Billions for Nano-What?

Headline Albany Business Journal: Tech boom isn't stopping 'out migration' :

Thousands of new jobs have been created in recent years, and billions of public and private dollars invested in the region's growing tech economy. Still, out-migration continues . . 

So, even with the practically recession-proof economy in Albany (because government is the main industry) and the much-touted, heavily taxpayer-financed, tech "boom" there, more people still leave the region than come in.

This is proof positive that the heavily-government-involved model of economic development simply does not work.

What does work? What has always worked:  Leverage our natural/public assets to lower overall costs of doing business, and then leave private businesses alone to figure out their own way.

New York's assets a century and a half ago were (1) lots of natural, low-cost hydropower and (2) a natural route to the West (the Mohawk Valley) .  NY leveraged the latter by constructing the Erie Canal.  With Cheap Transportation and Cheap Power, New York (driven by Upstate NY in particular) became a magnet for industry and thrived.

What has happened since?  We now tax transportation in NY (the Thruway) -- turning transportation into a liability.  All the cheap hydropower is sent Downstate to cheapen electricity rates there (where cost of electricity is likely a smaller percentage of income), which has the effect of raising Upstate's rates -- turning cost of power into a liability here.

Upstate will never regain it's role as an economic engine for New York State while policies are forged in a Downstate-dominated state government.

Returning to a form of government that gives Upstate more control over its destiny will solve economic problems, stop the out-migration, and benefit the entire state as a whole.

Why We Don't Produce Enough STEM Majors . . .

Study Finds That One In Four Americans Don’t Understand This Basic Scientific Fact About the Earth

More than a quarter of Americans incorrectly believe that the Sun revolves around the Earth, according to a new study by the National Science Foundation.

Students are not going into Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math studies in college because they lack even the basic knowledge to understand the world around them, much less than succeed in advanced studies.

Let's cut back on the group activities and student's "constructing their own knowledge" and get back to direct instruction of the knowledge they need.

Duplicitous . . .

Duplicitous -- adjective -- "marked or characterized by duplicity."

Duplicity -- noun -- "deceitfulness in speech or conduct, 

as by speaking or acting in two different ways . . . 

double dealing . . ."

Rep. Richard Hanna: Why I voted Yes on the House Amendment to S. 540, the Temporary Debt Limit Extension Act.

"This legislation prevents our nation from defaulting, which has never happened in our history. . . . Default is entirely unacceptable for the United States of America and it would be painful for most every family and household I represent. . . .we need to pursue overdue reform to the long-term, structural drivers of our debt . . . I believe my constituents sent me to Washington to govern responsibly and not engage in petty politicking, so I look forward to resolving our serious fiscal problems in a thoughtful and productive way that allows us to stop borrowing from our children to spend on ourselves."

Rep. Hanna, why don't you and the other members of Congress recognize the existence of the debt ceiling when proposing new spending -- like YOUR spending proposal for universal Pre-k -- and stay under it?  The only reason why you are now forced to raise the ceiling to prevent "default" is because you and other members of congress are undisciplined, spending money that you already know we don't have.

Portraying yourself as concerned about borrowing while proposing a massive new spending program illustrates the definition of duplicitous, no? 

You may technically prevent a default, for now, by raising the debt ceiling, but you cannot not stop its effects from eventually happening. When the world starts thinking that we might not be able to repay our debts, the game is over.

We are just about there now.  Some countries have already stopped trading using the dollar, in spite of its status as the world's reserve currency, over fears that its value will no longer be there. When American companies issue bonds in other currencies (like Verizon's recent issue in Euros) the handwriting is on the wall.

The dollar will be devalued, like with other countries and their currencies, overnight. The value of a portion of people's lifetime savings will be wiped out.  And when people can't get their money out of the bank, there will be civil unrest.  And Congress' spending beyond our means will be to blame.

The debt ceiling is there to prevent over-spending.  Raising it only allows over-spending to happen.

APPLE-Flavored Lipstick . . .

On the Common Core Pig?

When government leaders want to implement a program that proves unpopular, sometimes the program is re-branded with cosmetic changes (like a name change), but the program is still basically the same.  Is that the case with the Common Core reform package entitled “Achieving Pupil Preparedness & Launching Excellence (APPLE) Plan?”

According to Assemblywoman Malliotakis' website:

The APPLE plan solution addresses critical issues in the areas of Curriculum, Teacher Support, Funding, Student Anxiety, Special Education and Data Collection and concludes with two reform options recommended by members of the Assembly Minority Conference. Proposed solutions within the APPLE Plan include: 

•  Stopping the rushed implementation of the Common Core State Standards; 
•  Providing funding for professional development; 
•  Eliminating the Gap Elimination Adjustment (GEA); 
•  Reducing the over-reliance on student testing; 
•  Reasserting that an IEP is the supreme document for the education of a child with special needs; and 
•  Requiring that parents must consent to any disclosure of student information to a third party. 

“We need to put the brakes on Common Core implementation. You only get one chance to educate a child,” said Borelli. “Thanks to Ed Ra and the rest of the minority conference, we finally have a good plan in place for the proper education of our children.”

While the Assembly Minority members should be commended for producing a plan (available here) that addresses the most controversial aspects of the Common Core rollout, THE COMMON CORE STANDARDS STILL REMAIN.  These are standards that many psychologists are calling developmentally inappropriate.

As I blogged in December, there is a real problem with the Common Core Standards themselves, with their emphasis on performance over knowledge.  I concluded:

"Critical thinking" is "wisdom" . . . which comes with age and cannot be taught.  Common Core teaches the mimicry of wisdom while withholding the substance of it: knowledge.  

If you care about the next generation and the well-being of the nation, you will fight implementation of Common Core.

Universal Pre-K FAIL. . .

Rep. Hanna and Senator Gillibrand are at it again, promoting their "Strong Start for America's Children Act".

"If we expect our children to walk through the doors of our colleges and universities tomorrow, and succeed in our economy in the years ahead – we need universal pre-k," Gillibrand said in the release."High quality early learning leads to strong cognitive, social, emotional and language development – key skills for a bright future."

The problem with this proposal is that these things have been tried before, but research -- performed by think tanks on both sides of the political aisle -- shows that the results are inconclusive.

Heritage: Universal Preschool’s Empty Promises

For most children, “70 to 80 percent of the cognitive gains associated with attending prekindergarten have faded out by the spring of the first grade.”[19]

Brookings: Can We Be Hard-Headed About Preschool? A Look at Universal and Targeted Pre-K

If a year of Head Start does not improve achievement in elementary school, should we assume that a year of state pre-K does?

Since we now borrow 40 cents out of every federal dollar spent, should we borrow more to achieve inconclusive results?

Predetermined Conclusions?

Per the OD: Hinckley Reservoir proposal elicits concerns for some, hope for others

The authority is asking permission from the state's Department of Environmental Conservation to withdraw up to 48.5 million gallons of water a day, the maximum amount it can legally take, said Patrick Becher, executive director of the authority.

As pointed out a month ago, although the application says 48.5 and MVWA confirms they are seeking 48.5 MGD, both the Notice of Complete Application and, now, the recent re-notice to extend the comment period only refer to "a maximum taking of up to 32 million gallons per day . . .."

Since MVWA seeks 48.5 MGD and has sent DEC plans to increase water treatment plant (WTP) and intake main capacity to accommodate 48.5 MGD, the language of the Notices (which were drafted by DEC) seems to suggest that DEC has already made the determination to issue the permit, but with withdrawals limited to 32 MGD (which happens to be the capacity of the existing WTP).

Another cue that a decision has already been made is the statement in the OD article coming out of DEC Central Office:

The DEC has considered the effect on the area wildlife if this was granted, and there doesn't seem to be an adverse impact, said Emily DeSantis, director of media relations for the department's hub in Albany.

Of course not!  MVWA's projection of an imperceptible increase in demand out to 2030 coupled with no specific expansion plans present nothing that would allow an impact to be identified  . . . But that would be putting the blinders on, ignoring: (1) that MVWA intends to draw 48.5 MGD, (2) that the new agreement with Canal Corp frees MVWA from any requirement to make compensating flows, (3) that no environmental impact study was ever made of the effect of that new agreement, and (4) that in 2007 we already had a water "emergency" caused in large part by the lack of compensating flows. That avoidable "emergency"  resulted in the fishery being shut down, harm to aquatic life, lost electric power generation, and lost income for many businesses.

It is difficult to believe that DEC's conclusion would apply when 32 MGD (much less than 48.5 MGD) is removed from the creek on a sustained basis during dry weather and the creek flows are allowed to drop to 160 cfs for prolonged periods of time . . . .  especially when no study has told us how much more often we can expect these minimum flows to occur.

One gets a feeling that just enough facts (i.e., the minimum projected increase in demand, unspecific "need" for water for economic development purposes in the 4 Towns) will be cherry-picked to justify a politically-motivated DEC (commanded from Central Office) to see no environmental impacts and "rubber-stamp" this application with a 32MGD withdrawal limit, which defacto already exists, to make it look like DEC is doing something.
 
If this happens, expect a slow degradation of the West Canada Creek as withdrawals increase over many years.  Maybe by the time the creek is completely destroyed, no one will remember what a magnificent stream it once was.

A Tale of Two ODs . . .

At left is a comparison of two "ODs" -- Operating Diagrams -- for the Hinckley Reservoir. The top was drafted in 1920 and became part of a 1921 Agreement between the State and Utica Gas & Electric. The bottom was drafted in 2012 and became part of a 2013 Agreement between the State Canal Corp and the Mohawk Valley Water Authority.

The former was the subject of litigation between Erie Boulevard Hydropower, LLC and the State over the State's deviation from the 1920 OD during the 2007 drought.  The State released less water from Hinckley Reservoir than called for in the OD in order to keep reservoir levels above MVWA's intake.  (Had levels dropped, the intake would be high and dry and we would have no water at our taps).  Less water released from the dam means less water turning the power company's turbines -- producing less power to be sold causing lost income to the power company. The Court of Claims threw out Erie's lawsuit citing language in the 1921 agreement that allowed deviations from the OD without compensation to the power company in certain emergency situations.  Erie appealed . . .

A few days ago the Appellate Division reversed the Court of Claims saying . .

Because defendants altered the release rate for the purpose of preserving safe drinking water during a drought – a legitimate public and State purpose (see ECL 15-0105 [5]) – and not for a canal-related purpose, defendants are liable for breaching the contract.

So, unless deviations are for a canal-related purpose, the State's taxpayers will be responsible to the power company for the lost income the deviations cause.

The 1920 OD assumed that Utica's water supplier adds to the flow into Hinckley from its own reservoir to make up for what it takes out of Hinckley during dry periods.  The 2013 agreement between MVWA and the Canal Corp does away that requirement.  The 2012 OD takes that into account and controls reservoir levels to protect MVWA's intakes.

So does not that make the 2012 OD a deviation from the 1920 OD for a non-canal-related purpose?

With MVWA not contributing water to Hinckley, but taking more out as it ramps up to taking 48.5 million gallons a day per its new proposal, how much money will the power company lose in the future?

Since the power company did not approve of the 2013 agreement, it seems like the Canal Corp just locked itself into a course of conduct that exposes us taxpayers to liability to the power company.

I wonder how long this situation will be allowed to last???

Hidden In Plain Sight 3 . . .

In case you missed the MVWA's full page color advertisement in Friday's and Sunday's Observer Dispatch (which YOU paid for!) it is reproduced at left. It is almost verbatim the March 2013 newsletter you already received with your water bill. Both trumpet the agreement reached between the MVWA and NYS Canal Corporation that settled their lawsuit.  Why do we hear about this again, now?

The bold text 2/3 down gives a clue:

"While this agreement does ensure prudent management of reservoir levels, it is important to note that neither the MVWA nor the Canal Corporation controls the flow of water into the West Canada Creek below that reservoir.  The operations of a privately-owned hydroelectric plant determine how much water will be released and when."

Blame for flows of the West Canada below the reservoir is being deflected to a "privately-owned" company -- but not mentioned is the fact that MVWA and Canal Corp (your government) are the only ones who divert water away from the Creek (the power company does not).

With West Canada Creek's natural flows ranging from about 150 cubic feet per second up to over 30,000 cfs, there is plenty of water available for all sorts of uses -- provided that "excess" water is captured when flows are high and released when flows are low. Although MVWA has often claimed a "right" to take 48.5 million (75 cfs) gallons of water per day, that right was contingent upon it maintaining a storage reservoir upstream of Hinckley Reservoir of a size per the table reproduced at the right. Doing the math with these figures reveals that MVWA should be holding about 120 days' worth of water use in storage.  At the full 48.5 MGD, 6 billion gallons should be in storage. That's almost 1/4 the size of Hinckley reservoir itself! MVWA should be using this 120 day storage to replace what it takes out of Hinckley when creek flows are low.

MVWA's ad is drumming up public support for the MVWA-Canal Corp agreement now perhaps to avoid it being scrutinized as part of MVWA's pending application before the Department of Environmental Conservation to expand its service area. The new agreement does not hold water.  It was made without benefit of an environmental impact statement. The two "consumers" of West Canada Creek water went into a closed room and divided the creek's water among themselves. The agreement relieves MVWA of the storage and flow augmentation requirements which means that water will be removed by MVWA and not replaced.  Ultimately that means less water available for the creek below Hinckley Dam. 

Slick public relations campaigns may distract, but they cannot paper over the math.  

MVWA and Canal Corp hope no one notices that their agreement comes at the expense of everyone who uses the creek below the Hinckley dam. 

Hidden In Plain Sight 2 . . .

Observer-Dispatch: Authority wants to increase output from Hinckley Reservoir

The Mohawk Valley Water Authority is requesting permission to withdraw roughly 27 million more gallons of water a day. The authority is asking the state Department of Environmental Conservation to modify its water-supply permit, from 21.4 million gallons per day to its legal maximum of 48.5 million gallons per day from Hinckley Reservoir.

Thank you, OD, for getting the facts out to the public! The public notice was misleading as to the amount of water that was being sought.

And here's a bit more detail that trickled into DEC's public file . . . . The total "peak day" water demand for MVWA's existing service area + 4 Towns + Western Oneida County + certain Herkimer County Towns (including places already getting water from other sources) will zoom from 25.462 mgd  in 2010 to . . . (hold onto your hats). . . . . 26.619 mgd in 2038 (strains of Peggy Lee "Is that All There Is" playing in the background) (see p 17/119 of the added materials).  And this "huge" increase in need justifies spending . . . about $50,000,000?  (see p 118/119)

Of course, as noted in small print, the figures do not include water that may be needed by a chip fab (or 3) . . . But assuming chip fabs come, do you think the chip fabs will be paying for all this infrastructure increase? or any of it?

But there is even MORE that is being hidden in plain sight . . . Stay tuned. 

Ohhh Nooooo. Not Again . . . .

A year ago in the post Sewer District Sleight of Hand I warned that the County was shifting its economic development costs for the new North Utica Interceptor onto the backs of current sewer users rather than paying for it itself.

Well guess what was buried in the Utica Observer Dispatch, Friday, January 3, 2014
Legal Notices?

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the County Legislature of the County of Oneida, New York, will meet at the County Office Building, in Utica, New York, in Oneida, New York, on January 15, 2014, at 1:45 o'clock P.M., Prevailing Time, for the purpose of conducting a public hearing in relation to the proposed $4,000,000 increased cost of the increase and improvement of the facilities of the Oneida County Sewer District in said County, consisting of the North Utica Interceptor improvements at a new maximum estimated cost of $15,630,000. The revised estimated annual cost to the typical property owner in said Sewer District as a result thereof is $5.36 for a single family home and $8.04 for a two family home.

Dated: Utica, New York, December 30, 2013. 

Existing sewer users did not then and do not now need this project to treat their sewage.  Now the cost of an additional $4,000,000 is being dumped onto them in the name of "economic development."  Your water bills are going up some more!

This is a project that will benefit new users who, as yet, do not exist. It should be paid for entirely by those who will benefit from it. 

Hidden in Plain Sight . . .

In the last post it was noted that MVWA water users' bills have skyrocketed because County Sewer District costs for a consent order and sewer system/waste treatment plant expansions have been passed on to water users. Now MVWA seeks permission to expand its own system to serve outlying parts of Towns of Westmoreland, Kirkland, Frankfort, and Schuyler.  Few details of the expansion are provided in MVWA's application to DEC because the "need" to expand the system to these areas is hypothetical, based more on MVWA's desire to relieve itself of future DEC oversight rather than actual planned developments in these places.

What is not hypothetical is the amount of water MVWA is requesting to withdraw. From "Water Withdrawal Application Supplement WW-1" Question #9 (see page 6 of the 68 page PDF of the Application made available to the public at DEC on 12/26/13):

 9. WATER WITHDRAWAL AMOUNTS  This project involves withdrawal of up to: 48.5 gallons per day.

(You should note that the amount requested from DEC (48.5) does not match the amount advertised to the public by DEC (32mgd).)

Also not hypothetical is the construction that MVWA proposes - almost 3 miles of new water main - in order to take additional water from Hinckley Reservoir. From "Exhibit C.1" (see page 16 of the PDF of the Application):

It is the intent of MVWA to construct one new main of sufficient capacity to handle the full amount of authorized withdrawal, 48.5mgd, without utilizing the capacity of existing mains. The existing 36" main will remain in service and function as a back-up to the new main . . .

The Greater Utica area currently served by MVWA uses about 21 mgd of water and has a population of about 130,000.  The 4 Towns proposed to be served combined contain a small fraction of the Greater Utica population.

Does anyone really believe that the proposed new mains are related to MVWA's expansion into the 4 Towns?  The real objective of this project is hidden. 

There is good information that an expensive expansion of the water treatment facility is also in the offing because the existing plant can only handle 32 mgd, but this does not appear in the application available at DEC for public review . . . yet.

Guess Who will be tapped with even higher water bills to pay for all this?

We've seen it with the Sewer District, we've seen it with Griffiss "International" Airport, and we are seeing it again with the MVWA.  The people of Greater Utica, deprived of effective representation in government by design, are being forced by that government to pay for the "economic development" dreams of local developers, contractors, and all the other politically-connected leeches who hope to get rich at the Taxpayers' risk.

When does it end?

There is more about this proposal that is hidden in plain sight.  Stay tuned. . .

Not the Only Reason . . .

In the Christmas edition of the OD: Less water used could mean higher prices paid suggests that

As more and more residents, who get their water from the Mohawk Valley Water Authority, buy water-efficient appliances, the authority is forced to look at continually raising rates. . . . 

"When I came here 16 years ago, the average customer, the whole household used 80,000 to 100,000 gallons a year," [MVWA Executive Director Patrick Becher] said. "That's down to 50,000 gallons a year. We've been seeing a two to three percent declined in actual water sales, which is troublesome because our costs don't go down to operate the system."

Undoubtedly there is some truth to Mr. Becher's assertion that water-efficient appliances contribute to a decline in demand.  But is Mr. Becher ignoring the "elephant" in the room -- the Oneida County Sewer District -- whose charges have caused the bottom lines of all of our quarterly water bills to balloon?

Since Mr. Becher does not control the County charges, he may be forgiven for overlooking their effect . . . but we homeowners cannot.  The County signed the Consent Order, the County determined that a new sewer interceptor and expansion of the Wastewater Treatment Plant were necessary for economic development, and the County passed ITS costs on to the water users.  When it costs a small fortune to water your lawn or garden, or wash your car, you stop doing those things, even in times of drought like we had during 2012.  When you can no longer afford your water-using business (due to rates/taxes/regulations etc.), you leave town. And demand for water drops.

Our local government is so fragmented functionally and geographically that the right hand doesn't know what the left is doing -- making it incapable of adequately responding to the needs of the average citizen or small business. For every action taken by one part there is a reaction elsewhere.

While the reason for the story seems to be a set up for higher water rates, the more likely motivation is MVWA's recent application to DEC (buried in the legal notices last week) to expand its service territory to include all of the Towns of Frankfort, Schuyler, Kirkland, and Westmoreland. We probably will hear that MVWA needs to do this to get new customers to offset the decline in demand. See http://www.dec.ny.gov/enb/20131218_reg6.html#699060001700001 (scroll down to multiple counties).  The comment period expires 1/17/14 -- just in time for Christmas, New Years, and the ML King holidays!  I'll post more on this later.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! 

Innocent Victims . . .

$2 Million settlement reached in Longo lawsuit

A $2 million settlement has been reached to resolve the wrongful death lawsuit against the City of Utica stemming from police Investigator Joseph Longo's murder of his wife in 2009. . . .

The lawsuit stems from Longo's killing of his wife, Kristin Palumbo-Longo, before he stabbed himself to death Sept. 28, 2009, inside their Deerfield home on Cosby Manor Road.

Mr. Longo's actions left his 4 children motherless, fatherless, and without a means of support. This is a real tragedy. One's heart cannot help but to go out to the innocent victims, the children.

But now the Taxpayers of the City of Utica are somehow on the hook for $2 Million. That's over $30 for each resident, over $100 for each family.  How did this happen?   What did UPD do wrong?  UPD took Inv. Longo's guns. . . . UPD confined him to a desk job . . . UPD insisted on counseling . . . But the Longo family insists that UPD did "not do everything it could."  But what more could UPD have been done? What more was UPD obliged to do?

The article speaks of cronyism . . . but that's nothing new . . . or unusual in any government agency. How did cronyism cause these deaths?

The article suggests that UPD could have done an internal investigation regarding allegations of officer-involved domestic violence . . . But what would have been the outcome? How would that prevent what happened?

The article suggests a "fitness-for-duty psychiatric evaluation" . . . But how would that have changed things?  Assuming that Mr. Longo was unfit for duty, what would have been the result?  Discharge from his job?  How would that have helped the marital maelstrom seemingly at the center of this sad story?

Somehow the UPD is the target of the suit.  But the UPD was merely Mr. Longo's employer.  The crime occurred in Deerfield.  UPD has no jurisdiction in Deerfield.  Other police agencies cover Deerfield.  If someone feels that he or she is in danger from another person, and no satisfaction is obtained from the other person's employer, should not he or she have taken other measures of self-protection?

When does the Taxpayer become responsible for the criminal acts of another person?  

Perhaps the Mayor is right to have settled this suit.  With four innocent children, who knows what the outcome of a trial would have been.  The damages could potentially be a lot higher.  But does that not say something troubling about our legal system?

Utica Taxpayers did not cause the Palumbo-Longo dischord.  Utica Taxpayers did not cause Mr. Longo's mental state.  Utica Taxpayers did not give Mr. Longo the knife.  And Utica Taxpayers did not commit the stabbing.  But Utica Taxpayers are now forced to pay for this crime.

Evil created innocent victims here: The four children . . . And the Taxpayers of the City of Utica.  

Home . . . . Again!

WKTV: Mohawk Valley Chamber of Commerce unveils new name
WIBX: Chamber Of Commerce Introduces New Name And Branding
YNN: Mohawk Valley Chamber of Commerce announces new name
UticaOD: Chamber of Commerce changes name to Greater Utica Chamber of Commerce
And from WUTR:

Finally, after YEARS of blogging on this issue, Greater Utica's premier booster organization gets it right!

THANK YOU, GREATER UTICA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE!

Why I DON'T Believe in Common Core . . .

In the NY Daily News a couple days ago was an article "Why I Believe in the Common Core" by Brett Peiser, CEO of "Uncommon Schools."

"The parents of our students understand that, contrary to the criticisms levied by a small contingent of opponents of the Core, the new academic standards are about establishing and teaching the skills and knowledge our students need to be ready for college-level work - not about high-stakes testing. . . .

Our country ranks behind too many others in international rankings of math and reading proficiency. Our schools have simply not been preparing children for college well enough, and we all need to do better.

Common Core is part of that solution . . . Common Core challenges teachers and students to get to the "why" behind how things work. So, it's not just learning that 3 x 5 = 15, but how and why that is true. It's a chance for students to become deeper and more critical thinkers. . . .

What's wrong with asking a third grader to figure out multiple ways of solving 12 times 8 or 36 divided by 4? What's wrong with asking a seventh grader to write an essay comparing two similar newspaper articles and how each author approached the same topic? What's wrong with asking any student to cite the evidence behind their answer?"

Mr. Peiser has mastered word-smithing well. . . .  suggesting those in agreement have higher "understanding" while marginalizing the opposition as a "small contingent" focused on trivialities. . . . citing conditions and aspirations that no one disagrees with . . . and, with the reader hopefully roped-in, presenting Common Core as the salvation.

If you had to rely solely upon the contents of Mr. Peiser's "informational text" for data and had no independent knowledge to draw upon, you would probably think that you now know all you need to know about the issue and accept his position as true.  Of course, Mr. Peiser is banking on you being ignorant . . . and that should make you angry!  It would be easy to marginalize Mr. Peiser's article as a crock by someone in a position to gain financially . . . but that avoids the substance.

The bottom line is that we all want our students to be able to think critically . . . but can you have critical thinking without something to think critically about? 

In the past we equipped our students with a "storehouse of knowledge"  -- things most people could agree upon: math facts and basic skills, history of our country and the functions of its government, basic principles of science, geography, world history, etc. That "storehouse" is the substance of critical thinking -- but it is now dismissed by Common Core proponents as "rote learning."

Why teach 10 ways to do multiplication when one SIMPLE "tried and true" way works and, once mastered, comes up with the right answer every time? The end result of the new approach is that NO way is mastered -- and students don't know when they've come up with the wrong answer. How can there be "understanding" of math without that storehouse of knowledge including math facts?

If you know nothing, there is nothing to understand!

The evil here is Common Core's emphasis on performance rather than knowledge (The same was true for Outcome Based Education, the Regents' "higher" standards of the late 90s, and a bunch of other reforms). By depriving our students of that "storehouse of knowledge" held in common with each other and with older generations, communications with the older generation becomes difficult, communications among different disciplines becomes difficult. . . . And this makes it easy to reprogram students, and eventually a population, using "informational texts" for whatever is the ideology of the day.

Example: If you knew nothing about the ice ages, multiple advances and retreats of ice, geologic changes in sea levels, the Vikings farming of Greenland, etc., you would be less likely to be a skeptic, and more likely to accept the "consensus" than humans are causing climate change. Which scenario (the acceptance, or being a skeptic) best represents "critical thinking?"

What does Common Core fill student's heads with besides mindless exercises in processing information?

At our schools, we inspired our students to "show what you know" on test day. Our students discussed Michael Jordan's career and how often he failed on his road to success, and that he was never deterred. Our students loved coming to school in Michael Jordan T-shirts during the exams. As the week wore on, one of our third graders wrote in a reflection about the challenging questions: "I just knew I wasn't going to give up."

Michael Jordan's career might be inspirational and give students something to talk or write about, but it is trivial in the larger scheme of things and spending a week on it is a waste of time.  It is not the "knowledge" the students will need to succeed in the future . . . and not the knowledge that society needs to maintain itself and help it to evolve in the future as new challenges arise.  

"Critical thinking" is "wisdom" . . . which comes with age and cannot be taught.  Common Core teaches the mimicry of wisdom while withholding the substance of it: knowledge.  

If you care about the next generation and the well-being of the nation, you will fight implementation of Common Core.

Flying High - - But Not Here . . .

From Aviation Week: Million Air Expanding Facilities, But Refuses To Grow At All Costs

". . . the newest FBO to join the chain is a facility at Orlando Sanford International Airport. The facility is operated by Freeman Holdings Group, the ninth Freeman location in the Million Air chain. Freeman CEO Scott Freeman calls the Million Air addition a strategic move for the company that operators facilities stretching from California to New York. . . . As part of the addition, the facility is undergoing a $3.5 million renovation that including stripping the facility’s 10,000-ft. attached hangar down to the structural steel and rebuilding. The 7,000-sq.-ft. terminal building is also undergoing upgrades that will include some of the Million Air-standard features, along with a range of amenities such as a theater, flight planning room and executive conference room."

Wow . . . that's lots of money . . . and a theater? and an executive conference room? Think Mr. Freeman will be doing this at Griffiss?

Well, as the headline says, Million Air "refuses to grow at all costs."  Million Air's CEO Roger Woolsey says:

"“If you overpay for your property, you can’t make money ... or you charge ridiculous fuel prices.”"

With its highest sales tax, Oneida County is already behind the curve on keeping Million Air's fuel prices low.  How are other costs at Griffiss compared to elsewhere?  There is a special utility company there that pays some lush salaries for a small operation.  Are its costs lower?

If it costs too much to do business here, the customers . . . and business expenditures to attract them . . . will go elsewhere.

Two Videos, Two Lessons . . .

The first video is by M.J.McDermott, a meteorologist for Channel 13 in Seattle, entitled "Elementary School Math, An Inconvenient Truth." Ms. McDermott does a good job explaining multiplication and division algorithms, comparing the tried-and-true algorithms most of us post-40 year-olds  learned with new algorithms being used in schools today.  Pay close attention to her revelation near the end of the video of comments made in the teacher's manuals by the book publishers.

The second video is by Karen Bracken affiliated with Tenesee Against Common Core, entitled "Common Core - Subversive Threat to Education." In this hour-long presentation she explains the historical context of Common Core, who is behind it, and its links or potential links to the United Nations, eugenics, and the UN's concept of "sustainability." Before dismissing this as an attack on the current administration, look at the "Who's who" revealed at 0:19:20.  Some names may surprise you (and, perhaps, you will no longer be surprised why Republicans often attack the Tea Party).

And before you dismiss the second video as a wild conspiracy theory, go back to the first video and ask yourself why students are studying inefficient algorithms that are never mastered, and then told to use a calculator?

After watching the second video, you will know the answer.

Honesty . . .

"We all knew. . ."


So if you all knew, Ms. Gillibrand, that a promise was being made that could not be kept, why the silence?

Since no one was listening to Republicans, why did the Democrats go along with the lie that was being perpetrated?

Did Our Sheriffs Really Write This Drivel?

OD: GUEST VIEW: New preschool plan can boost pre-K, cut crime By ROBERT MACIOL, CHRISTOPHER FARBER and ALLEN RILEY

We’re talking about children as young as 4 years old who don’t have the opportunity to participate in high-quality preschool. As a result, many start school without the pre-literacy and pre-math skills that form the foundation for academic success, and with behavioral issues that make it difficult for them to interact well with other kids in the classroom. Many then struggle in the early grades and continue to fall behind and eventually drop out of school before turning to crime. . . . Participation in high-quality preschool puts kids on a different path. . . . [emphasis supplied]

I don't know about you, but this does not sound like anything our sheriffs wrote . . . but I could be wrong.  The language used sounds suspiciously similar to that in Congressman Hanna's announcement a few days ago.

But that is not the interesting part.  

The sheriffs cite a slickly-produced report called "I'm The Guy You Pay Later"  which makes the simple argument to pay for preschool education now or pay to incarcerate people later.  The report comes from a group calling itself Fight Crime: Invest in Kids .

 Who funds this "national, bipartisan, non-profit, anti-crime organization?"

"Major funding for Fight Crime: Invest in Kids is provided by: Alliance for Early Success • The California Education Policy Fund • The California Endowment • The California Wellness Foundation • Annie E. Casey Foundation • Robert Sterling Clark Foundation • Early Childhood Investment Corporation • Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation • The Grable Foundation • Grand Victoria Foundation • The George Gund Foundation • Hagedorn Foundation • Irving Harris Foundation • Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust • Robert Wood Johnson Foundation • W.K. Kellogg Foundation • The Kresge Foundation • McCormick Foundation • Ohio Children’s Foundation • The David and Lucile Packard Foundation • William Penn Foundation • The Pew Charitable Trusts • Pritzker Early Childhood Foundation • Rauch Foundation • Dr. Scholl Foundation • W. Clement and Jessie V. Stone Foundation."

Of course, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation stands out because it is one of the key players behind the "Common Core."  We are all just finding out how "well-researched" that was!  This seems to be more of the same.  How clever, though, to get local law enforcement behind extending federal control over our schools.

It's not about education or crime-prevention, folks. It's about cradle-to-grave federal control over your children. . . or should I say control by our national elites.

It's too bad that our local sheriffs seemed to have been sucked into this power play.

Spending OUR Money -- to Advance THEIR Agendas . . .

Two articles in tonight's OD on very different subjects have something in common:

Mohawk Valley Water Authority receives $112,500 to do study

The Mohawk Valley Water Authority has received more than $100,000 in order to study water in western Mohawk Valley. . . . The authority received $112,500 total for the study through the Local Government Efficiency grants administered by the New York Department of State.

MVWA is a water purveyor, it is not a regional planning organization. MVWA is also a "power broker" in the region, using its base of rate payers in Utica and environs to give a gift of public water to those in outlying areas that MVWA and the regional elite deem worthy, enriching chosen developers at existing water users' expense.  Empirically MVWA has an agenda to expand its sphere of influence, regardless of the negative impacts of the sprawl it induces (an inefficient distribution of urbanization and lowered population densities that mandate increased per capita costs (more taxes and more fees) at various jurisdictional levels to support expanding areas of infrastructure and services).

Water is where Nature put it and it is still where it always has been. Local water supplies were studied to the nth degree back in 1968 (when our regional population was booming and water scarcity was looming) and a plan was crafted by Oneida and Herkimer Counties, in conjunction with the NYS Department of Health, which specified which localities would get water from which resources. Any studies of water needs today should be done by these same entities.

Money given to MVWA "to study water in western Mohawk Valley" is like putting the fox in charge of the hen house: it will undoubtedly produce a report to justify whatever agenda MVWA has.

Hanna sponsor of bill to increase preschool funding

. . . the Strong Start for America’s Children Act would give children and families nationwide better access to affordable high-quality early learning programs such as Head Start and preschool. . . “By focusing on early education, we can begin to break the back of intergenerational poverty, producing more taxpayers and a more competitive America through a better-educated, growing middle class,” Hanna said in a news release. “One in four children starts their life in poverty. This bill will help ensure their lives do not end in poverty."

The problem with Mr. Hanna's position is that he assumes lots of facts that are not in evidence. What is "affordable" and "high quality" to Progressives like Mr. Hanna likely will be something else to the everyday taxpayer.  After years of spending money on "Head Start," at best the results have been equivocal, as explained in a recent Washington Post article which is clearly sympathetic to the program.  So why do we continue with such programs when they do not produce material, easily recognized and lasting positive results?

Such programs, like all the spending on "Race to the Top"  to implement the "Common Core" 'standards,' are there to advance a Federal Agenda. . . . which is not education but control over the minds and hearts of the next generation. This is evidenced by the "rollout" of "Common Core" and the content of modules to be used in classrooms. It has long been accepted that power over education was left by our Founding Fathers to the States. . . . but the Feds have used the power of the purse (OUR tax money) to advance national education policies which have, thus far, produced disastrous results.

Mr. Hanna, who likes to paint himself as a fiscal conservative, is anything but . . . and his sponsorship of this bill is sponsorship of more federal intrusion into our everyday lives.

11/14 Update: National Review Online: Don't Look to the Feds for Pre-School
Syracuse.com: Jennifer Garner's star power boosts Rep. Richard Hanna's early childhood education bill