two accountability articles by P Schrag

[Peter Farruggio <pfarr@UCLINK4.BERKELEY.EDU>]

The ACLU has been representing a group of parents in California public
schools in their claim that the state has not provided their children in
poor schools with an equal opportunity to learn.  They have pointed to
decrepit physical conditions and  an overabundance of inexperienced
teachers as examples of how the state has allowed the inequity between poor
and affluent schools to persist and even worsen, despite the vigor of the
Califonia economy and the surplus of state revenues.  Sacramento Bee
columnist Peter Schrag has written two pieces about Republocrat governor
Gray Davis' vicious, scapegoating response to the lawsuit: blame and sue
the victims, the local school districts.

I forward these because I think we in the anti-high stakes movement should
try to make the "savage inequalities" argument of this lawsuit one of our
central arguments to the public, especially since it's the truth.

First, here's the URL for Schrag's Dec 6 column, and then below is the more
recent piece with full-text.

Pete Farruggio

Adequate schools: The state is also
                     accountable

                     By Peter Schrag
                     (Published Dec. 6, 2000)


http://www.capitolalert.com/voices/schrag/schrag_dec06-00.html

****************************************************************************************************************************************

http://www.capitolalert.com/voices/schrag/schrag_dec20-00.html
Gov. Davis to students: Let them eat
                     lawyers

                     By Peter Schrag
                     (Published Dec. 20, 2000)

                     Gov. Gray Davis' costly decision to sue 18 California
school districts, among
                     them Los Angeles, Long Beach, Fresno and Oakland,
makes clearer than
                     ever the bankruptcy of the state's claim that it is
providing adequate
                     educational resources for its neediest students. It
also underlines the hypocrisy
                     of state education policies in which everyone is
supposed to be accountable
                     except the state itself.

                     The suits, filed by the governor's high-priced
lawyers from the Los Angeles
                     firm of O'Melveny & Myers, come as cross-complaints
in a case brought
                     against the state by the American Civil Liberties
Union. The ACLU represents
                     more than 100 poor and minority students who, like
thousands of others, lack
                     trained teachers, and sometimes have no regular
teacher at all, have no books
                     and are forced to attend school in rundown buildings
-- some with stopped
                     and filthy toilets and/or unheated and often
overcrowded classrooms -- that
                     would be an embarrassment anywhere in the civilized
world. The districts are
                     those in which the ACLU's student plaintiffs go to
school.

                     But Davis says that's not his problem, and he's sent
his $325-an-hour lawyers
                     to drag those districts and lot of principals into
court to prove it. Not that the
                     state acknowledges the allegations of the students;
it only says that if the
                     allegations are true, the court should order the
districts to correct things.

                     But of course, the cross-complaint effectively
acknowledges the students'
                     allegations. If they were unfounded, Davis' lawyers
could easily prove it
                     without suing the districts. In essence, the state is
saying that that it's shocked,
                     shocked, to learn that these terrible things are
going on in California's public
                     schools.

                     Is this the way our education governor intends to
guarantee California's
                     children an adequate education? Is it the state's
position that every kid without
                     a desk or a set of books or usable toilets has to
find a lawyer, then file suit
                     before he or she can get relief? (Interestingly
enough, the cross-complaint
                     doesn't blame the districts for the lack of
credentialed teachers, suggesting that
                     the state seems to be acknowledging its
responsibility on that issue).

                     At one level, the state's legal strategy seems
transparent; if it can get some
                     court to order the districts to shape up -- or better
yet, get the districts,
                     fearing devastating legal costs, to surrender and
agree to some vague set of
                     remedies -- the governor could go back to court,
declare the problem solved
                     and have the case against the state dismissed.

                     At a more subtle level, this looks like fairly common
corporate strategy --
                     delay, run up the opponents' costs, sue some other
party. John Daum, the
                     lawyer who represents the governor, also represented
Exxon in the Exxon
                     Valdez oil spill case.

                     Early last year, the governor, defending his new
centralized testing and
                     accountability programs, was reported to have said
that local control has been
                     "an abject failure." Now the governor seems to be
saying that when the onus
                     threatens to fall on his doorstep, local control is
great. Given the state's
                     established constitutional responsibility for
providing adequate K-12
                     education, the state now appears to be exercising
that responsibility by, in
                     essence, suing itself.

                     If it's not settled soon, the cost -- to the state
and to the districts -- is likely to
                     run into the tens of millions of dollars, all of
which could be far better spent on
                     fixing up those classrooms, getting decent teachers
into all classrooms and
                     giving them the support they deserve.

                     Given the fact that some of the state's feistier
urban superintendents, who have
                     talked off and on about filing their own suit against
what they believe is the
                     state's failure to provide adequate resources to its
urban districts, are now
                     talking about filing a countercomplaint, the
governor's scorched-earth strategy
                     is even more counterproductive.

                     When the ACLU suit was filed, many state officials
expected it to lead to
                     negotiations and political, not court-imposed,
solutions. In essence what the
                     suit calls for is better state oversight of schools,
especially those serving its
                     poorest students. Given the costly bloodletting that
the governor's legal
                     response now threatens, it makes that course all the
more imperative.

                     Which puts the initiative squarely (and literally) in
the court of San Francisco
                     Superior Court Judge Peter Busch, himself a Davis
appointee, who's handling
                     the case.

                     In November, Busch rejected Daum's motion contending
that the ACLU was
                     suing the wrong people because it was the districts,
not the state, that are
                     responsible for the conditions complained of.

                     "That the state has chosen to carry out certain of
its obligations through local
                     school districts," he ruled, "does not absolve the
state of its ultimate
                     responsibility."

                     He also seemed to anticipate the tactic that the
governor is now using with his
                     suits against the districts. "If the state does not
have the legally required
                     oversight and management systems in place, the same
kind of problems would
                     be prone to recur elsewhere."

                     To prevent that bloodletting, Busch could now use his
authority to call in the
                     parties in this case, and urge them to negotiate a
settlement -- which is what
                     this suit is ultimately likely to lead to anyway.

                     It's the governor who's chosen to escalate this
fight. If he continues to resist, it
                     will at least be clear who would rather fight
students asking for a decent
                     education than create the oversight processes and
accept the responsibility
                     that he's trying to impose on everyone else.

                     Peter Schrag's column appears in The Bee on
Wednesdays. He can be
                     reached at Box 15779, Sacramento, CA, 95852-0779, or at
                     pschrag@sacbee.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the ARN-L list, send command SIGNOFF ARN-L
to LISTSERV@LISTS.CUA.EDU.