A few thoughts from an interested taxpayer, parent and voter:
The never-ending annual School budget debate has resumed. It seems that the two most frequently argued positions are also back without apology. On one side is the "let's spend anything, it's for our children" advocates and on the other side it is the "Let's cut, cut, cut" crowd. It's grown tiresome, predictable and pathetic.
Keeping in mind that the Selectmen and Finance Committees have already modestly increased the school budget the argument isn't really about cuts is it? It's all about spending.
Our school budget problem is not that costs increase, it's that school costs increase at a rate that not realistic.
So what's realistic?
In a town where tax revenues grow at roughly 2.5 - 3% a year a realistic budget should grow at roughly 2% - 2.5% annually or about a $550,000 increase in this year's school budget. That's not bad -- especially if you're a private sector type where budgets grow far slower. Its also not the $1.3 million dollar increase the School Administration is seeking.
In our school district, teacher compensation, which is roughly 80% or more of the school budget, has historically grown at about 5.5% annually or nearly twice the rate of tax revenue (town income) growth.
Spending money at twice your income has never been a recipe for fiscal health or long-term financial viability.
To fix the school's budget problems you need to fix expenses; you need to set total compensation cost growth (salary, steps, longevity, stipends, etc) at 2.5% - 3% annually. That's the fix.
I'd like to hear the School Committee and Administration talking expense management and talking labor costs. Arguing about how much to spend on paper, paint and chalk is sort or pointless if nobody's ever going to talk about the 80% of the budget (teacher compensation) that's sinking the ship.
Personally, I don't think taxpayers are willing to pay higher property taxes so that teachers can get annual wage increases of 5 - 5.5%. It seems as though the School Administration and School Committee are thinking otherwise.
Wouldn't it be nice if all the grown ups could get in a room together and agree that in a town where tax revenues grow at roughly 2.5 - 3% a year a realistic budget should grow at roughly 2% - 2.5% annually? Or, about a $580,000 increase. A $580,000 increase in the school budget seems both reasonable and affordable.
And, wouldn't it be really nice if the School Committee and School Administration would assume some genuine fiscal responsibility and reality and actually manage all expenses to a roughly 2% - 2.5% annual growth budget?
It just doesn't seem to need to be so hard, so political and so divisive. And, it certainly does not require the drama and theatrics that the School Administration and School Committee seems to bring to the budget hearing process and their televised meetings.
16 comments:
The Truth Maker would comment to Brother Bob, that you once again have made an astute evaluation, as to what is presently a real predicament within the mind set of the present leadership of our school district.
What I am perplexed about, is how after our district fought for a model litteracy program to be implimented, to forfill a long time need within the district is now being considered, as the means upon which the leadership of our district is planning to gut, to medigate the hiring of office personal.
No matter what one may say in regards to Dr. Johnson, she fought the battle to bring our district up to the standards that has been missing from our schools. This program is a model for others to follow around the commonwealth and now every one on the school committee is willing to simply turn a blind eye and not demand that the present Superintendant provide a clear and desive responce in his attempt to undermine a world class litteracy program here in Sandwich.
Bob you would be correct in evaluating the present philosphy.
It is all about the money for salaries and not programs.
It is also time for a charter change, where the Superintendent shall submit a balanced budget to the School Committee, for approval, rather then some proposed line item wish list that is disingenous at best on the backs of good educational programs that have shown to have provided a rewarding experience for those children that need this extra help, with out being placed in some special needs class, so that the school district can obtain more funding from the chapter 70 money
On good way to save would be to eliminate programs that do not work, like Project Excell. Save the reading an math and admit camp no one is learning is a money pit.
There has been no transparency in the budget process with regards to the LIteracy Program. Disappointing to say the least. A program that has been been documented as having educational and financial positive impact on the school district being cut for what reason is the question I ask. Cutting it is cutting services and cutting excellence. Interesting about the k-8 coordinator jobs. The union told it's people not to apply. But these plum jobs are already filled because teachers went against the unions to apply anyway. The coordinators will do two sessions of teaching and have the rest of their day to coordinate. Same union folks that have been part of the stalemate to the system now in leadership. Go figure. That seems a little risky as compared to the Literacy Program's known success. Of course who cares about the million dollar tax payer investment in the Literacy Program. Sure is easy to spend other people's money. Hope the School Committee gets a chance to talk about this tonight.
The Truth Maker would ask the good citizens of Sandwich with children in our school district. Will your child be better of with less support in the litteracy programs, as is being proposed by the latest budget proposal by the present superintendent of schools and the school committee last night???
Our district, just spent thousands of dollars to enhance this need in our district over the past several years, because the Commonwealth of Massachusetts had shown our school district we were not living up to the needs in this area and it had a very weak program in place to prevent our young children with these needs from failing.
Again much effort and time along with taxpayers dollars went into re-establishing a program of excellence, that enhanced the educational experiences of those children that were falling through the cracks. Children at a young age
were being classified as special needs children, when in fact, they were not. They just needed some one,to provide a little more support at an earlier age to overcome what was being denied to them in the learning experience, during the formative years of development.
Each school had its own idea and not one had the same guidlines or measuring tools in place.
Dr. Johnson fought a long battle to unify all three schools to produce a product that was the same and measurable for all.
So I ask, are we are now are going to focas all of programs to the High School at the expence of the lower grade development educational process?
The basic foundation of education begins at the lower grades and if the foundation is not solid,and no matter what programs, you will have at the high school, can overcome the intial learning failures and the by-product will only be more failure. Is that what we want here in Sandwich?
Science, Math, Music and Engineering all begin with the basic understanding of being litteral, if we cannot understand what the words tell us, how in the world can we achieve excellance, in some 2020 visonary goal?
Bob G, unless I missed a very entertaining meeting this budget season it looks like the "drama and theatrics" went the way of the former chairman and good riddance. This committee's not perfect but they've been behaving themselves even not taking the bait when Marie talks down to them like they're idiots.
TO 11:27 THE REASON NO DRAMA IS SIMPLE. NO DR J AND THE CHAIR AND VISE CHAIR ARE NOT CAUSING ANY PROLBEMS. BUT I AM SURE THAT DOESN'T MEAN A THING TO YOU
;
Well said Truth Maker but a day late and a dollar short. The program was slashed last night and I doubt seriously that it will be up for discussion. Only Robert Catallini spoke up about the process and in defense of the Literacy Program. A couple of other members made sense about other issues in the lengthy discussion, but no one really knew what to do besides vote Canfield's budget up or down. With 6 people there is could have gone down with a tie vote, which may have gotten them to negotiations instead of speeches. Not that some of the speeches weren't admirable. But it's over now. Of course they may not get the money they want which will bring it back to the drawing table. Parents are apathetic and why wouldn't they be and teachers are afraid to talk except to whine about the contract. It is so funny to me that no one has ever mentioned that it might be the teachers holding up the contract. The ludicrous PR presentation being played out at the SC meetings, that the suffering teachers are waiting for the School Committee to become good guys is unbelievable except when you think of it being in Sandwich that this little show is playing out. It is such an insult to parents and taxpayers. Maybe the teacher last night who called the unsigned contract a distraction and said he would rather be home grading papers time would be better spent convincing his union negotiators to get the job done from the negotiating table. Times have changed folks. Do any of your pick up a paper and check out what is happening the rest of the world. Take responsibility for your actions union.
A "vise chair" sounds damn painful --- I could see why it could cause "prolbems".
The Truth Maker would state to poster 2/1/12 3.23 that it is to bad that the vote went the way it did. Many points if discusssion were lacking by the Superintendent in the presenting of this whole process. If you were to look back into history, I had spoken to this in other postings over the past several weeks.
As it stands now, the only change may come is when the proposed budget is being hashed out by the Selectmen and finance committee.
I am afraid that this school budget lacks the crediability to sustain a long interview process.
On one side you will have the number that was given to the schools to generate a budget around and on the other side you have the number being proposed by the school committee.
One can see a wide difference remains between both numbers and that will need to be reconsiled, before it is a final number for town meeting.
Once again working programs that have had measurable positive results are being circumvented to add discourse to the process of presenting a budget that has more to do with paying salaries then placing educational experiences before the children of our town.
Once again it will be the children that get hurt in this process, I ask, where is the trust in building good relationships with those of us that get to see all the infighting, but not the actual reasons as why?
As far, as the continued, intimindation by the leaders of the union go. Perhaps it is time to disband the union leadership and get some in that really care about the children they all proclaim to care about?
It is also time for the school board to get out of the contractual negoiations going forward and make it a requirement of the School Superintendent that he or she do all of the negoiations as part of there contract to lead our school district.
To Anon 11:27:
The drama and theatrics I was referring to was the Administrations’ endless public campaign for and discussion of a budget that would grow by as much as $1.3 million dollars.
The Super and the School Committee knew that that budget amount would never fly. They been told so repeatedly AND the Committee itself was never prepared to recommend that number.
So, why the Super and the Committee endlessly discussed this pie in the sky, pipe dream spending figure instead of a more realistic spending plan is beyond me.
I like realism. The only things I want sugar coated are my doughnuts.
Thank you Truth Maker for several of your points regarding the union contract. First of all, I would like to remind the teachers and the union of a few things:
1. You are all getting paid for your jobs. And at an average salary of 40K, you are getting paid nicely.
2. You are all receiving your benefits and pensions.
3. You are all receiving about 3 months of vacation time.
The only thing you are not getting is a retroactive salary increase? Move on - NO ONE gets that anymore.
I am so tired of teachers not showing up for school events because the union told them not to. And to be honest, I think the majority of teachers are tired of not being 'allowed' to show up without fear of the union bullies.
I am a huge fan of our teachers and agree with the Truth Maker that a change in leadership needs to happen within the union so that we can all move on.
I also strongly agree with the Truth Maker that to have the School Committee involved in union contracts is crazy. They are not lawyers and have no business trying to negoiate a contract. This is not even touching on the fact that there is almost always some type of conflict of interest for at least one member of the committee. Maybe if the School Committee did not have an impact on the contract, the union would finally stop trying to fill the empty seats with the puppets.
I agree with your last comment Bob G. completely. How I hate the the shell game of asking for more as a negotiation to a number. In truth maybe we need to changer or budget time frame and not come up with financial guidance till after the Governor's budget. Seems like all we do is spend Jan-May arguing about the budget. If we are, and I think we are a conservative community, that wants to live in our financial realities why are we wasting so much time and tearing our town apart year after year. We've been there done that where the speeches about value of education is concerned. RC missed that. History paints a very consistent picture, this town doesn't care about education and part of that is just an economic reality. Of course watching the amount of time devoted to the Jr. High sports program during Tuesday budget discussion gives you a clue. This was perhaps the worst School Budget process I've seen and the decisions of the School Committee sadly send the message that no one really knows what they are doing. But what can we expect with our 4th Superintendent in a 10 year span. Last year the super. could do no right. This year the super can do no wrong. The community has checked out. We are all on survival mode and many of us wish we had the sweet deals those on the town's payroll do.
Teachers do far better than a $40K avg ---- that's just starting pay. The Sandwich avg is over $60K/year with many in the $70K range.
Not true. L
Just to be clear -- according to the Mass DOE the average Sandwich teacher made $69,609 in 2010 -- the state average was $68,781. Other surrounding towns were:
69,883 maspee
66,010 bourne
71,156 falmouth
72,234 barnstable
58,568 wareham
You can see it yourself at: http://profiles.doe.mass.edu/profiles/teacher.aspx?orgcode=02610000&orgtypecode=5&leftNavId=815&
And, if you look at the 2010 Town Report you will see many teachers exceed $70,000. The President of the union, however, did not -- she only brought in $69,295.81 in 2010.
(see http://www.sandwichmass.org/PublicDocuments/Sandwich%202010%20Town%20Report.pdf )
Post a Comment