Ducey and Republican legislators have some ducking and dodging to do. According to a recent Arizona Republic/Morrison/Cronkite News poll, voters still want more money for our schools by a wide margin, even after the passage of Prop 123—74 percent for more money, 17 percent against and the rest undecided. Republicans, many of whom want to weaken or dismantle public education, don’t want to go along. But they can’t say that in the face of overwhelming public support for funding, especially just before an election.

“Let’s wait ’til next year,” Sen. Don Shooter, R-Yuma, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said. Well, he didn’t actually say that, but that’s what he meant. He said he’s waiting to hear the governor’s proposals for increasing education funding.

“My hope is the governor will have some proposals,” [Shooter] said. “I know they’re working on it, but I don’t know how far along they are.”

Don packed a whole lot into his statement that needs to be unpacked. Even though he’s a legislator—you know, one of the folks who write laws, vote on them and send them to the governor for his signature—he claims he doesn’t have any ideas of his own on way to increase school funding. So he hopes the governor has some proposals. Hopes. You’d think as the Republican head of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Don could walk into the governor’s office and say, “Hey, Doug, what do you have in mind for education funding?” He could, of course. But then he’d have to tell the reporter what Ducey told him. It’s much more convenient for Shooter to say he knows the governor is “working on it,” but he doesn’t know any more than that.

The reporter for the AZ Republic who wrote the story about the voter poll, Alia Beard Rau, apparently had a bit more success than Shooter talking with the governor—or actually, talking to Daniel Scarpinato, the governor’s spokesman, which is supposed to be the same thing. What Rau got was this.

“The governor has been very clear on this issue since he rolled out the land-trust proposal over a year ago,” Scarpinato said. “He has heard from teachers, from parents, from educators and from citizens that resources in our schools are an issue.”

In fact, the governor has been very unclear, purposely, on the issue of school funding. Before the vote, Ducey said Prop 123 is a first step, but he never actually said what he thinks the next step should be and has been avoiding the issue ever since. The closest he got was on the August 10 edition of the Bill Buckmaster Show, where he tossed together a word salad filled with self congratulation for passing Prop 123—which gave the schools some of the money the legislature illegally withheld from them in every budget since 2009, mostly using money from the state land trust, not the budget—and promises that the Classrooms First committee would come up with a proposal to redistribute existing school funds, most likely to the benefit of charter schools and districts in high rent areas. His silence on the issue of new school funding was deafening.

Rau also got a “Let’s wait ’til next year” from Scarpinato.

“We’re going to look for other ways, particularly targeted programs that we know work,” Scarpinato said. “We are in the process of developing the agenda for next session.”

We’re in the general election season, which is when candidates are supposed to tell us why we should vote for them. “Wait ’til next year” isn’t an answer to the question, “Do you think the legislature should budget more money for schools?” Any candidates who aren’t for increasing funding for education now, with 74 percent of the voters saying they want more funding, sure as hell aren’t going to be for it when the pressure is off in January. Reporters should be asking candidates the question at every opportunity, and if candidates duck and dodge like Shooter and Ducey did, the question should be asked over and over until the candidate answers or it’s clear they never will.

5 replies on “Ducey ‘Next Step’ Watch: Day 118. Duck-Dodge-and-Stall Edition”

  1. David: one of the comments on your previous post (Next Steps Watch, Day 117) said: “Maybe we should set up a ‘accurate reporting on the education scene’ watch on David Safier. Wonder how many days would go by before he comes up with a single post that honestly acknowledges the reality of what we’re dealing with in Southern Arizona public education: a poverty-stricken public school district ‘educating’ close to 50,000 students every year that has gone completely off the rails and that is being grossly mismanaged by its current ‘leadership.'”

    So how about answering this question for us, which YOU refuse to answer as much as any Republican refuses to answer whether they support increased funding to public education:

    When do you intend to acknowledge, as a so-called “supporter of public education,” that what is going on in TUSD undermines the reputation of our public schools, and, in undermining their reputation, undermines the degree to which the electorate is willing to support them financially? When do you intend to admit what is clear to anyone who has been watching the district closely for the past three years: that the district was not in a position to put desperately needed bonds on the ballot this fall because it is being conspicuously mismanaged, and its leadership has acted repeatedly in ways that undermine public confidence?

  2. Mismanagement and honoring the will of the voters are two entirely different issues. Mismanagement is no excuse for illegally withholding money from a school system that needs it. Managing the management. Whose job is that?

  3. Managing the management of TUSD is the TUSD Governing Board’s job, and they are not doing it.

    No one said there is any excuse for the state’s illegal withholding of 301 monies.

    What was referenced in the above post is the fact that TUSD said it was going out for bonds in November of 2016, and then chose not to do so. The credible reports of various kinds of mismanagement and lack of transparency in the district have been constant during the past four years that the current board majority (Grijalva-Foster-Juarez) has been in the driver’s seat on the Board. The excuses given by the district for not putting bonds on the ballot this fall (including the recent failure of Pima County bonds) have nothing to do with what many believe to be the real reason: They do not have the public confidence needed to pass bonds. They have not built the kinds of sound relationships in the community needed to run a successful bond campaign. They continue to depend on state level across-the-board funding increases (including the bad-deal-never-should-have-been-passed Prop 123 ) that Safier and others beg for them because when it comes to the kinds of district-focused funding supplements (bonds and overrides) responsibly managed districts can obtain, they cannot win enough public support to pass them.

    Safier continues to pretend expertise in education policy and concern for the wellbeing of the disadvantaged students in our schools while refusing to touch the most important issues in Southern Arizona with a ten-foot pole. He is a manipulative, highly selective propagandist, not a reliable guide for those honestly trying to understand how to ensure that the needs of the poor in our schools are met.

Comments are closed.