What are some of the things Oklahoma Public Schools are doing to ensure student safety and security? Before we answer this crucial question for our students and parents, I'd like to give a shout out about our Blanchard Lions wrestlers for their performance this weekend at the class 4A state championships. The Lions have officially added one more sport to its growing list of dynastic programs - Wrestling. Of the 32 class 4A wrestling teams, Tuttle was, as usual, crowned class 4A State Champion, but the Blanchard Lions placed 3rd, the highest placing ever by a Blanchard team. Individually, Zach Williams at 120 lbs. defeated a three-time state champion from Tuttle and became the reigning state champion at that weight. At heavyweight, Ryan Bracken also defeated a Tuttle wrestler, 2-1, to claim the heavy wt. title. At 106 lbs. Braeden Williams was crowned state runner-up, only losing to a Cascia Hall wrestler* in the finals. Jaxon Stratton was also a state runner-up at 152 lbs., only losing to a Heritage Hall wrestler* in the finals. Ian Plott placed 4th in the state at 126 lbs. with Josh Parks 138 lbs., winning matches - and several other wrestlers qualifying for state.
* Note - Heritage Hall High School was crowned class 4A State Runner Up, with only four wrestlers competing at the state tournament. Of course all four (the self-proclaimed four horsemen according to the Daily Oklahoman) were crowned state champions, as two beat Blanchard wrestlers in the finals. Many high school sports fans believe only the best athletes receive scholarships to private schools, and I think this evidence indicates this well kept secret.
Student Safety and Security - After the Columbine and Sandy Hook school catastrophes, many public schools began to re-examine their student safety policies and protection protocols, and determined what they could do better to ensure student safety. Some schools installed bullet-proof glass on exterior doors and windows, double-entry doors with the inside door locked at all times, metal detectors as in airport security and court houses, and hired gun-toting security guards (resource officers). Our own Oklahoma Legislature even passed a law allowing specific school employees the right to carry a concealed weapon. Public schools also routinely conduct "armed intruder" drills, so that all students and employees know what to do in an emergency. The only school safety measure which is somewhat controversial is that Oklahoma public schools can now legally arm teachers or administrators. If any Oklahoma Public School drafts a board policy, within the guidelines of law, it can allow specific school employees to be armed. So, we'd like to have the Blanchard community opinion of "Does our Blanchard School Board need a policy which allows specific employees to carry a weapon?" If you live in the Blanchard School District, or are a Blanchard parent, please call 405-485-3391 and provide your name and your yes or no opinion. Please, no one outside the district should call and voice your opinion, as you should call your own district office.
Sunday, February 25, 2018
Monday, February 19, 2018
Links to Small School Consolidation
Friends of Small and Rural Schools:
As we fight the battle against the privatization of our small schools, which includes school consolidation efforts, private school vouchers, rural charter and virtual schools, etc... - it is important to shine a bright light on those lawmakers who purport to support our public schools, but have something more sinister on their minds. As such, sometimes issues which our K-8 Nation ignores as consolidation or voucher issues, are in reality.. highly related to those entities which could harm all our public school students (my opinion only). A shining example of this connection appears on the outside to have nothing in common with the survival of our small schools, but lets examine it again:
Most small school supporters are keenly aware of Senator Bice's bill to consolidate small schools (outside of her Senate District) for schools with less than 200 students. We know that it would destroy our small school autonomy, so most small school supporters are against this bill. A result of passage of this bill could mean that the nearest school next door would rule the decision making for our small schools.
As many of you know, I've been fighting the equalization battle for our public school at the OSSAA for some time now (about 10 years). I don't believe any K-8 schools are members of the OSSAA, so I don't suppose many K-8 supporters would be on board for "leveling the playing field" between private and public school members of the OSSAA. I know that a few are, however, so I'll provide you the link between small school consolidation and "leveling the playing field" between privates and publics in the OSSAA:
As there are no K-8 members of the OSSAA, the OSSAA may have a vested financial interest in consolidating K-8 schools - If K-8 schools were consolidated with other schools, all students in all public schools would become OSSAA members, resulting in more member dues, more school play-offs, etc.., which would invariably result in more money for the OSSAA. (It's always about money... never students for the OSSAA, whether or not you may think its good or bad).
A couple weeks ago, I presented a private school classification rule change to the OSSAA (just to consider sending it out to a vote of the membership), and it was shot down by a vote of 12-2 to "not send it to a vote". Everything was on the up-and-up, until I was told something "off the record" by an anonymous source, which indicated that if I had included a clause which would include all schools, it would have passed with flying colors. Presumably, this would have meant that all schools should become members of the OSSAA, which means more money.
Only Senator Bice (among all state lawmakers) was present at the consideration meeting, who coincidentally is sponsoring the small school consolidation bill. As David Jackson introduced me as the presenter of the rule change under consideration, he looked to the back of the room (where Senator Bice had just stepped in) and introduced her as a VIP in attendance. At that moment, without "thinking first", I turned and said to Senator Bice: This issue is not about school consolidation, it's about "leveling the playing field" between private schools and public schools in the OSSAA". She then replied, jokingly "That's for next months meeting". My two board members sitting in the front row, did not know what the exchange was all about, so asked me on the way home, and I told them.
We will continue our battle against the forces of school consolidation efforts, vouchers, rural charter schools, etc... no matter where it takes us - whether it is at the OSSAA, OASA, or any other battleground. We must all work together!
As we fight the battle against the privatization of our small schools, which includes school consolidation efforts, private school vouchers, rural charter and virtual schools, etc... - it is important to shine a bright light on those lawmakers who purport to support our public schools, but have something more sinister on their minds. As such, sometimes issues which our K-8 Nation ignores as consolidation or voucher issues, are in reality.. highly related to those entities which could harm all our public school students (my opinion only). A shining example of this connection appears on the outside to have nothing in common with the survival of our small schools, but lets examine it again:
Most small school supporters are keenly aware of Senator Bice's bill to consolidate small schools (outside of her Senate District) for schools with less than 200 students. We know that it would destroy our small school autonomy, so most small school supporters are against this bill. A result of passage of this bill could mean that the nearest school next door would rule the decision making for our small schools.
As many of you know, I've been fighting the equalization battle for our public school at the OSSAA for some time now (about 10 years). I don't believe any K-8 schools are members of the OSSAA, so I don't suppose many K-8 supporters would be on board for "leveling the playing field" between private and public school members of the OSSAA. I know that a few are, however, so I'll provide you the link between small school consolidation and "leveling the playing field" between privates and publics in the OSSAA:
As there are no K-8 members of the OSSAA, the OSSAA may have a vested financial interest in consolidating K-8 schools - If K-8 schools were consolidated with other schools, all students in all public schools would become OSSAA members, resulting in more member dues, more school play-offs, etc.., which would invariably result in more money for the OSSAA. (It's always about money... never students for the OSSAA, whether or not you may think its good or bad).
A couple weeks ago, I presented a private school classification rule change to the OSSAA (just to consider sending it out to a vote of the membership), and it was shot down by a vote of 12-2 to "not send it to a vote". Everything was on the up-and-up, until I was told something "off the record" by an anonymous source, which indicated that if I had included a clause which would include all schools, it would have passed with flying colors. Presumably, this would have meant that all schools should become members of the OSSAA, which means more money.
Only Senator Bice (among all state lawmakers) was present at the consideration meeting, who coincidentally is sponsoring the small school consolidation bill. As David Jackson introduced me as the presenter of the rule change under consideration, he looked to the back of the room (where Senator Bice had just stepped in) and introduced her as a VIP in attendance. At that moment, without "thinking first", I turned and said to Senator Bice: This issue is not about school consolidation, it's about "leveling the playing field" between private schools and public schools in the OSSAA". She then replied, jokingly "That's for next months meeting". My two board members sitting in the front row, did not know what the exchange was all about, so asked me on the way home, and I told them.
We will continue our battle against the forces of school consolidation efforts, vouchers, rural charter schools, etc... no matter where it takes us - whether it is at the OSSAA, OASA, or any other battleground. We must all work together!
Monday, February 12, 2018
Excellence Personified - The Blanchard Lions
Our Blanchard Lions continue to display excellence in athletics in yet another sport.. wrestling. Our Lion wrestlers were just crowned class-4A State Runnerup in Dual-State over the weekend. It's the highest placing wrestling team ever in the history of Blanchard High School sports. Of course, the wrestlers themselves are primarily responsible for this exhibited superiority, but the coaches also play an important role in leadership. Our wrestling coaches, Tanner Harris and Nick Abbott, have both done a stellar job in preparing our student-athletes for competition this year. Our Blanchard wrestling program is now recognized among the sates best, due to our students, parents, and coaches - just as it is for many other athletic and academic programs.
Sunday, February 11, 2018
High School Public/Private Sports = NCAA Div.I / Div.II / Div.III Sports
The NCAA divides university sports into three divisions: NCAA Division I (D-1) is the highest level of intercollegiate athletics sanctioned. D-1 schools include the major collegiate athletic powers, with larger budgets, more elaborate facilities, and more athletic scholarships than Divisions II and III as well as many smaller schools committed to the highest level of intercollegiate competition. Division II is an intermediate-level division of competition in the NCAA. It provides an alternative to both the better-funded Division I schools which offer more scholarships and to the scholarship-free environment offered in Division III. Division III schools focus on providing students with athletic competition, and therefore provide no scholarships, as opposed to Division I schools which focus primarily on institution success. There are several Division II schools which enroll more students than Division I schools, just as there are many Division III schools which have more students than Division II schools - but the divisional differences are based primarily on institutional wealth and student financial assistance, so enrollment numbers play no part.
The critical differences in high school sports classifications in many states are beginning to mirror the differences at the NCAA level of competition. Public high schools cannot provide student financial assistance to students, but many private high schools can and do provide financial assistance including scholarships to students. Any public high school offers sports for the benefit of the kids, but many private high schools, like NCAA Division I schools, have sports for the benefit of the Institution.
Many public school supporters believe Oklahoma should re-classify high schools in the OSSAA according to student financial assistance offered by the schools. The current "enrollment-based" system of classification is not reliable for appropriate levels of high school competition in Oklahoma.
In 1987, I sat in the bleachers of Cameron Stadium in Lawton, Oklahoma, as the Aggies took on Carson-Newman Eagles of Jefferson City, Tennessee for the NAIA (Division II) National Championship. As the Cameron Aggies were securing their 30-2 victory in the waning moments of the game, the Cameron Fans were going wild in celebrating the win. At that particular moment as the clock wound down the final 30 seconds, a lone booming voice from behind me proclaimed "To be the best, you gotta beat the best!!! Aggies! and you ain't beat the best! Boomer! Sooner!" It was hilarious, as the loner was wearing an "O.U." sweatshirt and appeared to be inebriated. He was right, it's not as though the Cameron Aggies had just defeated the Oklahoma Sooners. Thank goodness for divisional football.
The critical differences in high school sports classifications in many states are beginning to mirror the differences at the NCAA level of competition. Public high schools cannot provide student financial assistance to students, but many private high schools can and do provide financial assistance including scholarships to students. Any public high school offers sports for the benefit of the kids, but many private high schools, like NCAA Division I schools, have sports for the benefit of the Institution.
Many public school supporters believe Oklahoma should re-classify high schools in the OSSAA according to student financial assistance offered by the schools. The current "enrollment-based" system of classification is not reliable for appropriate levels of high school competition in Oklahoma.
In 1987, I sat in the bleachers of Cameron Stadium in Lawton, Oklahoma, as the Aggies took on Carson-Newman Eagles of Jefferson City, Tennessee for the NAIA (Division II) National Championship. As the Cameron Aggies were securing their 30-2 victory in the waning moments of the game, the Cameron Fans were going wild in celebrating the win. At that particular moment as the clock wound down the final 30 seconds, a lone booming voice from behind me proclaimed "To be the best, you gotta beat the best!!! Aggies! and you ain't beat the best! Boomer! Sooner!" It was hilarious, as the loner was wearing an "O.U." sweatshirt and appeared to be inebriated. He was right, it's not as though the Cameron Aggies had just defeated the Oklahoma Sooners. Thank goodness for divisional football.
Friday, February 9, 2018
Public School Consolidation Bill - SB 920
Senate Bill 920 by Senator Stephanie Bice (R-OKC) would require school districts with an ADM of less than 200 students to consolidate administrative services with a contiguous school district or districts by July 1, 2020. There are currently 95 school districts, mostly K-8, which would automatically lose autonomy and fall under the authority of the nearest K-8 or K-12 school district if Bice's Bill becomes Law. It is important to keep in mind that Bice's Senate District includes mostly large metro schools and private schools such as Heritage Hall and Bishop McGuinness, so has no interest in schools with less than 200 students existing. She has repeatedly stated that her "constituents" (voters) want to consolidate schools, so she has a duty to consolidate. It does not matter to Senator Bice
Anyone reading this post may wonder why a public school official with a school which has over 2000 students, is concerned about a school consolidation bill which would not affect his district. My philosophy concerning our public schools is quoted in An Administrator's Guide - LEADING WITH INTEGRITY (Reflections on Legal, Moral, and Ethical Issues in School Administration) by Clarence G. Oliver, Jr., Ed.D. The oft-quoted message "Then They Came for Me" is credited to Martin Niemoller, a prominent Protestant pastor who spent 7 years in a German Concentration Camp before and during World War II. Here is that now famous message that causes us to think deeply about being concerned for the welfare of our fellowman:
"First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out -
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out -
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out -
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me -
and there was no one left to speak for me."
For me, this message means that one must always do what is right, even though it may result in personal risk - and even though those who are wronged may not be known to me. I believe this message encourages us to speak out on behalf of others, even though the affected may not be us. For me, in this case, even though the bill is to consolidate smaller schools than which I work, I will still speak out for those that it will directly affect. As we saw on the news the other night, the El Reno superintendent also believes in speaking out about SB 920.
Coincidentally, Senator Bice appeared at the OSSAA meeting on Wednesday to support the private schools in her district (BM and HH), and help prevent any "leveling of the playing field" for our public schools. She evidently has no constituents who support public schools either.
Anyone reading this post may wonder why a public school official with a school which has over 2000 students, is concerned about a school consolidation bill which would not affect his district. My philosophy concerning our public schools is quoted in An Administrator's Guide - LEADING WITH INTEGRITY (Reflections on Legal, Moral, and Ethical Issues in School Administration) by Clarence G. Oliver, Jr., Ed.D. The oft-quoted message "Then They Came for Me" is credited to Martin Niemoller, a prominent Protestant pastor who spent 7 years in a German Concentration Camp before and during World War II. Here is that now famous message that causes us to think deeply about being concerned for the welfare of our fellowman:
"First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out -
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out -
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out -
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me -
and there was no one left to speak for me."
For me, this message means that one must always do what is right, even though it may result in personal risk - and even though those who are wronged may not be known to me. I believe this message encourages us to speak out on behalf of others, even though the affected may not be us. For me, in this case, even though the bill is to consolidate smaller schools than which I work, I will still speak out for those that it will directly affect. As we saw on the news the other night, the El Reno superintendent also believes in speaking out about SB 920.
Coincidentally, Senator Bice appeared at the OSSAA meeting on Wednesday to support the private schools in her district (BM and HH), and help prevent any "leveling of the playing field" for our public schools. She evidently has no constituents who support public schools either.
Saturday, February 3, 2018
Ray Gomez
As a teacher and public school official for almost 40 years, I've had the opportunity to work with dozens of school boards and literally hundreds of school board members in three communities. I can honestly say that Ray Gomez was one of the best I ever worked for, as a board member of Blanchard Public Schools. He only cared about what he could do for kids - and never complained about teachers, coaches, or even administrators, and always had the greatest praise for all school employees. After Mr. Gomez left the school board, and I would see him around town, he would always say to me "Well, I see you've got 'em after you again... keep your head up, you're doing the right thing", referring to my ability to anger some people. It was the best encouragement I ever received. Ray passed away Friday night... and my eyes are becoming misty as I write this... Ray Gomez was one of the best friends anyone could ever hope for. I've only known Ray for about 10 years, but all those who knew him much longer said that he would do anything for anyone, even those he did not know. Like Will Rogers, Ray never met a man he didn't like, and I never met anyone who didn't like him. In the late 1950's Elvis Presley was asked by a reporter why some people didn't like him - and Elvis replied "I don't know, but even Jesus Christ had some who didn't like him, and they killed him." I'm quite sure there was no one who knew Ray Gomez that didn't like him, and I truly hope that Ray counted me as one of his friends. I pray that he did. I know that Ray, the quiet man he was, is now celebrating loudly and gleefully in heaven, and looking down on us all saying "retirement is great!" Ray never did retire, so now he's getting his much deserved rest. Thank you, Ray Gomez, for being our friend...
Friday, February 2, 2018
Step Up OK relies on regressive tax increases for revenue
The tax increases for funding the Step Up OK plan are mostly regressive, as it will affect middle and lower income Oklahomans much more than the wealthy and corporate. For example, the $1.50-per-pack cigarette tax increase will affect lower and middle income tax payers more so than the wealthy because all sales tax increases are regressive, so it is for the 6 cent increase on fuel as well. The "personal income tax" adjustment will also affect lower and middle income Oklahomans more than it will affect the wealthy as most Oklahomans who earn less than $50,000 annual salary will have a higher percentage of their income taxed than millionaires do. Also, the taxation of little cigars and a 10% tax on chewing tobacco will affect only the lower and middle class, not the wealthy or corporate.
The "simplification of individual income tax" is, in fact, an increase in the individual income tax rates, while the corporate income tax rates will stay the same or be reduced. It's no small wonder that the "oil and gas CEO's" (Oil Overlords) are supporting the tax increases in Step Up OK. As a friend believes: The oil and gas overlords are committed to doing their part for solving the state budget crisis and providing teachers a $5000 pay raise, as they have "pledged" $133 million to the Step Up OK plan. Under the "Plan", the overlords will see an oil and gas gross production tax increase from 2% to 4% on all their oil and gas wells, which will result in a $133 million windfall for the state to spend. Wow, how generous of them! But let's take a closer look at the Overlords' generosity, to analyze what it really means:
Oklahoma Statute Title 68 Section 1009(D) reads: On oil and gas sold at the time of production, the gross production tax shall be paid by the purchaser of such products, and such purchaser shall, and is hereby authorized to deduct in making settlements with the producer and/or royalty owner, the amount of tax so paid. ... provided, that in the settlement with the royalty owner such producer shall have the right to deduct the amount of such tax so paid on royalty oil or to deduct therefrom royalty oil equivalent in value at the time such as tax becomes due with the amount of tax paid...
What sounds like legalese BS is what the oil producers use to shaft the ignorant land and royalty owners, but you read it right - Oil Overlords have the right to deduct their GPT from rancher and farmer royalty owners checks! or at least what amount is settled on by the Overlord and the rancher. Most ranchers and farmers didn't even know they could negotiate the deducted fee, but even if they did, and tried to negotiate the paid GPT fee, it is very unlikely a rancher could negotiate anything less than the entire GPT. The Oil and Gas Overlords continue to perpetrate the canard - that they are in fact paying the GPT, when it is actually the ranchers and farmers who are shafted. (Note: The same oil and gas attorneys who wrote OS Title 68 Section 1009(D) are the negotiators which negotiate with ranchers on the GPT fees). I saw a real royalty check to a land owner from an oil company in the amount of $76.44. The provided check was originally for $78, but a $1.56 (2%) Gross Production fee was deducted, making the final amount $76.44. When the GPT increases to 4%, $3.12 will be deducted from the royalty check, making the land owners royalty only $74.88...
The bottom line is this: The oil overlords are supporting the Step Up OK plan because they will just pass the GPT increase on to the land owners. It will not take one thin dime from Larry or Harold. They will still be multi-billionaires, so they have given permission to their corporate cronies for Step Up OK to proceed. We can hear the violins playing as they sacrifice for Oklahoma. Many corporate legislators will vote for the tax increases on the middle class and it will pass with flying colors, as their corporate bosses have given the green flag. The corporate overlords and their corporate minions will be "heroes" once again... but our rancher and farmer land owners will pay the bill and should be the real heroes.
The "simplification of individual income tax" is, in fact, an increase in the individual income tax rates, while the corporate income tax rates will stay the same or be reduced. It's no small wonder that the "oil and gas CEO's" (Oil Overlords) are supporting the tax increases in Step Up OK. As a friend believes: The oil and gas overlords are committed to doing their part for solving the state budget crisis and providing teachers a $5000 pay raise, as they have "pledged" $133 million to the Step Up OK plan. Under the "Plan", the overlords will see an oil and gas gross production tax increase from 2% to 4% on all their oil and gas wells, which will result in a $133 million windfall for the state to spend. Wow, how generous of them! But let's take a closer look at the Overlords' generosity, to analyze what it really means:
Oklahoma Statute Title 68 Section 1009(D) reads: On oil and gas sold at the time of production, the gross production tax shall be paid by the purchaser of such products, and such purchaser shall, and is hereby authorized to deduct in making settlements with the producer and/or royalty owner, the amount of tax so paid. ... provided, that in the settlement with the royalty owner such producer shall have the right to deduct the amount of such tax so paid on royalty oil or to deduct therefrom royalty oil equivalent in value at the time such as tax becomes due with the amount of tax paid...
What sounds like legalese BS is what the oil producers use to shaft the ignorant land and royalty owners, but you read it right - Oil Overlords have the right to deduct their GPT from rancher and farmer royalty owners checks! or at least what amount is settled on by the Overlord and the rancher. Most ranchers and farmers didn't even know they could negotiate the deducted fee, but even if they did, and tried to negotiate the paid GPT fee, it is very unlikely a rancher could negotiate anything less than the entire GPT. The Oil and Gas Overlords continue to perpetrate the canard - that they are in fact paying the GPT, when it is actually the ranchers and farmers who are shafted. (Note: The same oil and gas attorneys who wrote OS Title 68 Section 1009(D) are the negotiators which negotiate with ranchers on the GPT fees). I saw a real royalty check to a land owner from an oil company in the amount of $76.44. The provided check was originally for $78, but a $1.56 (2%) Gross Production fee was deducted, making the final amount $76.44. When the GPT increases to 4%, $3.12 will be deducted from the royalty check, making the land owners royalty only $74.88...
The bottom line is this: The oil overlords are supporting the Step Up OK plan because they will just pass the GPT increase on to the land owners. It will not take one thin dime from Larry or Harold. They will still be multi-billionaires, so they have given permission to their corporate cronies for Step Up OK to proceed. We can hear the violins playing as they sacrifice for Oklahoma. Many corporate legislators will vote for the tax increases on the middle class and it will pass with flying colors, as their corporate bosses have given the green flag. The corporate overlords and their corporate minions will be "heroes" once again... but our rancher and farmer land owners will pay the bill and should be the real heroes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)