DUELING LETTERS IN THE PDN

Saturday's Daily News ran my open letter to the Superintendent of Education and Fernandez' response. I pointed out the laws available to the Superintendent that require him to see that all students receive an adequate education and the statutory tools available to him that gives him the strongest position in  the government re "financial crisis."  I chided the superintendent for "caving in" without putting up a fight for our students.

As you'll see when you read his response, Fernandez quibbles with the reportage of his quote then  repeats the same "cave in."  

The key statutory language that gives Fernandez the strongest hand is as follows:

“Insofar as the provisions of the Every Child is Entitled to an Adequate Public Education Act are inconsistent with the provisions of any other law, the provisions of this Act shall be controlling.”     This sentence can be read to preempt any attempt to cut hours or funds in such a way that the Department of Education is not in compliance with the 14 points.

I closed with, "Yours [Fernandez'] is a legal, moral and ethical duty to see that every child gets an adequate education. Yours is not to shrink from your duty while mouthing empty rhetoric about “financial crisis.”

And here's Fernandez' second "cave in."

"I think it is worth asking the Legislature to suspend the Adequate Education Act." 

And my last words, "If you [Fernandez] won’t stand up for the kids, how can we expect others too?"

The Board of Ed. meets at JFK High on Tuesday at 6.  If permitted, I'll speak and outline for parents their rights under the Every Child Act. I'll also explain then-Senator Calvo's role in the passage of the Every Child Act as he  amended § 15 to give the superintendent the right to sue.

Bob

Here's my letter:

Here’s a quote from the PDN for March 1: “Fernandez said the department has also looked at whether … the Legislature could temporarily suspend the requirements of the Adequate Education Act while the government of Guam is still dealing with a financial crisis brought by a federal tax reform law.”

This is shocking! As the superintendent of Education, it’s unfathomable that you would not vigorously oppose such a suspension much less advocate it!

Section 20 of the Adequate Education Act, duties of the superintendent: “to perform other duties as may be required by public law to provide an adequate public educational system.”

What’s the policy of the law? Section 2, declaration of policy: “I Liheslaturan Guåhan declares that the education of our children is the top priority of our government. The resources of the government must first be directed toward providing an adequate public educational system.”

And: “I Liheslatura (the Legislature) finds that the Organic Act requires the government of Guam to provide an adequate system of public education. The Organic Act Bill of Rights mandates compulsory education for children between six (6) and sixteen (16). The interplay of these provisions creates a right to an adequate public education for children that is analogous to a constitutional civil right.”

Section 13, Department of Education appropriation: “I Liheslaturan Guåhan shall annually appropriate from the General Fund or any other funds determined to be appropriate by I Liheslaturan Guåhan to the Guam public school system all amounts necessary to provide an adequate public educational system … and to that end provide an adequate public education for all public school students.”

(Section 3 states): “Since the Organic Act assigns the responsibility of providing an adequate public educational system to the entire government and all government officials, the scope of the act is government-wide. ”

Layoffs and the “financial crisis brought by a federal tax reform law?” You must fight for the rights of 32,000 students who are your responsibility. The law is on your, really the children’s, side:

“Insofar as the provisions of the Every Child is Entitled to an Adequate Public Education Act are inconsistent with the provisions of any other law, the provisions of this Act shall be controlling.”

Mr. Superintendent, you have the trump card here. It is extremely disappointing to see that you were so willing to discard that trump card so quickly. (The paper wrote): “Fernandez said the department has also looked at whether … the Legislature could temporarily suspend the requirements of the Adequate Education Act …”

The act lists 14 points as the minimum necessary for an adequate education. Would you have the Legislature temporarily suspend a healthful, safe, sanitary learning environment? Students could handle an unhealthy, unsafe, unsanitary, environment for how long? Or “at least one hundred eighty (180) instructional days.” Can we get by with less? Teachers are the sine qua non of any school system. Would you consider a a certified teacher for every class as just a frill?

Mr. Superintendent, you must fight to maintain all 14 points. Why run up the white flag without even entering the battle? 

The Adequate Education Act prescribes minimum standards of adequacy. If your for suspending the minimum, what’s left? You have the legal tools to comply with the Adequate Education Act. Public policy as announced in statute and the Organic Act favors the act. Is it ever moral to avoid defending the rights of children when you have the means to do so?

Mr. Superintendent, yours is a legal, moral and ethical duty to see that every child gets an adequate education. Yours is not to shrink from your duty while mouthing empty rhetoric about a financial crisis. If you won’t stand up for the kids, how can we expect others too?

Robert Klitzkie is a former senator and a resident of Yigo.

Here's Superintendent Fernandez' letter

In response to the letter sent by Bob Klitzkie, I want to clarify that the attribution by the Pacific Daily News was not quite accurate regarding “the department has also looked at whether the Legislature could temporarily suspend the requirements of the Adequate Education Act.” At no time has the department made a request to the Legislature that it suspend the Adequate Education Act.

However, in discussing the governor’s directive to go to a 32-hour work week, I did say the following to an audience of administrators, teachers and parents at Liguan Elementary School:

“The way (the Guam Department of Education) differs from other departments is that we have this law called the Adequate Education Act that sets in law the mandates on this department. … As we go through the harder decisions and start to look at whether we have to impact our facilities, our schools – things that we are trying not to do – at some point, if we get to a certain point where we have to cut that deep, 

I think it is worth asking the Legislature to suspend the Adequate Education Act. … (The Legislature should say): ‘Look, if you are not, as a department, able to meet that mandate, then we have to give you some relief.’ I don’t want to expose the department to any type of lawsuit because we have this mandate out there, but (then), at the same time, we have to go to a 32-hour work week.”

I made the statements to illustrate a simple point. If our elected officials require Guam DOE to meet the set of mandates in the Adequate Education Act, which I believe are intended to protect and provide for our students, then the resources to meet these mandates must be provided to the department.

This fiscal year, with seven months to go, Guam DOE is being required to cut $19.6 million from our budget. We have identified $12 million in savings that we were able to do without significant harm to our schools and classrooms. However, any deeper cut – especially if we have to start furloughing employees – is going to impact our ability to meet the requirements of the Adequate Education Act. This is a reality.

The message to our governor and our legislators then is this: Our public education system protects, nurtures and educates our young people. In a financial crisis, we should still have the fortitude to prioritize and support Guam DOE, its mission, and its mandates as spelled out in the Adequate Education Act. That’s what it means for education to be a priority.

In that spirit, I ask again that as both branches of government continue to wrestle with the impact of the federal tax cuts, our governor and senators find a way to relieve the department of further cuts and allow us to continue to support the needs of our children as we try to insulate them from the financial and political fallout of recent weeks.

Thank you, Sen. Klitzkie, for raising your concerns. I hope you will join us in advocating for and protecting the resources that Guam DOE needs to meet the requirements of the Adequate Education Act and to emerge from this financial situation intact. Si Yu’us ma’ase’.

Jon Fernandez is superintendent of the Guam Department of Education.

I have changed the paragraphing for easier reading.  All emphasis is added.