Share This Page

Pittsburgh Public Schools officials — and the teachers union — don't get it

| Saturday, Feb. 1, 2014, 9:00 p.m.

Imagine some strange time warp, in which the captain of the Titanic decided to throw a line to the Lusitania, even as both ships were sinking. That's pretty much like the board of education of Pittsburgh Public Schools considering a partnership with the August Wilson Center for African American Culture.

Both are sinking ships. And events last week underscored the calamitous finances that have placed both in jeopardy. Pennsylvania Auditor General Eugene DePasquale announced in Pittsburgh that his office will audit the school district to help find ways to avoid bankruptcy, which could come as soon as 2016.

And Common Pleas Court Judge Lawrence O'Toole accepted the recommendation of the court-appointed conservator that the August Wilson Center be sold after finding no financial solution to the center's crushing debt. If there is a glimmer of hope, it comes from the judge's decision that no sale take place without a court order.

While emotional support for the center abounds, the prospect of the school board participating in a financial rescue is a staggering example of good intentions gone awry. When a weak swimmer tries to save a drowning friend, both might perish, as stronger swimmers remain on the shore, discouraged from attempting their own rescue.

And the school board has other problems, from turning away cash buyers for abandoned school buildings to refusing to close and consolidate underutilized schools. In December, Superintendent Linda Lane presented a plan to cut the district's doomsday deficit by cutting costs throughout the district, requiring hard choices for the politicians on the board.

Lane proposed closing as many as 10 schools, cleaning classrooms on a staggered schedule, using public transit for most students, shrinking the central staff, eliminating intramural sports and cutting many vacant positions. But the board failed its very first test, balking at the recommendation to close the smallest school in the district, which serves a mere 110 students.

And the teachers union, like the school board, doesn't appear to get it either. The district received a $40 million Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation grant four years ago to improve teaching here because the board and the union had shown they could work together. But that has ended.

What remains of the Gates money could now be yanked, along with millions in federal dollars, over what the district calls “performance indicators” and the union calls “cut scores.” The district would retrain teachers who scored less than 150 out of 300 possible points. The union fears teacher dismissals, even though most parents would ground their children for a score that dismal.

Compounding this problem is the presence of staff from the national American Federation of Teachers, using Pittsburgh to serve its national agenda without regard for the children of this city.

Auditor General DePasquale, a Pennsylvanian with local ties, should be welcomed with open arms and the operatives from the national teachers union should be told to go home, sent packing back to Washington or wherever. This is a town that settles its own problems.

Joseph Sabino Mistick, a lawyer, law professor and political analyst, lives in Squirrel Hill (SabinoMistick@aol.com).

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.