Take Advantage of School Choice

The following is a link to Kent Oyler's (the President of Greater Louisville Inc.) statement about the importance of public school parents engaging in the opportunity to choose their school during this time.  This is an incredible opportunity to influence your child's future and further, it is the greatest predictor of which schools are performing and which are lacking.

http://insiderlouisville.com/metro/education-community/kentoyler-school-selection-matters/?utm_source=Newsletter%20Subscribers&utm_campaign=80356ac405-Daily%20Insider&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_5ccd89012b-80356ac405-70807009

I will be publishing the results of those school choices once they are available to shed light on the best and worst performing schools as soon as the data is available.

Merry Christmas!

Mr. Mayor, I Voted For You Because You Are Not Ideological…

As my profile indicates, and as anyone who knows me personally will attest to, is I am conservative.  I am an active member of the Republican party and I don’t think I have ever voted for a Democrat in my life…until this last election cycle.  I voted for Mayor Fischer.  I voted for him because I believe he is a reasonable man and not ideological to the detriment of his community.  This is becoming more and more critical as we come closer to the final vote on the minimum wage ordinance.

Businesses across the county have universally said that nothing good will come from the minimum wage increase.  This is common sense.  If it is more costly for a business to operate in Jefferson County, they will go across the border to Indiana or Shelby County, etc.  It doesn’t mean that all will but if even a few do, the impact on jobs, revenue to the local government, and overall economic development in the city will be reversed from the recent gains we have enjoyed.  

Unfortunately, common sense is not applicable when you are a politician bought and paid for by labor unions who depend on the minimum wage increase to ripple across their entire labor structure to increase their dues and fatten their wallets.  Attica Scott is just the kind of politician I am referring to.  She turned her back so dramatically on her constituents that she lost her primary election as an incumbent.  Now that is a difficult task.  Over and over she has made it clear that her allegiance is with union labor, many times in direct conflict with economic development in the West End or common sense for that matter.  This is no more clear than in her staunch opposition to Walmart developing in the West End which would bring more jobs and development to her constituents.  

Mayor Fischer is a much more pragmatic politician.  This is clear in the thoughtful manner he has approached the minimum wage ordinance and his focus on economic development as a way to better all citizens of Louisville.  This is why I voted for him (in combination with my lack of confidence in my other option) and this is why all reasonable citizens of Louisville should contact him and encourage him to vote against this ordinance if it reaches his desk.  

The most recent evidence showing us that this ordinance is bad for the city is in the report released by the Mayor’s office at the request of Councilman Fleming.  See the Courier-Journal summary of this report here: http://insiderlouisville.com/metro/fischer-administration-delivers-minimum-wage-ordinance-reviews-clearing-way-vote/?utm_source=Newsletter+Subscribers&utm_campaign=d0d860c667-Daily+Insider&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_5ccd89012b-d0d860c667-70807009

The key takeaway is that it will cost the city at least an additional $700,000 in direct labor costs which does not include any lost revenue through job’s leaving the city.  Further, this does not account for the inevitable increase in unemployment for young or low-skilled workers.  I mentor a Freshman at Jeffersontown High School.  I was going to have a talk with him about a summer job in 2015 but if this bill passes, the likelihood of him getting that level of critical job skills at this point in his life will diminish.  

The Mayor is in a very difficult spot.  If he veto’s the ordinance, he will have to go against his local party.  If he supports the bill, he knows that jobs will be lost, the economic gains he has made will diminish, and he will be a less successful Mayor over the next 4 years.  I hope that anyone who is interested in killing this ordinance, Republican, Independent or Democrat, call the Mayor and let him know he has your support to do the right thing.  

Accountability (or the lack thereof) in the Jefferson County Public School System

There is a lack of accountability in the public school system which undermines the authority of the administration and creates a poor culture where under-performers are protected.  The tribunal process is one example of a broken system that desperately needs reform to refocus the system toward children and parents instead of teachers and administrators.  

Antoinette (Toni) Konz wrote a piece recently discussing the procedure in which teachers through principals can appeal termination decisions (http://www.wdrb.com/story/27490266/sunday-edition-fired-kentucky-educators-have-good-odds-in-getting-their-jobs-back).  The procedure includes a ‘tribunal’ consisting of ‘an active or retired teacher, an administrator and a lay person - none of whom reside in the county involved in the dispute’.  She also looked into the results of those tribunals.  In the analysis ranging from 2005-2010, over 70% of cases that go to a tribunal end up partially or completely reversing the decision of the Administration.  

Let us begin by asking what other industries in America has this kind of process when someone is terminated?  The answer is very few and almost all of them are union dominated industries (such as the Education industry).  This is a process advocated for by unions in order to protect even their least performing members.  For any other worker in any other industry, if your boss fires you, other than an Equal Opportunity Employment claim, the issue is over.  You are fired.  This is commonly referred to as ‘at will employment’ where an employee can come and go as they please and a boss can generally terminate someone without significant cause or reason.  The further you stray from this principle, the harder it is to hold leadership accountable for their subordinate’s performance.

The next question is what is the reasonable conclusion we can come to by looking at these results?  There are really only two conclusions.  The first is that the administrators are incompetent.  If the administration’s decisions are overturned over 70% of the time, you have to immediately assume they are incompetent.  I don’t believe that.  This would indicate that multiple Superintendents hired by different boards are all incompetent.  The likelihood of that is very low.  This brings me to the logical other conclusion, this process is rigged to protect poor performers. 

Finally, what is the financial impact of this process and how could that money better be allocated?  This process includes the tribunal members, attorneys for both sides, and an appeal process beyond that if either side is dissatisfied with the outcome.  Is this how we want to spend our money as a district?  Can’t we better allocate those funds to, I don’t know, help students learn something?

There are a couple practical results of this tribunal process.  First is the reluctance of Superintendents to take action because they are worried about a costly and difficult process that tends to side against them.  The far more egregious outcome is the lack of accountability this entire process creates.  Who is responsible for the performance of a teacher or principal?  After the tribunal reverses a decision, are they accountable for the results?  Answer: No.  They go away and the Superintendent has to deal with the outcome.  Further, the Superintendent’s job is on the line.  If they don’t perform, which is highly dependent on their principals and teachers, they can be terminated by the Board.  

The Board claims they want to increase accountability across the district.  Then they should make the repeal of the law perpetuating this process part of their legislative priorities.  We need to eliminate this process and limit teachers and principals to the same process all employees in other industries are subject to.  They can appeal a termination decision to the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission and that is it.  Otherwise, just like the rest of the United States, supervisors must have the ability to terminate people they feel are not performing and be held accountable for those decisions.  

3rd Open Letter to Mayor Fischer - Where's the Growth?

Anthony Piagentini

abpiagentini@gmail.com

February 16, 2014

Mayor Greg Fischer

Metro Hall

4th Floor

527 W. Jefferson Street

Louisville, KY 40202

Dear Mayor Fischer,

I would like to challenge statements you made in your last budget address as inaccurate and misleading.  Although I commend your focus on growth, your results have not been as effective as you indicated in your address to the Metro Council.  You said, “First and foremost, the economy is growing again.  A recent Brookings report said we were the fourth fastest growing metro economy in the United States, as it relates to job growth.”  Although I don’t doubt that a Brookings report said that, I don’t think it is irrelevant and inaccurate when you compare it to other reports.  

I performed a simple google search for the fastest growing cities in the United States.  On February 14th, 2014, Forbes published their list of the 20 fastest growing cities in the US.  Louisville did not rank at all on that list.  I also looked at USA Today’s top 10 fastest growing economies published on February 1st, 2014.  Louisville was not mentioned there either.  

I did finally stumble upon a report prepared for the United States Conference of Mayors as part of the 82nd Winter Meeting recently held in Washington, DC.  I will assume that even if you didn’t attend the meeting, you or your staff were able to read the report.  There are two areas in the report where Louisville are mentioned.  The first is the real GMP (Gross Metropolitan Product) annual percentage change.  We ranked 29th in that list.  What is concerning even with that rank is that we peaked at a growth rate of 3.8% in 2008 and it has declined since then with a projected 2.8% growth in 2014.  We are going in the wrong direction.  

The other list we are mentioned in is employment growth rates and total metro unemployment rates.  We are ranked 58th in that list.  Once again we are going in the wrong direction with employment growth of 2.3% in 2013 and projected 1.8% in 2014.  Further, the unemployment rate in the metro area is 7.1% putting us worse off than the national unemployment rate of 6.7% in February of 2014.  This is the most concerning statistic proving that your metro economy continues to underperform against the nation.  

The answer to this problem is relatively easy to fix.  Lower the tax burden of your citizenry.  Unfortunately I know this goes against your inclination since you are actively lobbying for laws that allow for new methods of raising taxes, such as through popular vote.  The data supporting this is in a Cato Institute report published in 2011.  The report shows that the only consistent explanation of why some local economies perform better than others over time has to do with the local citizenry’s tax burden.  For example, Louisville is only mentioned once in the entire report.  It is in a chart toward the end comparing the performance of Louisville to Indianapolis (the report selected paired cities in nearby states) in population, employment, and real personal income growth from 1980-2007.  Louisville was significantly outperformed in every category by Indianapolis.  The reason is simple, during that time period, Louisville averaged a 1.1% higher state and local tax rate as a percent of income compared to Indianapolis.  

Contrary to your statements last year, this economy is demonstrably underperforming.  Louisville has the ability to grow faster and more vibrantly than we have in recent history.  To unleash that growth, you need to make more structural changes to our budget and work with the state to reduce our combined state and local tax burden.  

I personally stand willing to help accomplish that.  Do you stand with me?

Sincerely yours,

Anthony Piagentini

2nd Open Letter to Mayor Fischer - Labor Budget Explosion

Anthony Piagentini

abpiagentini@gmail.com

February 16, 2014

Mayor Greg Fischer

Metro Hall

4th Floor

527 W. Jefferson Street

Louisville, KY 40202

Dear Mayor Fischer,

This is the second letter detailing problems with the current Louisville fiscal budget which I believe, increases our long-term fiscal risk.  Last week, my letter was introductory and only focused on one smaller line item in the budget, Codes and Regulations.  My questions in that letter were rhetorical and I did not expect a response.  This week’s letter begins to tackle a far more serious issue of increasing city labor costs and I would like a response from your office to the questions detailed below.

In your 2012-2013 budget address, you said, 

“After 17 months, we’ve reduced the size of government by about 100 people, largely through attrition. This is a start, but I have asked Chief Financial Officer Steve Rowland to put together a team and develop a strategic plan for using attrition to help eliminate the structural budget imbalance.”

In your 2013-2014 budget address, you similarly stated,

“We’ll see a yearly savings of about $1 million through the attrition that happened this year, when we chose not to automatically refill vacated positions. This is part of a long term trend. When the city and county merged, we had approximately 6,400 employees. We are now at about 5,400.”

Mr. Mayor, if these statements above are true, how has the salaries for ‘bi-weekly permanent employees’ gone up by 25% in 2 years?  It has gone from $149 million to $ 188 million in a 2 year timeframe.  Further, ‘wages for hourly permanent employees’ has gone up by 31% in that same period moving from $31 million in 2011-2012 to $41 million in 2013-2014.  

According to the US Census Bureau, population growth from 2010-2012 was only 1.3%.  In my first letter, I mentioned that labor force growth is only up 1.6% in a similar timeframe.  This would mean the cities labor costs are outpacing population and labor growth by a multiple of 15 (that is the lowest ratio using permanent employee cost growth and 1.6% labor force growth - using other numbers would have yielded an even higher ratio).  Put another way, your labor budget is outpacing the growth of Louisville by 1500%.  

Your statements in your budget address and the reality of your budgets are not congruous.  I would like a detailed explanation of the discrepancy between your statements around cutting the city’s workforce and the incredible rise in labor costs over the same timeframe.  I would like your response to answer the following questions:

What was the cause of this growth?

Why is it so disproportionate to Louisville’s population and labor growth?

How will this not put us at long-term fiscal risk (e.g. additional healthcare, retirement costs)?

Are there any areas you actually cut in the budget to offset these short or long-term costs?

What is the return on this labor investment and what has been the outcome of this growth in costs?

I once again reiterate my frustration that no media organization even attempts to hold your administration accountable for these discrepancies.  Their lack of attention to this level of detail shows either their complete bias toward your administration or their abdication of their responsibility as journalists.  

Again, I respectfully ask for a detailed response to this letter including answers to the above questions.  

Sincerely yours,

Anthony Piagentini

Open letter to Mayor Fischer, Feb. 17th, 2014 - Fiscal Mismanagement

Anthony Piagentini

abpiagentini@gmail.com

February 16, 2014

Mayor Greg Fischer

Metro Hall

4th Floor

527 W. Jefferson Street

Louisville, KY 40202

Dear Mayor Fischer,

This open letter to you will be one of many in which I detail the failure of your administration to properly manage the city budget of Louisville.  As a concerned citizen, I am aware that the average citizenry typically misses local abuses of power in favor of more scandalous episodes perpetrated by national politicians.  I believe you, like many local politicians before you, have taken the opportunity to mismanage Louisville’s budget to the detriment of it’s citizenry.  

I am further concerned about the complete lack of scrutiny your annual budgets receive even by the city’s renown local media.  For example, I tried googling any criticism of any budget you have put forward over your 3 years in office and I have yet to find a piece of substantive journalism that sufficiently pokes holes in your fiscal management.  Frankly, this is probably primarily due to the boring nature of budgetary discussions in media (they don’t exactly sell newspapers) but I would hope that honest journalists might help take up the cause of being the public’s investigator, no matter who the administration is or their bias in favor of it.

As an example of your failure, today I will focus on one line of your budget and that is the expenditure related to Codes and Regulations.  Although your 2013-2014 budget seems to be a stabilization from the 2012-2013 budget, since 2011, this line item has increased by 28%.  This is the department that one must navigate to get permits for construction, zone the city, manage specialty licenses, and enforce codes and ordinances.  

Although this is a necessary function of local government, it is also the agency typically most synonymous with stifling private sector growth through bureaucracy.  In that same period (January 2011 to November 2013), according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Louisville has only increased its total workforce by 1.4% and total output by approximately 6% (output was measured from 2011 to 2012 according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis).  Doesn’t this growth rate in this one line item seem disproportionately high compared to the growth in jobs or the local economy?  Further, when examining the department’s performance on LouieStat, they missed 5 objectives, didn’t measure at least two goals properly, and accomplished 2 goals.  That is a 22% success rate.  With a 28% increase in expenditure in 2 years, where is the return on investment?

Frankly Mr. Mayor, this is the smallest of your budget failures as future letters will document.  The greater issues are your personnel cost growth, healthcare cost growth, and debt expansion.  I again want to reiterate my hope that others will join with me in holding you and your administration accountable for failing to deliver on a stable metro budget.  Only by shining the light on this topic might we begin to right the ship that you have continued to take off course following a line of Democrat mayors who have clearly had no problem haphazardly spending our money.  

Sincerely yours,

Anthony Piagentini