Melissa Hammann: Half Day, Universal 4k: What's the Point

To: The Evansville School Board October 4, 2006

Cc: Heidi Carvin, Superintendent

Lou Havlik, 4K Committee Chair

The Evansville Observer

From: Melissa Hammann

Subject: Half-Day 5K, Universal 4K, What’s the point?

In 2002, full-day kindergarten was first offered in Evansville, with promises to continue offering a half-day program dependent on sufficient community demand. It was a baffling time for many of us parents bound by our naïve world of everyday financial management. We could not comprehend why the district doubled kindergarten staff salaries and benefits at a time of budget crisis, when even kindergarten round up was canceled. We were woefully ignorant of school funding formulas. On cat’s feet, our school district reached a crossroads between educationally sound decisions and those based on “show-me-the-revenue” mentality. I leave it to you to decide which path we continue on.

A record demand for the half-day kindergarten program in 2005 found the district turning away some students. In spite of the high enrollment in 2005, the administration reneged on the promise to the community. In March of this year, they recommended that the board eliminate the half-day kindergarten option in order to collect more state and local property tax revenue. A concerted effort by an outraged community citing educational and child-specific benefits convinced the board to save the half-day class this fall.

In a colossal show of hubris, prior to the board’s input, the administration told parents during kindergarten registration last spring; “Half-day kindergarten probably won’t be offered this fall.” Phone inquiries were similarly discouraged. It is no wonder that the current enrollment for the half-day class is only 12 after the record enrollment in 2005. I believe that lower community demand was artificially induced this year by these manipulations.

At the recent finance committee meeting it was decided once again to urge the Board to discontinue offering half-day kindergarten; “There is just a small number of parents who want this program and it is not wanted by the larger community.” Community members who have not chosen the half-day option for their child(ren) have said they support the choice and shouldn’t be characterized as “not wanting” it. It is almost amusing that the administration wishes to eradicate one program that “only a small number of parents want” while promoting another that is similarly disadvantaged (4-year-old kindergarten). The chuckling ends when I remember the common source of these apparently contradictory stances: tax revenue on the backs of our youngest, most vulnerable citizens.

I have done volumes of sound research to convince the administration that their plans for preschoolers in Evansville do not meet our community needs and expectations. I have extracted information from various sources, written reports, collated data and sent it all to the Board. I have encouraged the Board to seek out information, providing sources and data. The administration has not provided convincing evidence of the educational superiority of its planned program changes. Instead, it has provided the Board with the revenue incentives for following this course of action, as if that is the sole criteria in the Board’s decision making process. The Board is given incomplete data to support an agenda. The administration’s words and actions exacerbate ill will between working parents and homemakers when they characterize the champions of half-day kindergarten as an elite few. We simply want a kindergarten program that is flexible enough to meet a full spectrum of learning styles without ostracizing students for going home at lunch time.

The administration will have us believe that the timing of their planned half-day (5-year-old) kindergarten demise was completely coincidental with their promotion of 4-year-old kindergarten in our district. Had the Board been convinced to discontinue offering half-day kindergarten this fall, the increase in revenue from this action would have dovetailed perfectly with the 4K committee’s plan of full implementation in 2008-2009. The start-up costs to pilot and implement 4K would have been greatly reduced, perhaps even eliminated, at the cost of the half-day kindergarten program. However, if the state revenue contribution is doubled for the students switching to full-day kindergarten, the local property tax revenue contribution also must double for those 12 students. It’s a “double” whammy. The plain truth is that a 4K program would be self-supporting by the third full year due to the enormous potential revenue involved. Full funding projections for the program extrapolate to $630,000 in revenue, $210,000 from local property taxes. This is a lot of money for a program with low independent quality audit results and one which does not meet the expectations of the community for quality pre-school, per the 4K committee survey responses.

I can’t help but wonder if this is the same train of thought the previous administration used to rationalize the switch to full-day kindergarten during the 2002 budget crisis. “Think of all the extra revenue we will realize by this simple change!” That gravy train is gone and now they’re eyeing the 4-year-olds. Does anyone else see that there is a natural limit to this method of revenue enhancement?

There is a truth that came to light during these last 6 months of wrangling with the administration that I believe all parties can agree upon and should be addressed. There is a small group of students in our community who do not qualify for Head Start but whose parents cannot afford quality preschool for them. I would consider it a much more compassionate and efficient use of the district’s time and money to identify and meet the needs of these students.

Finally, to quote Mr. Woulfe, it’s a zero-sum game. When you add something over here, you have to get rid of something over there. Anybody who has endured any one of the excruciating School Board budget meetings knows this to be true. The message from the administration is loud and clear. “What program will be gutted next? If less than 15 students are enrolled, consider it targeted.” We are a growing, healthy school district. There is no reason to purchase a legacy for our children at the expense of educationally sound programming such as half-day kindergarten. Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,

Melissa Hammann