College For All—Or Else: For better or worse, a college degree is becoming an essential credential if you want to get the kind of job that can provide a middle class standard of living (before it's eventually outsourced somewhere else and/or your employer goes out of business). So when D.C. Council Chairman Kwame "Fully Loaded" Brown says he's trying to encourage more D.C. high school students to apply to higher education, it sounds like a good idea. It's Brown's specific solution that seems a bit muddled; the chairman wants to require students to take the SAT or ACT and fill out college applications in order to be eligible to graduate high school. Which means anyone who's not interested in college would also wind up lacking a high school diploma. Give Brown's plan an F.  -3

Acqua Gratuita: Consumers revolted last year against surcharges at Bank of America, Verizon Wireless, and other corporate behemoths. Is D.C. restaurant Elisir next on that list? The Italian joint has announced that it's rolling back the 29-cent-per-customer charge it used to impose for filtered water, replacing it with a choice of free tap water or a $3.95-per-table fee for bottled H2O. "It has occurred to us that our water policy is presently not meeting Elisir’s goals" of providing diners with good service, the restaurant says. It has occurred to us, meanwhile, that paying 29 cents for free water is pretty dumb. +1

Uberpriced: New smartphone-savvy luxury cab service Uber has made a flashy entrance into the D.C. market lately, ferrying local journalists to Graffiato for a lunch to preview their business (no one from Washington City Paper attended, so far as we know) and hitting social media outlets to promote itself. Which meant that on New Year's Eve, when regular cabs are hard to come by, there was plenty of demand for a fancier ride. Thanks to Uber's "surge pricing," though, fares went up. The company says it warned patrons in advance that would happen; surprisingly enough, by the time the bars closed in the wee hours of Jan. 1, people seemed to have forgotten that. -1

Fail, Victory: The Washington Redskins season ended not with a bang, but with a wimper, as the team marched up to Philadelphia to lose to the Eagles, 34-10, and finish the year 5-11. That's the worst record coach Mike Shanahan has ever had, in 17 full seasons. Perhaps as a result, he brought in some Navy SEALs and a Marine to the final meeting of the season; their mission was to inspire the players, not conquer them, as the rest of the NFL had more or less already accomplished that one. Meanwhile, on Jan. 26, it will be 20 years since the last time the Redskins won the Super Bowl. Can they draft Mark Rypien this spring? -2

Friday's Needle rating: 58 Today's score: -5 Today's Needle rating: 53

Except if they don't reimburse you for those expenses. That's exactly what happened, and now Ogilvy is suing to get paid back for the $143,000 it spent on the District's behalf. Some thankyou!

According to the complaint, exactly a year ago, DCPS approached Ogilvy proposing that the firm design an ad campaign to attract new teachers, and place the ads online and in local publications like the Washington Post Express. A contract was signed, Ogilvy did the work, and with explicit approvals from DCPS officials, cut checks so the ads could run.

By the summer, it was time for Ogilvy to get its money back. But the Office of Contracting and Procurement refused to pay, saying it wasn't a legal contract. So now Ogilvy's out $143,000, and hoping a judge will force the District to fork it over. And you can bet they probably won't be doing any more free work for the District in the future.

Complaints over the school's physical condition had begun a month earlier, when Darren Jones, then president of the Pleasant Plains Civic Association, had filed complaints about the building's upkeep after he toured the facility the month before. As Loose Lips reported in the April 15 edition of Washington City Paper that year:

"The place smelled like sewage," Jones said... "The cafeteria floods every time it rains." Puddles of water soaked the cafeteria floor, he said, and water stood two to three inches deep in a storage room where plates and utensils are kept. Students had to slosh through puddles to find a dry place to eat.

The shutdown was only the latest in a series of setbacks for the middle school, located at 10th and U streets NW. Underground Metrorail construction had damaged the foundation of the school's gym three years earlier, making it unfit for use. By the time officials shut down the cafeteria, a giant brace had been attached to one of the gym's walls, in an attempt to keep it from collapsing. The school's auditorium was damaged as well, and collected rainwater had started to cause the roof to buckle.

The school later became one of many embroiled in a legal battle between Parents United for the D.C. Schools, a lobbying group, and District officials. Parents United pushed for schools such as Garnet-Patterson to be shut down for a variety of issues, including fire code violations. However, the following year, Judge Kaye K. Christian dispatched with the lawsuits after the two sides reached a settlement. On Nov. 8, 1997, Garnet-Patterson reopened to the public.

We Need Some Money: Turns out having large numbers of people out of work is bad for municipal finances. (Who would have guessed?) District officials say sales and income taxes will bring in about $100 million less than expected. On top of that, D.C. Public Schools spent $25 million more than budgeted, and Congress cut Medicaid reimbursements to the city by at least $33 million—adding up to a projected deficit of $175 million for fiscal year 2011, which begins on Friday. Good thing the recession's officially over and we don't ever have to worry about money again! -5

Obama School-o-Rama: Appearing on NBC's Today Show, President Barack Obama declares there's just no way his daughters Sasha and Malia could have gotten a decent education in DCPS. Going on about out-of-boundary lotteries, Obama sounded briefly like any other over-educated, well-paid, gentrifying liberal—before admitting that, gee, yes, with his job, he probably could have gotten his daughters spots in, well, any school in the District, and then basically dodging the issue of why he sends them to Sidwell Friends instead. Cue more national media coverage of how Vincent Gray defeated Michelle Rhee in our recent primary in 3, 2, 1... -3

Southwest Invades National: Who needs seat assignments? Discount giant Southwest Airlines plans to buy AirTran for $1.4 billion, which would bring Southwest's anarchic, but cheap, system to DCA. (It already has a large presence at Dulles and BWI.) The deal would mean lower fares—if Southwest officials can be believed. Which, since they're trying to win approval from regulators for the merger, they probably can't. Oh well. +2

Redskins Trampled by Rams: Last year, the Redskins managed to beat the St. Louis Rams, 9-7, in a horribly boring game that nevertheless stood out at the end of the year because it was one of the only four games in which the team triumphed. Yesterday, the Redskins managed to lose to the Rams, 30-16, in a horribly frustrating game that, sadly, looks like it's going to be easily forgotten amidst a pile of other pathetic losses. Even worse news: Dan Snyder did not relinquish control of the team in disgust over its performance. -3

Friday's Needle rating: 63 Today's score: -9 Today's Needle rating: 54

The D.C. government has been trying to encourage street vendors to diversify their offerings, even holding informational meetings titled "You Don't Have to Sell Hot Dogs," the Post reports. Although vendors see increased profits in selling ethnic food, wariness of increased regulations have kept the number of hot dog carts high.

In other food news, the Washington Times reports that some DCPS parents and officials are worried about the new D.C. Healthy Schools Act, which ups the nutritional and exercise standards for local schools, saying that the new requirements will be burden on the system and stretch schools' already tight budgets.

A number of Apple fanatics spent the night camped outside the Clarendon store, waiting for today's release of the iPhone 4.

Meanwhile, open government fans may have to wait longer for Freedom of Information Act responses from the D.C. government, if Attorney General Peter Nickles has his way. Nickles asked the Council to give the Fenty administration a a "safety valve" of "unspecified additional time" to respond in unusual circumstances, the Post reports.

Photo by rollingrck/Creative Commons Attribution License

In an email sent to Parker by Elections Committee Chairwoman Claudette Carson, the frustration is clear: “Your previous and current dilatory actions do not allow the WTU to have elections as required. Your refusal to comply with the Elections Committee, WTU Constitution and law, unilaterally could bring, if left unchecked, the Elections Committee’s work to a halt.”

The salient question in the dispute is whether the Elections Committee’s nominating petitions are valid. WTU elections are held every three years. For each election cycle, committee candidates are required to submit a nominating petition signed by 20 union members. The committee has 15 spots to fill. During the nomination period last year, however, only five candidates received the 20 signatures necessary to be elected. After another two were added, three members dropped out due to retirements and layoffs. By the spring, the committee stood at four, not nearly enough for a quorum. Therefore, according to Parker, the committee could not be trusted to hold a legitimate election.

“The persons who submitted the petitions are trying to run a scam on our election,” Parker tells City Desk. “If we did an election with invalid petitions, we would have to do it over.”

Historically, however, the committee has almost never met the 15-member quota. “You can’t force people to take that office,” says blogger and WTU member Candi Peterson.

In April, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) opted to play the role as arbiter in another Election Committee nomination process, at Parker’s behest. This time, the 15-member quota would be met. Parliamentarian John Tatum, a non-elected official in the WTU, called the new Election Committee monitored by the AFT “bona fide,” and all nomination petitions filed before the current committee “null and void.”

The current debate picks up here: after the results for the AFT committee were announced last week, Carson requested that Parker deliver all the nominating petitions, membership lists and union dues reports. But now, Parker claims, it’s not his job.

“They’re trying to make it a George Parker issue,” says Parker. “The authority for this decision lies with the executive board.

No one seems exactly sure what Parker is up to. His term ends on June 30. Elections are usually scheduled on May 30. But, at the current pace of the debate, a new president won’t be elected until fall, when teachers return from summer break.

“To refuse to turn over this info is really holding 40,000 people hostage,” says Nathan Saunders, current union vice president and a candidate for the WTU presidency. “Teachers are livid and the implications are huge. It lowers the prestige of the organization, it invariably makes someone go to court to correct it, and it’s a waste of money.”

Peterson echoed this sentiment, but with less apocalyptic predictions: “Parker has run 100 times, so he certainly knew what to do. But for whatever reason he didn’t release the documents.”

In a letter being sent to WTU members, Parker writes that while he was "surprised and angered" by Chancellor Michelle Rhee's recent claim of a a $34 million DCPS surplus mere months after 266 teachers were laid off for budgetary reasons, he believes both that laid-off teachers should be reinstated and the contract should be funded.

"While it may seem intuitive–in view of the possible budget surplus–to link the issues of funding for the new teacher contract with efforts to reinstate RIF'ed teachers, these important matters must be dealt with separately," Parker writes. Efforts to reinstate the laid-off teachers "should not hinder the progress we have made on behalf of our schools, teachers and students in the new tentative contract."

"The reinstatement of RIF'ed teachers and funding for the new contract are two distinct issues," he writes, "that must be resolved fairly and thoughtfully."

What Parker says he wants most of all is solid information on the DCPS fiscal situation: "Regardless of the existence—or nonexistence—of a budget surplus, the 266 teachers deserve answers and they deserve justice." he writes. "Further, the entire D.C. community, parents, students and teachers deserve to know the truth about the school budget."

Regarding the contract, he fends off charges that he negotiated pay raises on the backs of the fired teachers: "The WTU negotiation team bargained in good faith with the District with the understanding that funding was available to pay for the progressive reforms and all financial provisions of the agreement. It is important to note that the raises in the new tentative contract were not negotiated contingent on DCPS having a surplus in the 2009-2010 budget."

He concludes: "We look forward to fiscal certification and financial approval by the chief financial officer and the city council as quickly as possible so that we can move forward and present the contract to you for a ratification vote."

Two days after Chancellor Michelle Rhee told D.C. Council members that she would pay for a groundbreaking teacher contract, in part, with $34 million in surplus funds, Chief Financial Officer Natwar M. Gandhi today posted a letter to Rhee telling her there is in fact no such surplus.

In fact, Gandhi asserts that there not only is no surplus, but Rhee did not consult with the CFO's office prior to announcing a contract agreement. In other words, Gandhi says that Rhee signed a deal she didn't know how to pay for.

Writes Gandhi: "[D]espite the fact that my office was neither consulted nor included in the negotiations regarding the WTU, my staff took the initiative and proactively engaged in the process of analyzing potential resources to support the proposed contract, should a final agreement between parties be reached."

Gandhi goes on to recount how George Dines, the acting DCPS financial officer, e-mailed Rhee a preliminary figure indicating a potential surplus. But that figure was never finalized.

"I was incredulous to learn in your...presentation to the Council on the contract, you asserted that a surplus is available to fun the proposed salary increases based on preliminary information," Gandhi writes. "I am at a loss to understand why you did not consult with me directly or with any of my DCPS financial staff about the viability of the proposed package prior to your public announcement."

There is a $34 million surplus in school-based underspending, he adds, but it is more than offset by overspending in the central office and other places. An overall surplus, he writes, "does not exist."

In closing, Gandhi offers support for the agency CFO on whose information Rhee relied.

"I want to reiterate my support for George Dines. I have the highest degree of confidence in his capabilities and appreciate his willingness to step in as Interim CFO at DCPS, especially in this challenging fiscal situation," Gandhi wrote.

By popping this surplus bubble, Gandhi turns a multifaceted political mess into a much simpler one. Where pressure was coming on two fronts—to rehire laid-off teachers or to press forward with the contract proposal—the issue is now simply: Where the contract money at?

Bottom line: Rhee messed with the savviest political player in town by blaming the surplus mess on Gandhi's shop. Now Dr. No is taking off the gloves. This may get good.

UPDATED 6:05 P.M.

A week after a new D.C. Public Schools teacher contract proposal was rolled out with great fanfare, fiscal revelations aired today leave its ultimate implementation very much in doubt.

Chancellor Michelle Rhee and Washington Teachers' Union head George Parker appeared at a D.C. Council administrative meeting earlier today to brief councilmembers on the agreement. Rhee was grilled on the deal's financing details and revealed that retroactive raises are being funded by a $34 million DCPS surplus.

With that revelation, "everyone's ears perked up," says a person at the meeting. That's because less than eight months ago, the school system was pleading poverty and ordered layoffs for 266 teachers to close a $40M budget gap.

The surplus, Rhee told the room, was the result of a miscalculation by the Office of the Chief Financial Officer. Specifically, she said expense projections had been based on an average teacher salary of $81,000 when the actual figure is nearly $15,000 less.

Councilmembers were aghast at the disclosure—an admission that at least some of the layoffs, which tore the local body politic asunder, were unnecessary. D.C. Council Chairman (and mayoral candidate) Vincent C. Gray was "stunned and astounded," a spokesperson says. Rhee said she had "recently" learned of the miscalculation, says a meeting attendee.

The political ramifications are heavy.

Bearing the brunt of the disclosure, at least immediately, is union president Parker—who will have to decide whether to seek reinstatement for the fired teachers with the surplus, or to press forward with a contract. In either case, his hard-line opponents within the union have a new avenue of attack; he stands for re-election next month. Parker claimed today that he had no knowledge of the surplus prior to the meeting.

Also in the hot seat: CFO Natwar M. Gandhi, who certified the erroneous figures last summer. Rhee named her former agency CFO Noah Wepman as the culprit, meeting sources say, but Wepman was supposed to be accountable to Gandhi—not Rhee.

In the wake of the fall layoffs, tough questions were raised about Wepman's independence from the chancellor, and he was forced out after a poor showing at a council hearing. Questions about Gandhi's stewardship of school finances now reappear. Note also that Rhee's fingering of Gandhi represents a shift of political blame to an entity ostensibly independent of the mayor; Gandhi, of course, has survived much worse.

Other folks with egg on their face: Katherine Bradley, who is spending $100,000 in her foundation's money, to hire former White House communications chief Anita Dunn to handle, among other things, the rollout of the teacher contract. And this is what they get?

The big questions going forward: Assuming Parker doesn't withdraw from the contract agreement and that Gandhi certifies the deal, will teachers vote for big raises knowing it comes at the expense of wrongfully fired ex-colleagues? And if they do vote to ratify, will a feisty group of D.C. councilmembers, led by a mayoral candidate, abide by their wishes and vote to approve the contract in this election year?

LL was not in the room; Examiner's Leah Fabel was there, among other reporters.

Fabel quotes Gray's reaction: "If I were one of the fired teachers, I would be ready to put my hands around someone's throat and squeeze till there was no air left....At the end of the day, some people's pay raises [would be] funded with someone else's job."

UPDATE, 6:05 P.M.: A Rhee spokesperson challenges LL's reporting that she identified Wepman as the source of the bad information; LL has asked in what context Rhee might have uttered his name.

Gandhi's office has issued a statement: "All of the facts, figures and information concerning the finances of the teachers contract will be released when the CFO’s analysis of the contract is made public."

And a statement from the WTU:

To put it simply, this is unacceptable.

We once again request that DCPS reinstate the teachers who were laid off. If the teachers are not reinstated, the WTU requests a new hearing on the RIF, at which time the newly available budget information will be provided to the court.

We also are requesting that the D.C. city council take legislative action to ensure greater transparency in the budget process. In particular, we would like to see more rigorous guidelines for determining what does—and does not—constitute a crisis that allows for unregulated actions like October’s RIF.

The WTU calls for a close review of the unilateral powers currently accorded the chancellor and the mayor, to determine if more must be done to ensure that there is greater accountability, both to the council and to the people of the District of Columbia.

Nothing can give back to the teachers, the students and the community what was lost as a result of either malevolence or mismanagement of the budget. We must, however, take all necessary steps to ensure that it does not happen again.

Photo by Darrow Montgomery

UPDATED 5:55 P.M.

Smoke billowed this afternoon from the roof of Eastern Senior High School, which is nearing the end of a $76 million renovation.

According to D.C. Fire and Emergency Medical Services, firefighters responded to reports of heavy black smoke coming from the building's roof shortly before 4:30 p.m. By 4:45, a second alarm had been called. East Capitol Street is closed east of Lincoln Park.

By 5:10, the smoke had stopped coming from the roof, and a police officer on the scene reported that the blaze was under control.

The school, built in 1932, has been closed since 2008 for a thorough renovation and had been scheduled to reopen this fall (although D.C. Public Schools officials recently backed off that timeline). Fire department spokesperson Pete Piringer said a "minimal amount of people" were in the building, which was quickly evacuated without incident. It's unclear if construction work was underway at the time.

Earlier today, a fire broke out at the Turner @ Green Elementary School, at 1500 Mississippi Ave. SE, causing damage to the school's playground and the building facade. Congress Heights on the Rise reported from the scene.

Photo, reporting by Arthur Delaney

UPDATE, 5:55 P.M.: The fire is out, Piringer reports from the scene. Construction crews were on the roof at Eastern today, he says, applying a waterproof rubberized membrane when the fire broke out; the roofers all escaped without incident. The blaze was contained to the roof, Piringer says, adding that any smoke or water damage to the rest of the building is "minimal."

The fire is likely accidental, Piringer says, and there looks to be no connection to the fire at Turner @ Green. That fire "totaled" playground equipment, while causing "superficial damage" to the building itself. The cause of that fire is under investigation.

UPDATED 7 P.M.

The D.C. Public Schools and the Washington Teachers' Union are set to unveil their long-awaited contract proposal, bringing to a close negotiations that have dragged on for the duration of Chancellor Michelle Rhee's tenure.

An announcement could come as soon as tomorrow, debuting an agreement that would offer city teachers significant raises plus the option to participate in novel "performance pay" plans, all funded in part with $64.5 million in private funds.

Preliminary details on the proposal come from draft internal documents obtained by LL; sources indicate that the outlines of the proposal are in place, though some details remain in flux.

The five-year contract, which would be retroactive to October 2007 and continue through September 2012, would mean an overall 21.6 percent rise in teachers' base salary rates. But the most discussed parts of the proposal stand to be performance pay and the process for "excessed" teachers (i.e., those laid off from an overstaffed school), as well as the novel funding stream.

Not all teachers would be eligible for performance pay. Those seeking to participate would have to "qualify in" using an teaching evaluation process that is yet to be finalized. Unlike the ill-fated "green tier" proposal, teachers who participate in performance pay would not lose tenure protections; however, they would lose some rights should they be excessed by DCPS.

As for those teachers not in the performance pay program, those rated "effective" or better under the IMPACT evaluation system would have three options if excessed and unable to immediately find a new DCPS position: take a $25,000 cash buyout; retire with full benefits if a teacher has 20 years experience; or take an additional year to find a placement with DCPS assistance, after which they would be fired.

Due process rights would be "streamlined" under the proposal but not ditched entirely. According to the documents, "teachers are entitled to due process that is fair, transparent, and expedient." The documents refer to a "system of checks and balances on the authority of school administrators."

Teachers who have moved past probationary status (i.e., in their third year at DCPS) will be protected from firing without "just cause." Those still on probationary status can be terminated for reasons "not arbitrary and capricious." The documents emphasize that those terms have "strong meaning in labor arbitration."

The base salary raises and performance pay initiative are funded via nearly $65 million in private donations gathered by the D.C. Public Education Fund—$10 million from the Laura and John Arnold Foundation; $10 million from the Broad Foundation; $19.5 million from the Robertson Foundation, and $25 million from the Walton Family Foundation. The money, according to documents, is devoted to the "recruitment, retention and rewarding of quality teachers."

Notably absent from that list is the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which has taken a keen interest in urban school reform and has developed ties with Rhee. One of the documents obtained by LL addresses its absence thusly: "The Gates Foundation has been incredibly generous, and, like all other funders, is donating substantial resources to a singular effort. The Gates Foundation is currently supporting innovations in teacher professional development such as the online platform, which is currently being planned, that will allow for personalized training for individual teachers."

As yet unaddressed: what happens in 2012, when the contract expires. Do the foundations have any ongoing commitment to funding DCPS, or would the city have to make up the difference, or would teachers face the possibility of a pay cut?

The contract proposal does address two extremely sticky areas of labor-management relations of late. One is the IMPACT teacher evaluation system, which is the foundation for much of what the contract proposes; the teachers union can have no direct say on evaluations under city law, but DCPS has agreed, according to the documents, to form a working group with WTU reps to "review teachers' concerns and suggestions regarding implementation of IMPACT....and to make recommendations to resolve issues and make improvements." IMPACT, additionally, will be subject to an outside review.

And then there's reductions-in-force, or RIFs—which occur when teachers are laid off to close a budget shortfall. Last fall, a DCPS RIF set off a political firestorm, with teachers, union officials, and politicians complaining about an opaque and arbitrary process that led to the firings of 266 teachers.

Under the contract proposal, new "checks and balances" would be instituted "to help members and the WTU deal with difficult personnel decisions and quickly challenge any arbitrary actions either at the building or district level." Specifically, there would be "consultation with WTU to discuss other possible options" prior to a RIF; "stronger language on the role of [local school restructuring teams]," which were supposed to play a crucial role in the fall RIF but in many cases did not; and "multiple hiring opportunities" for RIF'd teachers.

The contract proposal will be presented to teachers for a ratification vote; the contract would then go to the D.C. Council for final approval. A meeting of the WTU Representative Assembly has been called for tomorrow evening at McKinley Technology High School to discuss the proposal; expected to attend is Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, WTU's parent union, who has taken an key role in the negotiations.

The proposal, and teachers' reaction to it, stands to have a dramatic impact on the Washington Teachers' Union election later this spring, where President George Parker is facing a feisty challenge from longtime nemesis Nathan Saunders. The contract is also certain to have an impact on this year's mayoral race, with combatants Adrian Fenty and Vincent Gray already dueling over their approaches to education.

###

Here is a draft text from a Q&A prepared by DCPS and the WTU:

WTU Tentative Agreement – Questions and Answers

SALARY AND BENEFITS

1. How much is my raise?

The Tentative Agreement is for five years (Oct 1, 2007 – Sept.. 30, 2012), with base salary raises of 3 percent, 3 percent, 5 percent, 4 percent and 5 percent. Upon ratification, you will receive an immediate raise of 11 percent (retroactive pay of 3 percent for 2007-2008, 3 percent for 2008-2009 and 5 percent for 2009-2010). The total increase adds up to a realized increase of 21.6 percent. In addition to these significant base salary increases, there are substantial increases in benefit payments, administrative premiums and start-up allocations.

Special Note: Teachers who were separated or retired as a result of the November 2009 reduction-in-force (RIF) also will receive retroactive pay.

2. When the contract is ratified, when do I get my raise? When do I get my retroactive pay?

The WTU will work with DCPS to ensure retroactive payments are quick and accurate. (George Parker would have add here.

3. Is performance pay included in this Agreement?

A voluntary individual performance pay provision is included in this Agreement. Teachers must "qualify in" to participate in the individual performance pay system.

4. How do I "qualify" for individual performance pay? What are the consequences of participation? Will it be based solely on test scores?

WTU and DCPS will collaborate on the development and implementation of an individual performance pay program for the fall of 2010. The exact details regarding qualifications and standards for rewards have not been developed. The individual performance-based pay system, however, shall be on a voluntary, "qualify-in" basis that includes multiple measures of teaching practice and student growth for tested and non-tested grades and subjects. Most importantly, participation does not require teachers to relinquish their tenure.

In the event of excessing, permanent status teachers who elect to participate have 60 days to secure another placement in DCPS. If they do not find a placement, participating teachers are not eligible for the three options under performance-based placement (see Question #18) and may be subject to separation from DCPS.

5. How will the school-wide TEAM awards change? How much will they be worth?

The school-wide TEAM awards will now be based on the relative growth of student performance instead of a fixed amount of student growth. This will give many more schools and staff members a realistic chance of receiving an award. The amount of the awards will depend on the availability of funds and awards. All staff members will know the approximate amount of the TEAM award before the start of each year.

6. Where does all the money for the various monetary increases in the Agreement come from? What happens if the DCPS runs out of money?

Along with the traditional funding sources, DCPS has secured letters of support from a number of private funders to pay for base salary and performance components of this Tentative Agreement. Before the WTU a asked members to vote on the proposal, DCPS and the WTU received a written certification from DC's Chief Financial Officer that assures the financial viability of the proposal.

Failure to provide the funds to meet the obligations of the Agreement -pertaining to base salary, benefits and mutual consent is a material breach of contract by DCPS. The consequences of that breach will be settled by a court or an arbitrator, unless otherwise negotiated by the Parties.

7. How much do I get for "start-up" funds? How and when will it be distributed?

Start-up funds for the 2010-2011 school year will be $175, an increase of 75 percent. It increases to $200 for the 2011-2012 school year. The WTU will work with DCPS to create an effective distribution process that allows teachers to access the funds so they have the tools they need prior to the start of school.

8. What is the "Administrative Premium?"

(I have a good idea, but George should answer this on)

9. When do the increases in benefits kick-in?

The increases in benefits will be effective immediately upon ratification of the Tentative Agreement by members and approval by the DC City Council. (Check with George)

TENURE/DUE PROCESS

10. Does the contract force teachers to give up tenure?

No. This Agreement preserves permanent status and due process. Though tenure often is misconstrued and vilified, no one believes tenure guarantees teachers "a job for life." Everyone agrees, however, that teachers are entitled to due process that is fair, transparent and expedient. This Agreement provides that. It also strengthens language on due process and creates a system of checks and balances on the authority of school administrators—particularly as it relates to reductions-in-force. Moreover, teachers who volunteer to participate in any of the performance pay programs do not relinquish their due process rights.

11. Does the new contract include Red and Green?

No. Unlike the red and green proposal, all teachers' base pay is calculated using the same salary structure. New teachers and veteran teachers all are paid using the same base pay system. All of the base pay salary schedules can be found on the last pages of the proposed agreement.

12. What is the difference between "just cause" and "not arbitrary and capricious?" Why was this changed?

Permanent status teachers will continue to have the protection of "just cause." Just cause is a common standard in labor arbitration, and is included in the tentative agreement as a strong form of job security. Probationary teachers will not be "at-will" as is the case in most other states, in DC probationary teachers will have the protection of "not arbitrary and capricious." -It means a clear error of judgment or an action not based upon consideration of relevant factors. Both of these terms have strong meaning in labor arbitration and afford WTU members the protect they need and deserve.

13. How has the grievance process change? How is it better than before?

It is more streamlined. By removing one step and clarifying actions within each step, the process will work better for teachers and provide quick resolutions for all grievances.

REDUCTION-IN-FORCE/EXCESSING

14. Does the Agreement include the support and protection from arbitrary dismissals and RIFs?

The WTU was very concerned about the lack of transparency exhibited by DCPS over the past few years regarding dismissals and RIFs. The proposal has new "checks and balances" for evaluations, excessing and reductions-in-force. These new provisions will help members and the WTU deal with difficult personnel decisions and quickly challenge any arbitrary actions either at the building or district level.

15. How does the new Agreement address the uniqueness of B.C. law as it relates to RIF? Are there provisions in the new agreement to ensure a greater degree of fairness?

Under D.C. law, the Chancellor has unfettered authority to institute a RIF. This Agreement places some checks and balances on that authority and creates a process that promotes a greater degree of transparency and fairness. Additionally, it offers teachers affected by RIF and excessing options that were not previously available. (See Question 8.)

16. How will the contract stop DCPS from using a RIF to get rid of teachers?

The proposed Agreement cannot stop DCPS from implementing a RIF. RIF and Furloughs are part of the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations (DCMR). The proposed Agreement, however, has several new provisions to avoid many of the issues that led to the recent RIF. These include a clear policy regarding excessing and placement, consultation with WTU to discuss other possible options, stronger language on the role of LSRTs, and multiple hiring opportunities for teachers who have been RIFed.

17. How will excessing decisions be made?

Excessing decisions will be made using the rubric found on page 28 of the proposed Agreement. The following steps will be followed when DCPS determines an excess is necessary:

• The Local School Restructuring Team (LSRT) shall make a recommendation for the area(s) of certification to be affected.
• The Building Personnel Committee shall make a recommendation to the Supervisor as to the teacher(s) to be affected.
• The Teachers in the affected area may provide evidence to the Personnel Committee for their consideration.

If the Supervisor's final decision departs from the recommendations of the LSRT or the Building Personnel Committee, the Supervisor must prepare a written justification. Upon the request of the WTU President, the justification shall require the approval of the Chancellor prior to implementation of the excess at that school.

18. What happens if I am excessed? What happens if I can't find a placement? What happens if I can't find a placement after one year? Will I get help finding a placement?

When a teacher is excessed, DCPS will provide multiple hiring opportunities. If a teacher with an effective rating or higher is unable to secure a new position in 60 days they have 5 days to select from the following three options:

1. Receive a $25,000 cash buyout resulting in separation from DCPS;
2. Teachers with twenty (20) or more years of creditable service shall have the option of retiring with full benefits; or
3. An Extra Year to Secure a New Position.

Teachers who are unable to secure a placement will be provided additional hiring opportunities, professional development and temporary assignments. At the end of the year, any teacher who still has not secured a position may be separated from DCPS.

19. How do the three options work? What are the requirements?

Any teacher who receives an effective rating or higher will be eligible for the three options. Only excessed teachers with 20 or more years in DCPS have the option to select retiring with full benefits.

IMPROVING TEACHING AND LEARNING

20. When will all this professional development and new support for teachers be available?

Immediately upon ratification, the WTU and DCPS will take steps to provide teachers with the high-quality professional develop opportunities outlined in the tentative agreement. WTU will focus on the immediate professional development needs identified by our members to ensure those needs are met as soon as possible.

21. How will the new teacher centers work? Who will staff them? What will they do?

Work will begin to launch the new WTU Professional Development Centers as soon as ratification is complete. WTU will work with the teachers of the UFT Teacher Centers in New York City to help shape our centers locally. Their experiences will prove invaluable to the teachers of DC as we embark on a new area of teacher-led professional development in our city.

22. What are the school improvement models? Who decides what model should be used?

The Tentative Agreement includes three new models for school improvement. In all of them, teachers continue to be full WTU members with all of the rights afforded by the WTU contract. The actual details of the three models can be found on pages 20 -24 of the Tentative Agreement. Teachers, administrators and community members working with each school's Local School Restructuring Team (LSRT) will decide which model is best for their students.

WORKING CONDITIONS

23. Will the new contract help improve discipline in my school? If so, how? Will I be supported?

Yes. The proposed Agreement requires that every school align its school discipline policy with Chapter 25 of the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations (DCMR). In addition, each school will form a Student Behavior Management Committee (SBMCJ that must design a school-wide discipline and behavior management plan based on the local school's disciplinary needs, and it must be consistent with Chapter 25. To ensure every school has a comprehensive and fully operating plan, the WTU shall develop a system-wide template that will include the required components of school discipline/behavior management plans, along with models of best practices.

24. When will the WTU template for discipline be shared with my school?

The WTU already has contacted the AFT to help develop the discipline template for our schools. Working with the best discipline experts from around the country, the new template will be a step forward in ensuring our students have the safe'and orderly learning environments they deserve.

TEACHER EVALUATION

25. How will my concerns about the new teacher evaluation system be addressed?

D.C. law prohibits the union from negotiating on teacher evaluations. WTU and DCPS, however, have agreed in writing to form a working group of members and administrators to review teachers' concerns and suggestions regarding implementation of the IMPACT evaluation system and to make recommendations to resolve issues and make improvements. Additionally, the new Agreement calls for an independent evaluation and an internal review of IMPACT.

26. What additional things were agreed to or clarified in negotiations?

There four side letters attached to this tentative agreement. They cover a variety of concerns not directly addressed in the agreement:

1. A "working group" of teachers and administrators to review teachers' concerns and suggestions regarding implementation of the IMPACT evaluation system and make recommendations to the Chancellor as she/he works to resolve issues and make improvements.
2. Mutually agreed upon experts to review the IMPACT system and make recommendations to enhance and improve the system.
3. Clarification that WTU has always believed that past practice regarding progressive discipline does not apply to situations involving sexual harassment or sexual/physical abuse by a teacher.
4. Teachers who were RIF'd in November 2009, will be provided opportunities to interview for any position for which they are qualified before external candidates are considered. (Must check on the exact language on this one!!!)

Here is the text of a separate Q&A, one that addresses the sources of the contract funding:

Framing Message and Q and A for Private Dollars

Framing Message:

In order to appropriately compensate teachers for the incredible job they do each and every day, we called upon a broad range of foundations with vast experience in the field of education philanthropy to help support a contract that will compensate DCPS teachers in a way that no other school system can match. The dollars from each foundation – $64.5 million total – will be dedicated to separate and specific areas of the contract. These foundations believe in education reform that recognizes and empowers teachers. We are extremely grateful that they stepped up when asked and are helping to launch a new kind of contract.

Q AND A:

Q: Are any private funds being used to facilitate the costs of this contract?

A: Yes. A significant percentage of this contract is being funded with private dollars from a wide and diverse array of foundations. This funding will allow DCPS to compensate teachers as the skilled professionals they are, with accountability measures that reward strong classroom performance.

Q: Which foundations are involved?

A: The Laura and John Arnold Foundation
The Broad Foundation
The Robertson Foundation
The Walton Family Foundation

Q: How much have they contributed?

A: Each organization stepped up to the plate with extremely generous commitments.
The Laura and John Arnold Foundation: $10 million
The Broad Foundation: $10 million
The Robertson Foundation: $19.5 million
The Walton Family Foundation: $25 million

Q: Are these private dollars going to anything specific or a general fund?

A: These dollars will go toward the recruitment, retention and rewarding of quality teachers.

Q: Why are these foundations contributing to the cost of a teacher's union contract?

A: All of these foundations have two things in common: they believe.in our vision for reform, and they all committed their support when asked by the DC Public Education Fund.

Q: What is the role of the DC Public Education Fund?

A: DC Public Education Fund's mission is to serve as a strategic partner to businesses, foundations, individuals, and community leaders in collaborating on and investing in high impact programs with DC Public Schools. This work includes attracting critical funding resources, managing key public-private partnerships, and acting as fiscal sponsor for all grants made on behalf of DC Public Schools.

For questions about each individual funder, refer media to the specific foundations.

Q: Is it appropriate to use private funds for public education?

A: Yes, we want to bring every available resource to bear for improving our public schools.

Q: Are there any strings attached to these dollars?

A: It is important to be clear that the District will control this money, rather than the funders. The conditions are that DCPS stay true to its mission of reform, and that these dollars be used to support excellence in teaching. There are no conditions that are atypical for a standard grant agreement.

Q: But what happens when these foundations decide to put their resources elsewhere other than the DCPS system?

A: Our partners are committed to the terms and for the duration of this contract. Beyond that, it is our goal to sustain this with public dollars.

Q: Why is the Gates Foundation not involved?

A: The Gates Foundation has been incredibly generous, and, like all other funders, is donating substantial resources to a singular effort. The Gates Foundation is currently supporting innovations in teacher professional development such as the online platform, which is currently being planned, that will allow for personalized training for individual teachers.

Q: Why are there no local foundations involved?

A: Many local foundations generously fund school-based programs throughout DC Public Schools. Large national foundations are the appropriate source for funding...

UPDATED, 7 P.M.: Parker calls LL to emphasize that the Q&A posted above is not a final version. "We've made a lot of changes, no doubt," he says. LL will post the final version as soon as it is available tomorrow.

That led to this tweet: "Marion Barry just compared Michelle Rhee to Saddam Hussein on the dais." But a fellow livetweeter, @classic74, challenged that characterization, saying that Barry "was talking about the culture."

Today, LL went back to the videotape to check what exactly Barry said. Indeed, Barry's remarks were indeed about the culture, not about Saddam. But, in a way, they were even more telling.

Barry could not have distilled his worldview any more potently. Where Rhee—for her well-documented faults—holds as a base principle that children can learn regardless of whether they're rich or poor, black or white, born east or west of the river, Barry is all about excuses.

His view of urban education is essentially deterministic—that because the kids in his ward are born to poor, illiterate parents, that lets everyone off the hook when they don't learn. Except for Rhee, because she doesn't understand their "culture."

To put a finer point on it, Barry says that the Korean-American Rhee—who, he says, comes from a culture that's "autocratic," "dictatorial," and "hierarchical"—can't possibly understand how to teach poor black kids. It's a mission, he says, as futile as bringing democracy to Iraq.

Here's what Barry said, verbatim:

I'm gonna raise a subject that I know is going to set off the Washington Post. We have a clash of cultures. We have a clash of cultures. Everybody that comes here talks about Michelle Rhee not including people, not being collaborative, not listening....

The reality is that this school system is 90, 92 percent African American, Latino American, and a small number of white students. Everyone knows that this country is a melting pot, but there are distinct cultures in this country. The African-American culture, because of our history and a lot of other reasons, has a distinct culture difference with non-white America. Latinos are the same thing. Does not mean that non-African-American, non-Latino cannot teach, cannot administer, but when the cultures are so great, Ms. Rhee comes from a culture...that's autocratic, a culture that's dictatorial, a culture of hierarchical in their discussions.

We see it every day in Iraq—the American government trying to change a culture that has been totalitarian, that has been nonexclusive, that has been a police state. And we're having a hard time now, after 10 or 12 years in Iraq, getting that culture shifted to democracy. We see it in Afghanistan, and so until we face that, we're still going to have those problems.

I read the chancellor's educational plan...It looks at though it was designed for Montgomery County, or Long Island, N.Y., or some other affluent county. It was not designed for Washington, D.C., for an urban area. Not designed for a city, a ward where 82 percent of the parents are single family in my ward, where 54 percent are in poverty....

You can't teach a child to read when you can't read yourself. You can't teach a child values of respect if you don't respect yourself. And there's a lot of that going on around....We have to recognize this culture clash. Be ready—the Washington Post is going to be going crazy....I'm raising reality on where we are.

On June 11th, Mrs. Obama will address the Anacostia Senior High School Commencement, a DC public school that Mrs. Obama visited in the spring of 2009 in conjunction with her Women of Excellence event and her early mentoring activities as First Lady.

Last year, FLOTUS spoke at the commencement for the Washington Math Science Technology Public Charter High School in Northeast.

Ronnie Jones, one of the 229 teachers laid off in last September's "reduction in force," filed suit in D.C. Superior Court on Feb. 18 claiming defamation, false light, and intentional infliction of emotional distress—all this due to Rhee's quote about removing "teachers who hit children, who had sex with children, who had missed 78 days of school."

Rhee's comments, the lawsuit claims, were "in furtherance of her plan to discredit the D.C. Public School teachers who were fired under the pretext of a RIF....At the time defendant Rhee made the statement alleged above, she knew it to be false and without merit." Furthermore, co-defendant Mayor Adrian M. Fenty "instead of disavowing and correcting the erroneous statement of defendant Rhee, all but ratified her comments and reiterated that she was doing a great job and was in fact the premier superintendent in the country."

For the record: "At no time did plaintiff ever engage in any of the inappropriate conduct alleged and the defendants know that to be the case."

Jones claims he "continues to suffer from severe and irreparable injury in his profession and community standing" and has "suffered permanent damage to his reputation as a law-abiding citizen of high moral character."

His attorney is Gregory Lattimer, no stranger to the Office of the Attorney General. You might remember him from his bulldog pursuit of the DeOnté Rawlings case.

Jones is seeking some $30 million in relief—$15 million each in compensatory and punitive damages. Getting any kind of judgment will be a tall order, however—proving that Rhee knew her comments were "false and without merit" when she was spoke them will be a tough sell, to say the least. Especially when records show that, while Rhee's utterance wasn't precise, it reflected more than a grain of truth.

As LL noted earlier this month, students will be expected on June 21 and 22—the built-in make-up days scheduled for the Monday and Tuesday after school was originally slated to end. In addition: Students will attend on March 19, originally a "professional development" day for teachers, and May 17, originally slated for parent-teacher conferences. And June 18, originally a half-day, is now a full day.

What DCPS didn't do: Add time to the school day, shorten spring break, or take away the Emancipation Day holiday. "[U]ltimately these scenarios were too costly," says a DCPS release.