The percentage Arizona schools spend in the classroom is down this year, and TUSD's percentage is especially low. You can look at this morning's Howard Fischer/Alexis Huicochea article in the Star which gives an overall look at and analysis of the stats, and you can get more detailed information from the Auditor General's Report of Arizona School District Spending for Fiscal Year 2015 which gives a breakdown of spending in every school district in the state.

The information can be taken apart and put together in any number of ways. The most obvious takeaway is, when less money is allotted per student—and as can't be repeated too often, Arizona is 48th, or lower, in the amount it spends per student—the percentage goes down in the classroom. Fixed costs remain fixed costs. You may be able to trim a bit from what you spend on building maintenance, transportation, food services and the like, but they're stubborn costs. You can't make a school too much colder or warmer to save on energy usage, you can only put off building maintenance so long, you can't make bus transportation much more "efficient" without cutting back on safety and student convenience, and you can't cut back too far on food services without cutting back on safety and nutrition. But you can always put a few more desks in a classroom for a few more students, hold on to outdated textbooks a few years longer, cut back on paper and other consumable supplies—and, of course, cut teacher salaries.

Look at teacher salaries. Arizona's are low. By cheating teachers of the compensation they deserve, we're lowering the amount we spend in the classroom. If we did nothing other than give teachers a salary boost while we kept all other district spending constant, we'd increase the percentage we spend in the classroom. But giving teachers a fair wage means districts have to spend money they don't have, thanks to our deadbeat legislature (#deadbeat).

Then look at class size. More students per class means less money is spent per student on our already-low-paid teachers. For example, if 25 students are in a classroom with a teacher who makes $40,000 a year, that comes to $1,600 per student. With 35 students, the cost goes down to $1,143, or $457 less per student spent on teachers. If we did nothing other than lower the number of students in a class, we'd increase the percentage we spend in the classroom. Add that to a raise for teachers, and the percentage increases still more. But if the state doesn't value education enough to spend closer to what other states spend, low teacher salaries and large classrooms are the inevitable result. You gotta keep costs down somewhere, and all those fixed costs are, well, fixed.

You know the drill: We're giving away two pairs of tickets to a UA Basketball game on Thursday, March 3 at 7 p.m. and you want to be there.

Enter by filling out our submission form. We'll call/email the winner on Wednesday midday, and the winner will have to be able to pick up the tickets at our northwest side office—we're open 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. every day.

Good luck!

I don't make a habit of posting long passages written by other people, but I did it Friday when I put up Richard Gilman's entire post on how scam private schools will pop up if the Empowerment Scholarship Accounts (aka Vouchers on Steroids) become universally available in Arizona, and I'm doing it today with a large portion of an editorial from the Arizona Republic. Because, if those folks can say it better than I can, I'm happy to give them the floor — or the post, as the case may be.

Over the years, the Republic has done some excellent investigative reporting on various aspects of education in Arizona. This editorial, Education needs don't match lawmaker wants, which links to some of the paper's recent articles, is a continuation of the tradition. After describing students who are in the greatest need of increased educational attention, children living in poverty in general and a large portion of our minority populations in particular, and saying we need to make a concerted effort to improve their educational attainment, the editorial criticizes lawmakers for moving in the opposite direction.

Arizona’s GOP majority Legislature is pushing an expansion of Empowerment Scholarship Accounts, a voucher program that takes money out of public schools to pay for private or church school tuition.

Touted as a way to increase school choice and help low-income students, the current program is most used by students in wealthy districts, reporting by The Republic found.

Arizona’s quest for school choice has resulted in a large number of charter schools. The unintended consequence: charters serve disproportionately fewer Latino students, according to the Arizona Center for Investigative Reporting.

Education tax credits, also designed to increase school choice, also fail to deliver for those who most need help. Tax credit money designated for private schools disproportionately benefits well-off families, according to another Republic investigation.

Public school tax credits also tend to go to wealthier schools, where parents can afford the donations.

Now lawmakers are considering what could be a significant blow to efforts to raise the achievement level of Arizona’s poorest and most disadvantaged students.

Mayor Jonathan Rothschild said voters will need to invest in the city of Tucson if it is going to thrive.

"In my 30 years in business, I learned this: You cannot cut your way to prosperity," Rothschild said today in his fifth State of the City address. "At some point, you have to invest, and that means looking at the revenue side of the equation."

Rothschild spent a big part of the speech to a full house at the Tucson Convention Center highlighting recent wins for the city: the ongoing revitalization of downtown, the success of his efforts to get homeless vets off the streets, the 613 lane miles of streets that have been repaved since voters approved road bonds in 2012 and other accomplishments.

And he said he was committed to offering voters the chance to change the current election system, which nominates candidates by ward in the primary who then run citywide, giving Democrats a commanding advantage on Election Day.

He also acknowledged the city's financial problems. The City Council is now grappling with a $25 million budget shortfall. Rothschild laid some of the blame at the feet of state government, which has shifted costs onto the city. 

But he said that Tucsonans can only count on themselves to fund city services.

"Services have to be paid for, and so we're going to have that conversation with the community," Rothschild said. "In fact, the conversation has already begun, with polling that indicates city voters are willing to consider a half-cent sales tax to support core services—roads, public safety, transit and parks."

He said the next step was developing a proposal for the voters.

"Soon, we'll be asking for a financial investment," Rothschild said. "And when we do, we'll have a detailed plan—like we did with the street bond—spelling out what core services the funds will be used for."

Here's a copy of the speech: 

Opponents of the proposed Rosemont Mine were cheering news that the open-pit project in the Santa Rita Mountains has been delayed indefinitely.

Officials from Rosemont Copper’s Canadian parent company, Hudbay Minerals, announced on Feb. 24 that the project has been put on hold because of low copper prices and regulatory hurdles.

But company officials added in a press release that they still plan to move forward with the Rosemont mine once copper prices rebound.

“Hudbay remains committed to advancing Rosemont, which is expected to be one of the first new copper projects to be built once copper prices and capital market conditions improve,” the release states.

Mine opponent Gayle Hartmann said the company’s confidence in the project is a smokescreen to keep investors on board.

“Of course they sound bullish,” said Hartmann, president of Save the Scenic Santa Ritas, a nonprofit group that has battled the project from the start. “It’s not real, but that’s the way they have to sound for their investors.”

You hear a lot about the first landing on the moon with Neil Armstrong, but surprisingly little about Apollo 17, the last manned flight to the moon and Gene Cernan, the last man to set foot on the lunar surface.

This is the documentary the man deserves, replete with his total cooperation. Cernan sits down for extensive interviews, taking you through his entire experience from the NASA training program, until that legendary walk.

There’s plenty of amazing footage and photos, including Cernan’s failed spacewalk before Apollo 17, and his driving the lunar lander on the moonscape. It’s incredible stuff.

Before we had our smart phones and Internet, there was a guy up there scratching his daughter’s initials into the moon’s surface. This film touches upon plenty, including Cernan’s marital woes and personal struggles as a product of the space program. What this man overcame to eventually take that moonwalk is mind boggling, and the troubles he experienced after totally make sense.

This documentary does a nice job portraying his struggles and triumphs. There’s an incredible moment near the film’s end where Cernan stands by the actual capsule where it rests today and ponders the mannequin now sitting in his seat. He wonders about the notion of whether or not anybody will ever visit the moon again, and actually gets a little frustrated. Then the movie simply cuts to Cernan fishing with his dog, trying to relax. He has most certainly earned many a fishing trip.

This guy was, is, and shall be a total badass. (Available for rent on iTunes, Amazon.com and On Demand during a limited theatrical run).

Astronaut Scott Kelly, the twin brother of Tucsonan and retired astronaut Mark Kelly, is headed back to earth tonight from nearly a year in space aboard the International Space Station. 

Apollo 13 Commander James Lovell talks about why Kelly's long trip was important:

Given these risks, why fly in space for a year?

Again, I must recall the words of President Kennedy: We pursue these ambitious goals of space flight “not because they are easy, but because they are hard.”

There is another reason: discovery. Scott has flown so long so we can make huge advancements in our understanding of how long-duration space flight impacts human physiology, something that is essential if we are ever going to travel to more distant destinations, such as Mars.

And because Scott happens to have an identical twin brother — a fellow retired astronaut and my friend, Capt. Mark Kelly — NASA researchers are using Mark as a control subject on Earth while Scott serves as the test subject 250 miles above us to gain even more knowledge about how living in a zero-gravity environment changes us.

One day, an American will walk on Mars. But we will get there only because we chose to do it and because our leaders in Washington decided it was important.

These future missions will show and Scott’s flight has demonstrated the power of American purpose: one person facing the mortal dangers of space for the sake of international cooperation, science and exploration; the resolve to once again test the limits of risk in order to win progress; and a nation marshaling its innovation to realize that victory.

The New York Times rounds up some fun facts about Kelly's trip here.

Meanwhile, National Geographic rounds up 15 of the best photos that Kelly posted on Twitter here.

"Donald Trump is America's back mole—it may have seemed harmless a year ago, but now that it has gotten frighteningly bigger, it is no longer wise to ignore it."

It's Super Tuesday, and as John Oliver points out at the beginning of the video below, that's a big deal—In every election since 1998, the candidate who has won the most states on Super Tuesday has gone on to be picked as their party's nominee.

Well, Super Tuesday is here and reality TV star, human piñata and recipient of one small million dollar loan is our Republican frontrunner. 

In a segment from Sunday's show, Oliver takes a look at four things Trump supporters name as his assets: he tells it like it is, he's funding his own campaign and is not beholden to anyone, he's tough and he's successful.


Super Tuesday may be a big indicator in the upcoming election, but Arizona voters still have some waiting to do—Our primary takes place on March 22, three weeks from today.