Tuesday, July 7, 2015

Ackerman's real mistake

A funny thing happened last week: People got angry at Arlene Ackerman for righting a wrong.

Ackerman's real mistake

Signe Wilkinson  06/13/11
Signe Wilkinson 06/13/11
Travel Deals

A funny thing happened last week: People got angry at Arlene Ackerman for righting a wrong. 

That followed the superintendent's announcement that the school district had come up with money to preserve full-day kindergarten. The district previously said kindergarten would have to be cut if the city or state didn't pony up more dough.

The announcement was awkward because Mayor Nutter had already called for new taxes for those very items. It was made more awkward by Ackerman's telling the mayor she had found the money only an hour before taking the podium. In the days since, politicians and activists have fixated on Ackerman's seeming shafting of Nutter.

City Controller Alan Butkovitz took Ackerman to task for risking an important political relationship. Shelly Yanoff, of Public Citizens for Children and Youth, said the superintendent had hurt her cause.

Fair points. The public schools need an effective advocate in City Hall and Harrisburg, and it's hard for Ackerman to be one when she's busy alienating people. But the criticism misses the larger point that saving kindergarten was the right thing to do.

What people should be angry with Ackerman for is creating this situation by threatening to cut kindergarten in the first place. There were other, less proven programs that could have been cut instead - and, we know now, there was an opportunity to move money around. (The district will be paying for kindergarten with Title I funds reserved for other programs.)

Ackerman said she learned of the opportunity only shortly before her announcement, but that in itself shows she'd failed to do due diligence before throwing kindergarten under the bus.

The point is not to credit Ackerman for changing course - she should be able to find plenty of comfort in her compensation package. The point is that Philadelphians in general should spend more energy getting angry about what Ackerman actually did wrong - threaten a dramatic, unnecessary cut.

Maybe it's because we're used to brinkmanship in this town. Just two years ago, faced with a big deficit and in need of help from Harrisburg, Mayor Nutter introduced a "Plan C" that involved the closing of all libraries and recreation centers, and trash pickup every other week. We can't say for sure that Ackerman and the school district were up to the same thing this year, but it's quite possible kindergarten was being held hostage in an attempt to wring more money from the city - especially when you consider that the district could easily have cut something like summer school instead.

Brinkmanship works. It's hard for a mayor, governor, City Council or whoever to withhold money while constituents worry that, for example, the police department is going to be severely cut. What's more, brinkmanship is often practiced in the name of a good cause. Maybe that was even the case with the district - maybe the administration didn't have to cut kindergarten, but hey, cutting summer school is bad, too. If threatening to cut kindergarten could have saved summer school, would that have been so bad?

But the ends don't justify the means here. Threatening dramatic, unnecessary cuts breaks down the public dialogue: It deprives citizens (and officials) of real information, and forces them to form opinions and make decisions based on guesses.

If an official's cause is worthy, an honest accounting should suffice. Even the school district, right now, has a strong case to make as it stares down teacher layoffs and other cuts.

There's a strange justice in Ackerman paying a political price for rescuing a kindergarten program that never should have been in danger.

But the city can't count on irony to punish misbehaving pols. Brinkmanship should be taboo - and Ackerman held to account for her actual sin.

Follow us on Twitter and review city services on our sister site, City Howl.

We encourage respectful comments but reserve the right to delete anything that doesn't contribute to an engaging dialogue.
Help us moderate this thread by flagging comments that violate our guidelines.

Comment policy:

Philly.com comments are intended to be civil, friendly conversations. Please treat other participants with respect and in a way that you would want to be treated. You are responsible for what you say. And please, stay on topic. If you see an objectionable post, please report it to us using the "Report Abuse" option.

Please note that comments are monitored by Philly.com staff. We reserve the right at all times to remove any information or materials that are unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane, indecent or otherwise objectionable. Personal attacks, especially on other participants, are not permitted. We reserve the right to permanently block any user who violates these terms and conditions.

Additionally comments that are long, have multiple paragraph breaks, include code, or include hyperlinks may not be posted.

Read 0 comments
comments powered by Disqus
About this blog
Every year, city government spends slightly more than $4 billion. Where does all that money come from? More importantly, where does it go? Are we getting the most bang for our tax buck? “It's Our Money” is a joint project between Philadelphia Daily News and WHYY, funded by the William Penn Foundation, designed to answer these questions.

It's Our Money contributors

Tips? Comments? Questions?

Holly Otterbein:

It's Our Money
Also on Philly.com
letter icon Newsletter