Friday, November 17, 2017

Fwd: TeenBloc is in full swing



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: A+ Schools
TeenBloc: Elevating Student Voice

TeenBloc is A+ Schools' youth leadership program that works directly with students on issues that affect their school experiences. The program is a coalition of student leaders and organizers in Pittsburgh-area high schools whose purpose is to raise the student voice and create positive change in education. TeenBloc advocates for students and at the same time teaches students to advocate for themselves. 

This past summer, TeenBloc held a Youth Organizing Academy that engaged close to 20 students in advocacy and leadership development. The students learned goal-setting, communication skills, organizing techniques and how to analyze and address issues that affect them and their peers.

Since the summer, students have met on a regular basis in both citywide and chapter meetings to continue to develop their issue campaign around effective teaching and to plan a major youth conference that will be held in January. 

Directly below you'll find more information on the citywide meeting, the conference and how to get involved in TeenBloc.  

Inform and Take Action

Calling all students to attend the next TeenBloc Citywide Meeting on Tuesday, November 21, 2017 from 4:30 to 6:30 p.m. The meeting will be held at 1901 Centre Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15219 in the Hill District. 
Click here to RSVP.

Click here to listen to some of our TeenBloc students talk about their experiences on "The Youth Block" podcast as part of Youth Express radio service. 

Watch our latest episode of "Education Update" on PCTV, which focuses on the TeenBloc program. 

To join a TeenBloc chapter meeting or to learn more about media training and podcast opportunities, contact Brandon Ahmauri, PULSE Fellow and TeenBloc Coordinator at: bmcclendon@aplusschools.org or 412-697-1298 ext. 104. 

MLK Dreaming Radically Youth Conference

TeenBloc will host its inaugural MLK Dreaming Radically Youth Conference on Monday, January 15, 2018 from 1:00 to 7:00 p.m. 

The conference will be held at 1901 Centre Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15219 in the Hill District. 

The purpose of the conference is to help students recognize and celebrate their individual and shared power. Participants will brainstorm sustainable solutions regarding their educational experiences, develop action plans and network with other student leaders and activists. 

The event is free and open to high school students throughout the Pittsburgh area. 

Contact Brandon Ahmauri at: bmcclendon@aplusschools.org or 412-697-1298 ext. 104 for more information. 
 
Click here to register for the conference.


STAY CONNECTED:
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter


A+ Schools, 1901 Centre Avenue, Suite 302A, Pittsburgh, PA 15219


Learning Links

The Origin of Everything YouTube Channel from PBS investigates the “why” behind many aspects of everyday life. The fun videos are perfect for your most curious students, or for getting students excited about learning on their own. Video topics range from history (Why is there a South and North Korea?) to pop culture (Where does the #Hashtag come from?).
Quizlet Diagrams help students see what they're learning in a whole new way. Whether you're studying human anatomy or national geography, this new feature makes studying a lot more fun. Create custom diagrams, or choose from Quizlet's premade sets.


Sadly, Quizlet is not free. Get a free period of 14-days, then pay for the year. I won't be paying. 

Monday, November 13, 2017

Aquatics and Pittsburgh Public Schools


Tip: You might want to view this on the SlideShare site so it can easily go to full screen.

Ask for the PDF or Keynote if you want parts or all of it.

Fwd: Call for Action re Tax Cuts and Jobs Act



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Valerie Smith, Swarthmore College


Dear Members of the Swarthmore Community,
Late last week I joined Haverford President Kim Benston and Bryn Mawr President Kim Cassidy '85 in sending a slightly modified version of the following letter to our elected officials in Washington. It expresses why the recently proposed House version of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act will directly harm higher education in this country. The Act includes a number of changes to the tax code that will significantly increase the cost both of college and of student debt. While the Senate version of the bill is not quite as onerous, it also imposes new excise taxes on private college and universities, and it does not appear to provide the long-promised middle class tax "relief." I write now to urge you to familiarize yourself with this quickly unfolding legislation, which will almost certainly change again, and to ask you to consider texting, emailing, and/or calling your representatives in the House and Senate to stand with us in opposition to the bill, in whole or in part.
Sincerely,
Valerie Smith
President

***************************
At a time when lawmakers and the public should be keenly focused on lowering college cost and student debt burdens, this bill makes higher education in America more costly and less accessible. It harms higher education in the following ways:
 New excise taxes on approximately 70 private college endowments will take millions of dollars away from needy students and vital college operations. Endowment income plays a major role in maintaining financial aid and covering educational costs. The taxation of this income will weaken access to college, academic programs, and physical plants. It will directly cause job losses at many colleges and universities (thereby hurting local economies). Simply put, taxing our endowment will seriously harm our ability to support our academic mission, our commitment to public engagement, and our determination to make a liberal arts education accessible and affordable to all qualified students. It will almost certainly divert resources away from helping students.
• The elimination of colleges' access to tax free funding (via the municipal bond market) will hurt their ability to build and maintain educational facilities at a reasonable cost. Here at Swarthmore, we have issued our debt through the Swarthmore Borough Authority, thereby benefitting our broader community. While this provision was excluded from the Senate bill, it remains in the House proposal.
• The elimination of itemized deductions among 95% of taxpayers will greatly reduce charitable giving, as will the elimination of the estate tax. The loss of this support will directly reduce giving to charitable organizations, including Swarthmore, and would affect both financial aid for students in need and educational programming that prepares students to be productive citizens.
• Three repeals that penalize students—the repeal of the deduction for interest on tuition loans; the repeal of the Hope Scholarships Tax Credit; and the repeal of the Lifelong Learning Credit will make it harder for Americans to afford college tuition and will significantly increase student debt. The result will be less educated and less solvent citizens. 

•  The House and Senate bills both propose taxing benefits that colleges and universities typically provide for their employees. Most significantly, the proposals would tax dependent tuition benefits as well as educational benefits for employees. Other benefits, such as access to our health facilities could be taxed as well. These proposals will add a burden on our employees and run counter to our deeply held belief in the value of education and wellness.
In addition to the negative practical consequences of this bill, it sets a dangerous precedent. Much of the money in our endowment is the result of charitable donations from individuals looking to provide scholarship and aid for students and to advance the pursuit of education and knowledge for the next generation. With this bill, the federal government is replacing the donor's intent for the use of their funds with the government's intent, setting a dangerous precedent for all charitable giving in America.
The cumulative result of these tax changes will be losses in jobs and national economic health; educational access and quality; innovation and discovery; and American global competitiveness. 

For over a century, the United States has offered higher education that is the envy of the world, enhancing our global standing and competitiveness. The proposed legislation will do lasting damage to our system of national education, hurting us at home and abroad for countless years to come. Although this bill is framed as a way to make colleges more affordable, we believe it will have the opposite effect, as colleges may be forced to move funding allocated for scholarship and aid. This will directly harm students and their families. We urge you to reject or significantly amend this harmful bill. 

Swarthmore College 500 College Avenue
Swarthmore, PA | 19081 US

powered by emma

Sunday, November 12, 2017

Fwd: It's Back! Applications Are Now Open For Chile 2018

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "ISLA Lifeguards" <info@islasurf.org>
Date: Nov 12, 2017 9:45 AM
Subject: It's Back! Applications Are Now Open For Chile 2018
To: "Mark Rauterkus" <mark@rauterkus.com>
Cc:

We Are Lifeguards. We Are Globetrotters. We Are Activists. We Are ISLA.
Visit our website for more information on our humanitarian operations.
 
Is this email not displaying correctly? view it in your browser.

CHILE LIFEGUARD EXCHANGE

JANUARY 10 - 21, 2018
 
 
Don't miss this opportunity of a lifetime! Share your skills abroad while boosting your professional knowledge of lifesaving by joining ISLA's fifth lifeguard exchange in Chile.

Our team of International lifeguards will spend the first few days preparing to provide water safety for the Pucon Ironman 70.3, then the ISLA team will head to the port city of Valparaiso to lifeguard the beach during the busy summer season.  Checkout pictures from some of our prior Chilean Lifeguard Exchanges HERE!

Applicants who are fluent in Spanish are not required, but highly desired. Applications close November 26th 2017, so don't delay your submission. 
LEARN MORE

WHO WE ARE

ISLA is the world's leading surf lifesaving development organization. Since 2008 we have:
  • Conducted 47 Humanitarian Projects
  • Deployed Over 377 volunteers 
  • Operations in 6 continents 
  • Trained over 1,000 lifeguards
  • Donated over $100,000 in lifesaving equipment
REQUEST ISLA SERVICES
Text

Upcoming Projects

Join us on our next humanitarian trip.
Text

Certification

Recognized in 6 continents.
Text

Membership

Unlock discounts on over 300 brands. 
Text

Store

The only place to find official ISLA swag.

 

       
 
Copyright © 2017 International Surf Lifesaving Association, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you support lifesaving and drowning prevention.






This email was sent to mark@rauterkus.com
why did I get this?    unsubscribe from this list    update subscription preferences
International Surf Lifesaving Association · 8941 Atlanta Avenue #220 · Huntington Beach, California 92646 · USA

Friday, November 10, 2017

Fwd: This is Armistice Day



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: John H


It's long past time for us to act to force our government to end the senseless wars of aggression we have been waging since 2003.  It is time to examine our past actions in the light of the harsh reality they present.  And it is time to raise our voices to our politicians demanding that they act in our interests and not those of the military/industrial/intelligence contractors and the corporate whores who support and profit from these futile and destructive wars. 

We have become the 'evil empire' imposing our will (or attempting to) upon the rest of the world.  While we shiver in fear of terrorism, most of which we are directly responsible for, too few of us recognize what it is that we as a nation have become and how most of the rest of the world have come to see us.  This is a form of propaganda induced mental disease from which we must somehow recover before we allow our leaders to resort to nuclear Armageddon in a futile attempt to sustain world dominance.

In the attached article Edith Bell proposes an excellent first start.


John



Wednesday, November 08, 2017

Fwd: Race, Repression and Russiagate

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: John H

It's important to look around every so often and reflect on just how this "system" of ours deals out major parts of society and those it can't directly control with propaganda denigrates as communists, revolutionaries, criminals and otherwise "bad people".  Because this has become the norm and because the most common victims of this treatment are Blacks and other folks of color, it is incumbent on the part of whites to recognize and respond as best we can.  The history of this process is long, disturbing and terribly destructive of the values most of us pretend to hold dear but seldom rise to defend.

John

Tuesday, November 07, 2017

Incline covers today's ballot question

City employees as coaches

source: https://theincline.com/2017/11/03/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-yes-or-no-questions-on-tuesdays-ballot/

Pittsburgh city employees currently cannot coach a sports team for Pittsburgh Public Schools and get paid for it. But the ballot question before city voters asks if that should change. Here’s what you’ll see on the ballot:
Shall Section 707 Multiple Employment Prohibited, of the Pittsburgh Home Rule Charter be amended to permit a compensated City employee to hold a compensated position as a part-time athletic coach in a public school system or a compensated part-time educational position at a public institution of higher learning, as more fully described in Pittsburgh Ordinance 36?
City employees can have one paid job with the city. They can’t have a second paid job with other public entities, including schools or public universities. According to the city’s Home Rule Charter, exceptions include:
  • Member of the Pennsylvania National Guard or federal reserve
  • The city controller and deputy controller can have the same roles for Pittsburgh Public Schools.
  • A city treasurer can also be a treasurer for PPS.
  • Member or employee of a sinking fund commission or pension board
  • PPS employee from May to September
If approved, more exceptions would be added to the list — like the ones on Tuesday’s ballot.
Since this is part of the Home Rule Charter, changing it required a ballot question. Legislation authorizing the ballot question was first introduced to city council in May and signed by Mayor Bill Peduto in July. The legislation specifies: “For each exception, the Department of Personnel shall develop a strict multiple employment policy and enforcement procedure to ensure employee integrity and compliance.”
Council Member Corey O’Connor, who sponsored the legislation with Natalia Rudiak and Bruce Kraus, stressed that when it comes to coaches, school employees are always given first preference. But if there’s an opening after that, this change would allow a city employee to apply, he said. City workers could also apply to teach a class at a public university or community college.
Rudiak said she heard from constituents that there was a need for coaches in the public schools, so the legislation started as a way to make city employees eligible for those part-time jobs. City employees can already teach or coach at private schools, Rudiak pointed out.
City employees also showed interest in being able to teach in higher education, she said.
The rule prohibiting multiple employers was likely designed to prevent city employees from collecting full-time paychecks and other benefits from two entities funded with public dollars, O’Connor said. But coaches don’t make much money, he said.
“You’re not getting paid thousands of dollars here,” O’Connor said.

Monday, November 06, 2017

Conservative foil: Sue Kerr of Pgh Lesbian Correspondents


Let's ponder the definition. “Conservative” is holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation, typically in relation to politics or religion.

Sue Kerr, a blogger, (I am a blogger too) is playing the role of a conservative and asking people to vote “NO” to the City of Pittsburgh ballot measure that I have championed because:

- She has not found anyone with actual facts, however, she refused to answer my friend request on Facebook and refused to discuss this with me despite my repeated approaches to her. So, her seeking is more like planned avoidance. Come on Sue. Why can't we be friends? One of my central themes as a coach and advocate for better government is “playing well with others.”

- Then she writes, “the narrow exclusion would only benefit a few people.” Really? You really want to put hardships on super-minorities? You think that because only a fraction of the population is (insert letter of your choice) that they don't deserve the rights of others? What about protection against discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity? Hey, that is a “narrow” and those protections only benefit a few people. So, let's let things as they are. So conservative of you.

Pittsburgh passed a law with sexual orientation protection and that benefits few – and I'm proud to have that as part of the fabric of our city's legacy. Helping a few people helps us all be better, be stronger, be more whole. At its roots, the ballot question is about non-discrimination. I don't like discrimination, even for a few, and I'm puzzled why you favor it.

- Vote no, posts Sue, “because some are already coaching and teaching in public universities as adjunct faculty (just Google a few names.)” What? Who? Name names! I know of none. Should we google the entire city payroll? And, what might that uncover? I don't have the names of all the city workers. Sue, why don't you send this posting to Michael Lamb, city controller. Does your partner work for CCAC? I don't know what to think. I lost my decoder ring anyway. And, let's say it is true in that perhaps there are a few workers in the city who are already working another part-time job, against the norm and city charter's stipulations, for CCAC and /or Pittsburgh Public Schools – then what? Do you want to whistleblow? Or, would you just forgive them and not allow others the same opportunities? Then vote YES with me. Or, are you just without any logic and wishing to spread fog and doubt?

- Since, as Sue posted, “enforcement of this ban has certainly not been consistent” then it makes sense to vote YES and be done with this opportunity for meaningless rule-breaking. All should know that I championed this ballot question because last year a newly-hired coach was forced off of the PPS job because of his city employment with the department of public works. Real work actions, to my knowledge, have been fully consistent and ethical. He should not have worked last year – and he didn't. But, he should be able to work as a coach next week if we change the charter. And, I hope he applies, gets hired and takes another coaching job as soon as possible.

- Sue thinks a no vote is wise because of a lack of an informed perspective. Wrong. The matter before the voters in the election is for part-time employment. Part-time employment for public-school coaching and adjunct teaching at CCAC is different. The charter's authors didn't visualize every possible situation under the sun for the future of our city. This is an enhancement. Be progressive.

The quote from Mr. O'Connor of city council speaks against a broader exemption as being problematic, but this ballot question is specific and NOT A PROBLEM.
Ms. Rudiak of city council defends the ballot question too. The change is what it is. It is not an exemptions for all types of government side work. It is a question with focus. Perhaps Sue likes uncertainty and sinister plots within her ballot questions. I don't.

- Sue goes on to slam Natalia Rudiak for leaving office at the end of her term. She didn't seek re-election because she is moving on to other chapters in her life. “Who would champion such a thing?” is a direct question from Sue. Answer: A reasonable person who listens to citizens' concerns and does her job while she is hired to do her job. I'm happy that Natalia has not been a lame duck for an entire year.

Sue attempts to throw stones now at the messenger and not the message, a childish ploy.

Sue then plays the not forthcoming victim yet won't converse with me. Joke is on Sue.

Sue gets it wrong again when she posts that the goal is to create more employment and side income opportunities for City employees. Wrong! That is not the goal. Sue knows what the goal is, as the first line of her blog post reads, “… I think students in Pittsburgh Public Schools (PPS) deserve good coaches.” That's the goal. We had a good coach knocked off of a part-time coaching job opportunity because of a city-charter provision that worked AGAINST good coaching. Here is the formula from 2016-17 season on the PPS pool deck: 2 coaches, minus one, equals less coaching. That's bad. Help fix it.

- Sue asks a question for another day and another referendum, “Why not allow employees to do holiday temp work with the postal service?” That's not the issue. Your thinking that voters should pick “NO” because this ballot question is not going to help the postal service is crazy talk. I'm happy Sue thinks coaching is important. No amount of her lengthy googling should get in the way of a YES vote on this simple measure.

- Sue asks: Is it reasonable to amend our City constitution to address select employment vacancies in PPS? Isn’t that the responsibility of PPS? NO! The sticking point is the city, not PPS. The problem is with the city's charter, not PPS. When fixing a problem, go to the source of the problem. Victims are not to blame.

We’re talking 3,100 people who would be ineligible out of the whole population of the City. Is that a reason to change the constitution? YES. Vote yes. Problem fixed. Changes made. No blood required. This is not a drastic measure. I hate to write such a drastic blog post too.

The 3,100 people who work for the city account for the second largest block of employed people in the city. If five great coaches come from the ranks of the city's work force, they could impact hundreds of kids a year. Whole schools and neighborhoods could change. Teen violence might reversed itself. I know that I help to teach about 200 kids how to swim and swim better every year. In the course of my career, more than 10,000 kids have called me “coach.” The impact of a few coaches can be tremendous. I think that some of the folks who work in the city should have the same opportunities to contribute to the community in meaningful ways as I have had the good fortune to do as well.

I've been known to recruit coaching help for employment needs anywhere and everywhere. Even at UPMC and at AGH. Last year, an kid of an AGH employee was employed with our Summer Dreamers Swim & Water Polo Camp. Furthermore, it is HARD to find qualified candidates to coach in part-time positions. There is a world-wide shortage of lifeguards. Coaching shortages are, well, just google it yourself, Sue.
Sue says that this proposed change will disproportionately benefit men. Sue, ever hear of Title IX? There are not fewer opportunities for women coaches. And, women and men make the same money in coaching with PPS as it is a union-negotiated amount. Double-wrong.

OMG Sue, here is my answer for your absurd question that follows. Yes. Anyone can sue anyone at any time. Sue's Q: “Does this set up the possibility for excluded employees to sue the City because they are not able to pursue a sorting gig with the USPS over the holidays?” No one answered that question – except me.

Only a conservative crank would use the lack of a robust research process on the charter provision’s history – paralysis by analysis – as an excuse for a no vote.

Coaching is a privilege. I am privileged. I coach boys and girls. Title IX insures that the boys and girls get equal treatment.

I do not want to see our police union in Harrisburg at the PA Supreme Court in litigation seeking rights to move their homes and their kids into school districts that are out of the city. Rather, I'd be more willing to permit employees of the city, such as those on the police force, to be permitted to coach their sons and daughters and their classmates in the city's schools programs of sports, music, chess, drama, debate – with part-time jobs. For some, being engaged in the lives of their children is important. And, it is important enough that if my city prohibited that from happening, moving out of the city makes great sense. Let's keep those people here.

And you'd rather have a volunteer coach from the ranks of city employees – for further hardships on families. A volunteer coach isn't accountable. A volunteer coach has no standing with the district and can be flicked aside by the PFT in a heart-beat. Clueless odds are high. I do not want evenly applied coaching employment. I want talented, inspiring coaches. You seem to want to keep employees of the city within financial distress.

Your commending of the city employees who put forth this suggestion is misplaced too. A city resident and a PPS coach, acting on my own, seeing the reality of situations, put forth the ballot measure. The city and the district have been reserved. Let's all applaud people who act with integrity and let's all fix flaws, together. Both big and small flaws count. Don't get in the way of progress because it has always been done in another flawed way. This is fair. This is complete for what it is. If you want utopia, put it on the ballot yourself.

A good reason for you to block this YES vote is because a women helped get it in front of the voters and she is quitting. We are losing women in elected roles so we should not pass measures that they help to advance. Come on.

You, Sue, can write the post-office ballot measure for 2018. Go for it.

By the way, off of society's needs can't be put into one YES or NO ballot measure. By voting YES, the citizens of Pittsburgh get to side-step and fix a WORST-PRACTICE clause in the city's charter. It isn't about “best-practices” – but rather about making improvements.

Saturday, November 04, 2017

Fwd: What killed the Democratic Party?

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: John H

I am sending this article along because William Greider is anything by a radicle lift-winger.  If anything he is an traditional mainstream Democrat.  Yet, in this article, he clearly endorses a report by the Sanders wing of the Party entitled Autopsy: The Democratic Party in Crisis in which the real reasons for the Democratic Party's loss are diagnosed.  You may also want to listen to the Real News Network interview of Bill Curry, a former aide to President Clinton, on this issue.  In fact, you really should do both.



John

Link: