Jonathan Kantrowitz

By Jon Pelto from Wait, What

Governor Malloy’s plan would have taxpayers paying an additional $2,600 for each of Connecticut’s 6,000 charter schools students and $150 for each of the 222,000 students in Connecticut’s poorest and lowest performing schools

No really, that is the impact of the Governor’s “Bold” funding initiative.

Over the past few days, Governor Dannel Malloy has held a series of press conferences to maximize attention for his education initiatives. Today he will speak to a joint session of the Connecticut General Assembly and proclaim this – the Year of Education in Connecticut.

Governor Malloy’s Plan includes:

$50 Million more for the ECS (Educational Cost Sharing) Formula with 75% of that money going to the 30 poorest school districts.

$20 million more to dramatically increase funding for Connecticut’s existing charter schools while authorizing the creation of five new charter schools.

$4 million for 500 new early childhood education slots, $3 million for increasing professional development programs for early childhood education providers and $5 million to create a statewide “Tiered Quality Rating and Improvement System” so that parents can get more information about the quality of early childhood programs in their area.

And $25 million over the next two years to “transform” 25 district schools by setting up a “Commissioner’s Network where low performing schools would voluntarily participate and allow the state to take over their schools or help them partner with universities or other regional education centers to implement turnaround interventions.”

In addition the Governor will propose efforts to increase the quality of Connecticut’s teachers by mandating that a student must have a grade point average of at least 3.3 (B+) to get into a Connecticut teacher education program. He will also call for setting up a new teacher certification process that will make it easier for teachers from outside of Connecticut to get jobs in the state. If the B+ requirement was implemented, a recent CTMirror article reported that more than half of those attending Central Connecticut State University to become teachers would have been turned away.

The core of the Governor’s funding proposal is the additional funds for district schools and charter schools in the state.

Of the $50 million in new ECS funding, $39.5 million will go to the poorer communities. However, those are the same communities that, under Malloy’s plan, will have to transfer $1,000 from their local budget to the charter school in their community for every charter school student. This means that $6 million of the new funds will be transferred to the local charter school.

Once the transfer to the charter school is made, the 30 poorest districts will then be sharing $33.5 million in new education funds. Since those 30 districts educate 222,000 students, the net increase in per student funding will be $150.

Meanwhile, the additional money going to the existing charter schools (directly from the state and from the required local district transfer) will mean that each of the 6,000 charter school students will receive a net increase of $2,600 in funding.

We’ll learn more about the Governor’s “Bold” Year of Education Initiatives later today.

The State of Connecticut’s lawyers are fighting all-out war against 10 Connecticut school districts – which are part of the State of Connecticut! ONE OF WHICH, BRIDGEPORT, IS ACTUALLY BEING RUN BY THE STATE!

Another defendant is Stamford, Governor Malloy’s hometown, from where he was an enthusiastic supporter of the lawsuit when it was filed! Read all about it here.

Meanwhile, Malloy want to take money from these school districts and give it to charter schools?

In late 2005, Connecticut Coalition for Justice in Education Funding, representing the school districts of Bridgeport, Danbury, Hartford, New Britain, New London, Norwich, Plainfield, Stamford, Waterford, and Windham, filed suit against the state for its failure to adequately and equitably fund the public schools. In 2010, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled that under the Connecticut constitution all children are entitled to a quality (adequate) education and the state must pay for it. That landmark pretrial victory for schoolchildren allowed CCJEF v. Rell to proceed to trial on the merits of plaintiffs’ adequacy and equity claims. The case is now in the discovery phase, with trial scheduled for July 2014.

As part of the discovery process, lawyers for the state have issued subpoenas to the ten school districts, asking for documents to be produced. That is normal procedure in cases like this. What isn’t normal is the extent of the request.

The scope of the identical subpoenas is massive and unprecedented,” says Dianne Kaplan deVries, CCJEF’s Project Director. “The 46 separate requests contained therein cover all facets of school district operations: finance, personnel, curriculum and instruction, pupil support services, instructional technology and materials, student outcomes, and facilities. No district could be expected to comply with such an enormously onerous production order.”

“More than half of the 46 requests are couched in vague and far-reaching language,” continues deVries, “with the state almost always demanding 10 years of data and every related piece of paper, draft, memo, or email that was ever generated. Guess they want to shut down school operations in the midst of peak budget season for school districts, their municipalities, and their collective bargaining units, and to bring instructional supervision to a screeching halt less than a month before the state assessments are to be administered.”

CCJEF President Frank Carrano calls the stateís subpoenas a clear example of harassment: “In any litigation, one fully expects the plaintiff parties to get subpoenaed for the collection of pertinent facts directly related to the case. But these subpoenas go far beyond that. They constitute a punitive action brought to intimidate school communities that have the audacity to have finally drawn a line in the sand about the stateís failure to adequately and equitably fund their public schools at a level that ensures that every Connecticut PK-12 student has equal educational opportunity. Every school district in this state ought to be standing up at this time and saying to the Governor and legislature, ‘Enough is enough! Fund our schools, and stop pushing the burden off onto our municipalities and their property taxpayers.’ Would all 166 districts then get subpoenaed? And does the state now intend to similarly punish the dozens of other communities that are members of CCJEF?”

“Moreover,” adds Carrano, “there’s irony here, in that these subpoenas and their massive and duplicative reporting burden come just at a time that Governor Malloy has announced that reducing state paperwork and reporting mandates on school districts is a critical part of his education reform effort.”

At least one small district has informed CCJEF that it has absolutely zero capacity to respond to this subpoena, given the peak crunch-time of the school year and the fact that there are less than a handful of senior people left at central office because those jobs were cut over the past several years to save teachersí jobs and preserve reasonable class sizes. A top official from one of the larger districts, in an email to CCJEF, said: “This request, as written, will effectively divert more than half of this district’s central office capacity to support our schools for at least 30 days. The capacity of this district’s leadership to promote the well-being of our students will be severely impaired by overseeing the production, duplication, and review of these documents, in an environment where we are already woefully understaffed. It is morally imperative that this request is substantially narrowed for the sake of our students’ educational health.” Such responses are representative of the subpoenaed districts’ dismay at this action by the state.

Among the other small and mid-sized districts, most superintendents conservatively estimate that answering the subpoena as it is currently written is likely to require between 550 and 1600 hours of effort, at an approximate cost ranging from $35,000 to $85,000; and that even so, they will not be able to fully retrieve the vast amount of decade-old information being requested.

The largest districts subpoenaed are still trying to tabulate estimates on effort and labor costs within systems that have endured years of serious budget struggles, undertaken major restructurings of their school configurations and other significant reform efforts, and experienced a high percentage of senior staff turnover that has resulted in a loss of “historical memory” key to recovering 10 years of records that comprehensively span district operations.

1. I eat some soy foods, but don’t use soy supplements:

Soy foods good, soy supplements not so good?

Soy isoflavone supplements did not decrease breast cancer cell proliferation in a randomized clinical trial, according to a study published in Cancer Prevention Research, a journal of the American Association for Cancer Research. Although soy-based foods appear to have a protective effect, we are not seeing the same effect with supplementation using isolated components of soy. Beta-carotene and selenium supplementation have also been shown to lack benefit in lung cancer prevention studies.

But I do continue to take several vitamins and supplements:

Regular use of vitamin and mineral supplements could reduce the risk of colon cancer

2. After two skin cancers, and several pre-cancerous growths, I am a big fan of sunscreen. But I also have eczema I wonder if some people may be overdoing it. Or is taking Vitamin D the answer?

Sunshine may help to prevent allergies and eczema

Increased exposure to sunlight may reduce the risk of both food allergies and eczema in children, according to a new scientific study published this week.

3. I have started to drink coffee for the first time in my life, mainly to enhance athletic performance, but there do seem to be some side benefits: (and 4 strong cups of white tea almost daily should help as well):

Caffeine consumption = decreased risk of liver disease

4. I’m good on fish oil and green (actually white – same difference) tea, but have a hard time lowering carbs: ( I don’t feel full w/o them and don’t have a lot of alternatives readily available.)

Triglyceride levels predict stroke risk in postmenopausal women

A new study by researchers at NYU Langone Medical Center and colleagues found that traditional risk factors for stroke – such as high cholesterol – are not as accurate at predicting risk in postmenopausal women as previously thought. Instead, researchers say doctors should refocus their attention on triglyceride levels to determine which women are at highest risk of suffering a devastating and potentially fatal cardiovascular event. “We’ve always believed that total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol levels were the most important biomarkers for identifying stroke risk, but this study gives us strong evidence to question that approach,” Dr. Berger said.

To lower triglyceride levels:

1. lower your carbohydrate intake
2. fish oil (Omega 3)
3. green tea

5. I’ve never had a massage – Maybe I should?

Massage reduces inflammation following strenuous exercise

Most athletes can testify to the pain-relieving, recovery-promoting effects of massage. Now there’s a scientific basis that supports booking a session with a massage therapist: On the cellular level massage reduces inflammation and promotes the growth of new mitochondria in skeletal muscle.

6. What else is good for me?

A. Exercise
Vigorous exercise improves prostate cancer recovery prospects

B Statins
Statin Effects in Women Versus Men

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of statins in decreasing cardiovascular events in women and men.

Background: Published data reviews have suggested that statins might not be as effective in women as in men in decreasing cardiovascular events.

Results: The benefit of statins was statistically significant in both sexes, regardless of the type of control, baseline risk, or type of endpoint and in both primary and secondary prevention. All-cause mortality was also lower with statin therapy both in women and men without significant interaction by sex.

C. Dark Chocolate

Chocolate Consumption Reduces Risk of Stroke in Women

Ample evidence indicates that chocolate may have beneficial effects on the cardiovascular system. Chocolate consumption has been shown to reduce systolic and diastolic blood pressure in short-term randomized feeding trials (1), and has been demonstrated to improve endothelial and platelet function and to ameliorate insulin resistance (2). Moreover, flavonoids in chocolate possess strong antioxidant activity and can suppress oxidation of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol.

In the present study, only women in the highest quartile of chocolate consumption (median 66.5 g/week) had a significantly reduced risk of stroke, suggesting that higher intakes are necessary for a potential protective effect. The reason for the stronger association observed for hemorrhagic stroke than for cerebral infarction is unclear.

In summary, results from this cohort of women suggest that a high chocolate consumption is associated with a lower risk of stroke.

D. Not consuming diet soft drinks

Are diet soft drinks bad for you?

Individuals who drink diet soft drinks on a daily basis may be at increased risk of suffering vascular events such as stroke, heart attack, and vascular death. . However, in contrast, they found that regular soft drink consumption and a more moderate intake of diet soft drinks do not appear to be linked to a higher risk of vascular events.

Those who drank diet soft drinks daily were 43 percent more likely to have suffered a vascular event than those who drank none, after taking into account pre-existing vascular conditions such as metabolic syndrome, diabetes and high blood pressure. Light diet soft drink users, i.e. those who drank between one a month and six a week, and those who chose regular soft drinks were not more likely to suffer vascular events.

E. Alcohol

I rarely have more than one or two drinks (only at weddings, bar mitzvahs, my own birthday parties) and I don’t think I’ve exceeded five drinks more than once every two or three years, so I guess I’m OK:

Alcohol and your heart: Friend or foe?

“If someone binge drinks even once a month, any health benefits from light to moderate drinking disappear.” Binge drinking is defined more than four drinks on one occasion for women, and more than five for men.

F. But, I don’t drink milk. I guess I should!

A glass of milk a day could benefit your brain

Researchers found that adults with higher intakes of milk and milk products scored significantly higher on memory and other brain function tests than those who drank little to no milk. Milk drinkers were five times less likely to “fail” the test, compared to non milk drinkers.

7. I’ve started to take grape seed extract after reading this:

Grape seed extract kills head and neck cancer cells, leaves healthy cells unharmed

Nearly 12,000 people will die of head and neck cancer in the United States this year and worldwide cases will exceed half a million.

A study published this week in the journal Carcinogenesis shows that in both cell lines and mouse models, grape seed extract (GSE) kills head and neck squamous cell carcinoma cells, while leaving healthy cells unharmed.

“It’s a rather dramatic effect,” says Rajesh Agarwal, PhD, investigator at the University of Colorado Cancer Center and professor at the Skaggs School of Pharmaceutical Sciences.

Note: Here’s more from Wkipedia:

Human case reports and results from laboratory and animal studies provide preliminary evidence that grape seed extract may affect heart diseases such as high blood pressure and high cholesterol.[1] By limiting lipid oxidation, phenolics in grape seeds may reduce risk of heart disease, such as by inhibiting platelet aggregation and reducing inflammation.[2] While such studies are promising, more research including long-term studies in humans is needed to confirm initial findings.

A polyphenol contained in grape seeds is resveratrol, which may interfere with cancer cell growth and proliferation, as well as induce apoptosis, among other potential chemopreventive effects.[3][4]

Preliminary research shows that grape seed extract may have other possible anti-disease properties, such as in laboratory models of
• wound healing —- grape seed proanthocyanidins induced vascular endothelial growth factor and accelerated healing of injured skin in mice[5]
• tooth decay — seed phenolics may inhibit oral sugar metabolism and retard growth of certain bacteria that cause dental caries[6]
• osteoporosis — grape seed extracts enhanced bone density and strength in experimental animals[7]
• skin cancer — grape seed proanthocyanidins decreased tumor numbers and reduced the malignancy of papillomas[8]
• ultraviolet damage to skin -— dietary proanthocyanidins may protect against carcinogenesis and provide supplementation for sunscreen protection[9]
• anti-viral[10][11]

and from the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine

• Studies have found that some compounds of grape seed extract may be effective in relieving symptoms of chronic venous insufficiency (when veins have problems sending blood from the legs back to the heart) and reducing edema (swelling) after an injury or surgery.
• Small randomized trials have found beneficial effects of grape seed extract for diabetic retinopathy (an eye problem caused by diabetes) and for vascular fragility (weakness in small blood vessels). Larger trials are needed to confirm these findings.
• Grape seed extract contains antioxidants, which help prevent cell damage caused by free radicals (highly reactive molecules that can damage cell function). Preliminary studies have shown some beneficial antioxidant effects; however, more research is needed.
• A study funded by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) found that grape seed extract did not reduce the hardening of breast tissue that can occur after radiation therapy for breast cancer.
• NCI is also funding studies to evaluate whether grape seed extract is effective in preventing breast cancer in postmenopausal women and prostate cancer.
• NCCAM is studying whether the action of grape seed extract and its components may benefit the heart or help prevent cognitive decline, Alzheimer’s disease, and other brain disorders. Another study is investigating the effects of grape seed extract on colon cancer.

by Jon Pelto, from Wait, What

According to a published report in the Connecticut Post, the “Education Reform Plan” that Governor Malloy will announce later this week will include Commissioner of Education Stephan Pryor’s plan to give charter schools more public funds including money that will be shifted from helping Connecticut’s poorest urban districts. The primary beneficiary of this move will likely be Achievement First, the large Charter School Management Company that has 9 schools in Connecticut. And Ironic development considering Stefan Pryor helped create Achievement First and has served as one of its Directors until he resigned to accept Malloy’s invitation to become Connecticut’s Education Commissioner.

Details about the plan remain vague, but it would appear that Governor Malloy has decided to side with the charter schools and begin the “money follows the child” system in which scarce dollars used to help pay for education in existing school districts would be transferred to the charter schools.

The report is the Governor will “increase per-pupil funding for charter schools from $9,400 to $12,000” and that at least $1,000 per-pupil would be a transferred directly for the resource poor urban districts to the big-time donor supported charter schools that have recruited students from their area.

The Connecticut Post (see link below) claims that this would be the first time local districts would be transferring money to charter schools in their towns. The paper notes that “for districts like Bridgeport, which sends about 1,400 students to charter school, the cost would be $1.4 million annually.”

While that loss would be a major blow to the Bridgeport Public School System, the paper’s claim that charter schools don’t get any funds from local districts is blatantly false although the “untruth” has been consistently used by Achievement First and other charter school managers in their battle to get more taxpayer funds.

For example, the City of Hartford paid $1.5 million to help renovate the old school building that Achievement First – The Hartford Academy moved into. In addition, Hartford pays Achievement First $500 a year for each Hartford student who attends Achievement First – Hartford Academy (and that is on top of the grant Achievement First gets from the state of Connecticut). Hartford also provided Achievement First with a “one-time payment” of $400,000 to “cover costs associated with the operation of the school”.

As Achievement First has expanded, the cost to the City of Hartford has also gone up. According to one estimate Hartford now provides Achievement First with $2.35 million a year, money that could be helping Hartford overcome the existing challenges that face its schools.

Meanwhile, while Achievement First cries poverty, they seem to skip over the fact that the state of Connecticut gave Achievement First a $24 million grant to help build the permanent home of the Amistad Academy, which opened last year. It was the first grant of its kind to a charter school in Connecticut and will end up costing Connecticut taxpayers well over $35 million to pay back the bonds and interest for that grant.

Apparently Governor Malloy’s new plan not only over looks these existing taxpayer-funded subsidies but he is calling for significantly more money to be given to Achievement First and other charter schools.

According to the CT Post article, the number of charter schools allowed in the state would increase from 17 to 22 including some type of incentive that would reward local school districts to setting up separate charter schools within their district.

Of course, that overlooks one of the major problems and that is how does a publicly elected municipal board of education legally allow a charter school to be set up in its district when that charter school doesn’t even allow a local elected board to citizens to oversee it.

Achievement First traditionally claims that they need and deserve exactly the same amount of money that public district schools receive. But the fact is that they don’t have unionized faculty and staff so they can pay less…and yet these same teachers are put into the state’s teacher retirement system which will cost Connecticut taxpayers tens of millions of extra dollars in the years to come.

For more information on the breaking story see http://www.ctpost.com/news/article/Charter-schools-to-get-boost-under-Malloy-plan-3057442.php#ixzz1lcWikeVR
NEWS FLASH: So it begins – Malloy Plans to Shift More Public Funds to Charter Schools
by jonpelto
According to a published report in the Connecticut Post, the “Education Reform Plan” that Governor Malloy will announce later this week will include Commissioner of Education Stephan Pryor’s plan to give charter schools more public funds including money that will be shifted from helping Connecticut’s poorest urban districts. The primary beneficiary of this move will likely be Achievement First, the large Charter School Management Company that has 9 schools in Connecticut. And Ironic development considering Stefan Pryor helped create Achievement First and has served as one of its Directors until he resigned to accept Malloy’s invitation to become Connecticut’s Education Commissioner.

Details about the plan remain vague, but it would appear that Governor Malloy has decided to side with the charter schools and begin the “money follows the child” system in which scarce dollars used to help pay for education in existing school districts would be transferred to the charter schools.

The report is the Governor will “increase per-pupil funding for charter schools from $9,400 to $12,000” and that at least $1,000 per-pupil would be a transferred directly for the resource poor urban districts to the big-time donor supported charter schools that have recruited students from their area.

The Connecticut Post (see link below) claims that this would be the first time local districts would be transferring money to charter schools in their towns. The paper notes that “for districts like Bridgeport, which sends about 1,400 students to charter school, the cost would be $1.4 million annually.”

While that loss would be a major blow to the Bridgeport Public School System, the paper’s claim that charter schools don’t get any funds from local districts is blatantly false although the “untruth” has been consistently used by Achievement First and other charter school managers in their battle to get more taxpayer funds.

For example, the City of Hartford paid $1.5 million to help renovate the old school building that Achievement First – The Hartford Academy moved into. In addition, Hartford pays Achievement First $500 a year for each Hartford student who attends Achievement First – Hartford Academy (and that is on top of the grant Achievement First gets from the state of Connecticut). Hartford also provided Achievement First with a “one-time payment” of $400,000 to “cover costs associated with the operation of the school”.

As Achievement First has expanded, the cost to the City of Hartford has also gone up. According to one estimate Hartford now provides Achievement First with $2.35 million a year, money that could be helping Hartford overcome the existing challenges that face its schools.

Meanwhile, while Achievement First cries poverty, they seem to skip over the fact that the state of Connecticut gave Achievement First a $24 million grant to help build the permanent home of the Amistad Academy, which opened last year. It was the first grant of its kind to a charter school in Connecticut and will end up costing Connecticut taxpayers well over $35 million to pay back the bonds and interest for that grant.

Apparently Governor Malloy’s new plan not only over looks these existing taxpayer-funded subsidies but he is calling for significantly more money to be given to Achievement First and other charter schools.

According to the CT Post article, the number of charter schools allowed in the state would increase from 17 to 22 including some type of incentive that would reward local school districts to setting up separate charter schools within their district.

Of course, that overlooks one of the major problems and that is how does a publicly elected municipal board of education legally allow a charter school to be set up in its district when that charter school doesn’t even allow a local elected board to citizens to oversee it.

Achievement First traditionally claims that they need and deserve exactly the same amount of money that public district schools receive. But the fact is that they don’t have unionized faculty and staff so they can pay less…and yet these same teachers are put into the state’s teacher retirement system which will cost Connecticut taxpayers tens of millions of extra dollars in the years to come.

1. My son has a new venture, the magazine Great Restaurants of Fairfield, Westchester, & the Hudson Valley. Go on over to the Facebook page for lots of great restaurant info, and if you “like” it, that would be great.

2. I have updated my comprehensive restaurant listings for Bridgeport, Stratford, Westport, Wilton, and Shelton. Listings for every other town In Fairfield County are also available. Check them out – great for bookmarking!

3. Not to be missed is my new comprehensive listing of restaurants for sale in the area - many actually identified with pictures and many more easily identifiable.

Sponsored by Governor Dannel P. Malloy,
Attorney General George Jepsen
and the Connecticut Department of Banking

Thursday, March 29, 2012
10:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Webster Bank Arena
600 Main Street, Bridgeport, CT

Meet one-on-one with your mortgage lender or a HUD-approved housing counselor!

Documents to Bring
printable version (pdf, 40 KB); en español (pdf, 13 KB)

• Most recently filed and signed federal tax return with all schedules, and attachments including W2s
• Three most recent statements (all pages) for every bank, investment, and retirement account
• Most recent statement for every department store/credit card, auto/student loan, and other mortgages/liens
• A form of state-issued identification, such as a driver’s license
• A recent utility bill with your name and property address to show proof of residency
• Signed and dated Hardship Letter detailing why it is difficult for you to make your mortgage payments
• List of all household monthly income and expenses (actual expense monthly statement)
• A copy of your Homeowners Insurance Declaration Page and Real Estate Property Tax Certification (tax bill)
   
• For each salaried borrower:
  A month’s worth of the most recent paystubs (within 30 days of the event)
• For each self-employed borrower:
  Most recent quarterly or year-to-date profit/loss statement stating three months of business bank statements
• For each borrower with income such as Social Security, disability or death benefits, pension, adoption assistance, public assistance, food stamps, or unemployment:
  Benefits statement or Award Letter from provider, proof that you receive unemployment wages for a minimum of 12 months
• For each borrower relying on alimony or child support as qualifying income:
  Divorce or other court decree, or separation agreement or other written agreement filed with the court stating amount and period of time it will be received, and three most recent bank statements showing receipt of such payment
• For borrowers relying on rental income: 
  A complete schedule of real estate that you own, including the monthly payment amount for principle and interest, the amount of taxes and insurance/escrowed), and any homeowner association dues, current Lease Agreement(s) in its entirety, signed and dated, and three months of bank statements showing deposit of payment or cancelled checks showing receipt of payment
• For borrowers with income from other source(s) that amount to more than 20% of your total yearly income (this could include bonuses, tips or investment income, and letters regarding contribution to mortgage payments):
  A copy of documentation describing the nature of the income (employment contract or tip income)
• For borrowers that belong to a Homeowners Association: 
  A copy of a current bill or assessment.

• The Request for Modification and Affidavit (RMA) Form  (pdf)
  - includes an income/expense/asset form
• IRS Forms 4506-T (pdf) and 4506-EZ (pdf)
• The Dodd-Frank Certification Form (pdf)

Last October:

I bet he has never met, talked to, or visited a very poor person.

Mitt Romney’s statement that he is focused solely on the problems of middle class Americans, not the poor, may not sit well with lower-income voters within his own party. Roughly a quarter of Republican voters have annual family incomes under $30,000, and most of them say that the government does not do enough for poor people in this country.

In a Pew Research Center survey conducted in early October, 57% of lower-income Republican and Republican-leaning voters said the government does too little for poor people. Just 18% said it does too much. By contrast, higher-income Republicans took the opposite view; by roughly two-to-one (44% to 21%) Republicans with incomes of $75,000 or more said the government does too much, not too little, for poor people.

The truth is, especially since “welfare reform” the government’s safety net for the very poor has been full of holes. (read this link for may specific example