are considered "at-risk." The student population is mostly poor, many from bad neighborhoods and broken families - families where a good education isn't always a top concern and the source of your next meal isn't guaranteed.
Of the 22 schools targeted by the board's cuts, 14 have at-risk populations of at least 75 percent. Thirteen of these schools also include student populations with at least 75 percent coming from low-income families. And to top it all off, of the 22 schools hand-picked by the board for cuts, there are 12 schools graded with D or F performance scores.
Even among the 22 schools included in the cuts, the board, again for unexplainable reasons, focused the majority of its budgetary slicing and dicing for the D and F schools; basically, the very schools with the most need, the ones that can use all the help they can get. Of the school board's nine political districts, it was District 4, represented by board member Tehmi Chassion, that took the hardest hit from the cuts. (We think it's critical you know that.)
District 4 is the school system's most at-risk district with the highest percentages of low-income and minority students. Yet, with the board's imposed cuts, District 4 lost five key positions from J.W. Faulk (F-rated), six from Acadian Middle (D-rated), 7.5 from Northside High and 17 at the N.P. Moss Preparatory Academy (F-rated).
Chassion is a Northside High graduate. He grew up in the district. He was educated in the district, and now he represents the district. He's also among the six board members implicated with using this year's budget to hurt his district more than any of the others.
While it's impossible to know Chassion's true motives (we have our suspicions) for knowingly hurting the district he represents, his challenger for the District 4 seat, Erica Williams, knows this: It's wrong.
"This budget issue is not just about numbers in a report. Real lives will be affected tonight," Williams told the board during Monday's meeting, perhaps an attempt at awakening Chassion's long-dormant conscience before he and his fellow board members issued final approval on their budget.
But, just like the mysterious lighting strike that cut power right before the board's vote Monday, Williams' plea was ignored and the vote was cast with an old-fashioned roll call.