As you slowly pick yourself back up off the floor, we'll tell you that you read that correctly. Phil Frei stated at the April 26th board work-study session on the 2011-12 budget that 1.6% raises had been budgeted for the nearly 60 members of Administration and Administration Support. Yep...these are the most highly paid folks in the district. We're still not sure whether that tidbit was meant for public ears, what with all the indignation about revealing how much had been budgeted for raises last year.
Did y'all get a 1.6% raise this year? Let's see... those on Social Security did NOT. They've been frozen for 2 years. State workers have gotten the golden goose egg for the past 2 years, and could conceivably get zero for the next four years.
But...but...Didn't Admin Support receive rather hefty "Market Equity Adjustments" in August 2009?
True, true...go tell it to your board members; see if they care (actually some do). But the fact remains that 2 years ago, this group received an AVERAGE increase of 4.3%. Some received nearly 8%! And one individual, who earns $37/hr received a total of $5.00/fr increase between 2008 and 2009.
But now they want more. Check out the details of their situation report for this Monday's Human Resources Committee meeting:
May 02, 2011 - HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE
5:30 p.m. at the District Office (Room 220), 501 S. Bird St., Sun Prairie.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Management Team has conferred with representatives from the administrative support group and recommends the following changes to the salary and benefit plan:
1. Freeze the current salary schedule at the 2010-2011 level for 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 school years, while allowing for individual employees to make step movement. This is equivalent to an average increase of 1.6% salary over the next two years (2.4% year one and 0.8% year two).
2. Increase the employee’s health insurance contribution up to 9% with a health risk assessment and 10% without a health risk assessment (up from 5%/9%).
Big, hairy deal. So are state, municipal, and county employees.
3. Allow employees the option to request a pay out of up to 3 days of reimbursable time per semester.
Can YOU, dear reader, cash out unused leave? Ferris Beuler? Anyone? Program Manaers make about $45/hr. That's about $360 for an 8 hour day. Allow them to cash out 3 days and that's over $1,000 towards their WRS committment. State workers can do that too...but only after a minimum of 15 years service.
4. Increase the cap on the number of years of longevity from 20 to 25 years when calculating retirement benefits.
Oh...yeah...and they want to increase their retirement benefit. Sheesh!
Allow employees the option of participating in a premium only Health Reimbursement Account (HRA) for qualifying plans in lieu of using their retirement funds to stay on the district’s health and/or dental plans.
Saturday, April 30, 2011
You Can Call Whalen "Buttah"...'cuz he's on a Roll
On Monday, the big task for the school board was to elect its officers for the next year.
The results were:
John Whalen remains president for the 3rd consecutive year! (4-3 vote over John Welke)
John Welke becomes Vice President (4-3 vote over Terry Shimek)
Jill Camber Davidson remains clerk (7-0 vote after Seabass withdrew his name)
Jim McCourt fights off Caren Diedrich on a 5-2 vote to remain Treasurer
Terry Shimek becomes Deputy Clerk (4-3 vote over Tom Weber)
Did anybody else notice the prevalence of 4-3 votes? It would seem to the casual observer that our "7-0" board of rubber stampers has slowly been replaced. Nothing seems cast in stone anymore. And that's a good thing.
The results were:
John Whalen remains president for the 3rd consecutive year! (4-3 vote over John Welke)
John Welke becomes Vice President (4-3 vote over Terry Shimek)
Jill Camber Davidson remains clerk (7-0 vote after Seabass withdrew his name)
Jim McCourt fights off Caren Diedrich on a 5-2 vote to remain Treasurer
Terry Shimek becomes Deputy Clerk (4-3 vote over Tom Weber)
Did anybody else notice the prevalence of 4-3 votes? It would seem to the casual observer that our "7-0" board of rubber stampers has slowly been replaced. Nothing seems cast in stone anymore. And that's a good thing.
What a Difference a Day Makes
At Monday's Finance Committee meeting, Treasurer and Finance Chair Jim McCourt was all "Man the torpedoes and we can cut this budget". That sentiment didn't last long as at Tuesday's Board Work-Study meeting, his tone changed from cutting to increasing spending. Maybe he was on a sugar high Monday night??
McCourt also said that even though the board added $255,000 back into the building and grounds department budget, he has not heard anyone asking for the budget restoration. If the reinstated dollars were removed again, it would decrease the levy by another 0.6 percent, bringing the levy increase down to 1.9 percent.
---excerpted from the Sun Prairie Star
Whalen offers a different perspective
During the work-study meeting, the board reviewed the district's request to add the following to the 2011-12 budget:
$75,000 originally planned for the HR Specialist; District still thinks they can use this cash
$165,000 (7000 hrs @ $24/hr) for Response to Intervention Math/Reading tutors
$110,000 for 2FTE English as Second Language Teachers
$ 176,000 for 3 total FTE Social Workers
$65,000 for 1 FTE Technology programmer
-----------------------------------------------
$591,000 (raises the tax levy about 1.3%)
Whalen's response:
While preventing a levy increase might not be in the cards, McCourt was optimistic that school board members would be able to decrease the levy increase. “One of our board goals was a 10 percent or above fund balance. Even with that, we are going to be 11.5 percent at the end of next year, so obviously one of the options that is out there is we’ve got some extra fund balance that potentially we could use, and if we made an adjustment of another $450,000 to the fund balance, it would get us down to a levy increase of 2.5 percent. It would still keep us at 10.5 percent of the fund balance. I think we have some room there to potentially do something.”
---Jim McCourt
McCourt also said that even though the board added $255,000 back into the building and grounds department budget, he has not heard anyone asking for the budget restoration. If the reinstated dollars were removed again, it would decrease the levy by another 0.6 percent, bringing the levy increase down to 1.9 percent.
---excerpted from the Sun Prairie Star
Whalen offers a different perspective
During the work-study meeting, the board reviewed the district's request to add the following to the 2011-12 budget:
$75,000 originally planned for the HR Specialist; District still thinks they can use this cash
$165,000 (7000 hrs @ $24/hr) for Response to Intervention Math/Reading tutors
$110,000 for 2FTE English as Second Language Teachers
$ 176,000 for 3 total FTE Social Workers
$65,000 for 1 FTE Technology programmer
-----------------------------------------------
$591,000 (raises the tax levy about 1.3%)
Whalen's response:
"I like these ideas. I'm toying with the idea of going back to 4.5% [tax levy increase] and putting all these in [the budget]."
Sunday, April 17, 2011
Time To Re-evaluate Board Budget Parameters?
Yesterday's State Journal reported that overall property values over the past 12 months have declined, on average, by 0.8%. While that's encouraging news given the 4-5% decline seen last year, it still suggests problems for the 2011-12 SPASD budget.
One of the key budget parameters was to keep the mill rate increase below (gulp) 4.5%. While the McCourt's of the world will wave their hands and say that property values don't affect the budget, that's a little smoke and mirrorsy, and borders on being disingenuous. It's true that property values do not affect the budget, but property values ABSOLUTELY DO affect the mill rate. In fact, assuming no change in the tax levy, each 1% decrease in property values translates to a 1% INCREASE to the mill rate.
Since the board budget assumptions includes a property value (aka Equalized Value) increase of 0%, if Madison is taste of things to come, then we may find a similar 1% decrease in value. That means the target mill rate just climbed to 5.5%.
Yeah,yeah... we know ...the Rubenesque lady ain't singin' yet. But....it's not like there's been a huge amount of growth in the city here. Certainly nothing big enough to impact a $4B district-wide valuation. And area homes aren't exactly selling at prices that reflect a valuation increase.
That means, folks, that it's time the board got the pruning shears out.
Since the board budget assumptions includes a property value (aka Equalized Value) increase of 0%, if Madison is taste of things to come, then we may find a similar 1% decrease in value. That means the target mill rate just climbed to 5.5%.
Yeah,yeah... we know ...the Rubenesque lady ain't singin' yet. But....it's not like there's been a huge amount of growth in the city here. Certainly nothing big enough to impact a $4B district-wide valuation. And area homes aren't exactly selling at prices that reflect a valuation increase.
That means, folks, that it's time the board got the pruning shears out.
Administrators Look For A Hand Out?
Maybe Dr. Culver's use of the statement, "We're not strapped for cash" in his "Equity" situation report was but a taste of things to come.
What many community members may have overlooked on last week's school board agenda was the item for Closed Session discussion:
Category: Closed Session
Subject: Accept a motion to go into closed session for the purpose of taking action on closed School Board minutes of March 14 & 16, 2011; discussion and action on a grievance settlement; discuss Local 60 and Sun Prairie Education Association (SPEA) negotiations parameters; discuss and develop parameters regarding administrators' compensation/benefits; and discussion of District Administrator's contract [Wis. Stats. 19.85(1)(c) & (e)]
What's up the Administrators' collective sleeve?
Surely they wouldn't be looking for a raise...right?
Unfortunately, this is that part of the game where they tell the board what they're looking for, but the public doesn't get to see their "demands" until a counter-proposal is passed by the school board. And even then, you either have to be present at that meeting to get the proposals, or you have to request them. Nothing is easy in this district.
What many community members may have overlooked on last week's school board agenda was the item for Closed Session discussion:
Category: Closed Session
Subject: Accept a motion to go into closed session for the purpose of taking action on closed School Board minutes of March 14 & 16, 2011; discussion and action on a grievance settlement; discuss Local 60 and Sun Prairie Education Association (SPEA) negotiations parameters; discuss and develop parameters regarding administrators' compensation/benefits; and discussion of District Administrator's contract [Wis. Stats. 19.85(1)(c) & (e)]
What's up the Administrators' collective sleeve?
Surely they wouldn't be looking for a raise...right?
Unfortunately, this is that part of the game where they tell the board what they're looking for, but the public doesn't get to see their "demands" until a counter-proposal is passed by the school board. And even then, you either have to be present at that meeting to get the proposals, or you have to request them. Nothing is easy in this district.
Caution: No Sugar Daddy On Board
Board Votes 4-3 AGAINST Paying WRS costs for Non-Union Staff
The big-ticket item on this past Monday's school board agenda was gently titled, "Equity" You just know that a sweet sounding title like that has your tax dollars piled behind it.
The motion to approve paying $32,000 of projected WRS costs for the 31 non-union/non-contract employees initial seemed headed for passage. Jim McCourt, John Whalen, and Caren Diedrich were absolute supporters from the get go. These are the people who like to spend your money.
John Welke and Dave Stackhouse clearly were in opposition. We had Terry Shimek pegged as potentially being in opposition (while Shimek has been more toast than waffle of late, we're still not sure if he'll say one thing during discussion and then vote the other way...we need more time). Frankly, Shimek stated it best when he termed the $32,000 payment a "bonus". Jill Camber-Davidson, it seemed, would be the tie-breaker. During the discussion phase, the audience agreed that it looked like Camber-Davidson would support the motion (and spending). For the record, all signed from board member-elect Tom Weber indicated that had he been voting, his vote would be "No". After a few district residents spoke out against the motion, it was time to vote. Voting went as we suspected until it came to Ms. Camber-Davidson. Following what seemed to be a very pregnant pause, Davidson voted "NO", and the motion was defeated.
Don't Shoot the Messengers
Administrative Support staffers should neither judge nor condemn the four board members who voted against their "bonus". These board members were simply doing what they were elected to do: represent the electors who put them in the big chairs. It's not easy to sit up there and say "NO", knowing that that decision will hurt the pockets of 31 employees. But it was the right thing to do. For far too long we've had a board that didn't hesitate but to rubber stamp every proposal coming out of 501 So. Bird Street.
Equity for all? WTF?
While Culver is so concerned about his 31 Administrative Support staffers, where's the concern for equity for Local 60 staffers, who have been on the short end of the stick for many years. Yeah? More to the point...where is his concern for the taxpayers who ponied up $100M for the TajMah HighSchool and the CHUMS makeover? Who ELSE is "in the crosshairs"? How many district residents will be affected by Gov. Walker's mandate? There are a lot of folks on Sovcial Security who haven't had a raise--or a bonus--for 2 years. There are also a lot of state, county, and municipal workers who are all "in the crosshairs". Where's Culver's concern for them? They don't have a sugar daddy.
We're NOT strapped for cash?
All we've heard for 2 years is how terrible the budget situation is and how it's only getting worse. NOW Culver's situation report indicates that the district is "not strapped for cash" and therefore paying the $32,000 is no problem. Plus...we budgeted for it!!! Yeah? and we budgeted $1.4M more than we needed last year, and it appears we budgeted $1.1M more than we needed THIS year. The issue here is that our budgets contain too much fluff...prompting these kinds of remarks. The district likes to say its saving money...but show us that in the budget in terms of cuts. All they ever point to is utilities savings...largely due to nature, not cutting back. When has the budget shown a substantial DECREASE in spending for specific line items?
The big-ticket item on this past Monday's school board agenda was gently titled, "Equity" You just know that a sweet sounding title like that has your tax dollars piled behind it.
The motion to approve paying $32,000 of projected WRS costs for the 31 non-union/non-contract employees initial seemed headed for passage. Jim McCourt, John Whalen, and Caren Diedrich were absolute supporters from the get go. These are the people who like to spend your money.
John Welke and Dave Stackhouse clearly were in opposition. We had Terry Shimek pegged as potentially being in opposition (while Shimek has been more toast than waffle of late, we're still not sure if he'll say one thing during discussion and then vote the other way...we need more time). Frankly, Shimek stated it best when he termed the $32,000 payment a "bonus". Jill Camber-Davidson, it seemed, would be the tie-breaker. During the discussion phase, the audience agreed that it looked like Camber-Davidson would support the motion (and spending). For the record, all signed from board member-elect Tom Weber indicated that had he been voting, his vote would be "No". After a few district residents spoke out against the motion, it was time to vote. Voting went as we suspected until it came to Ms. Camber-Davidson. Following what seemed to be a very pregnant pause, Davidson voted "NO", and the motion was defeated.
Don't Shoot the Messengers
Administrative Support staffers should neither judge nor condemn the four board members who voted against their "bonus". These board members were simply doing what they were elected to do: represent the electors who put them in the big chairs. It's not easy to sit up there and say "NO", knowing that that decision will hurt the pockets of 31 employees. But it was the right thing to do. For far too long we've had a board that didn't hesitate but to rubber stamp every proposal coming out of 501 So. Bird Street.
Equity for all? WTF?
While Culver is so concerned about his 31 Administrative Support staffers, where's the concern for equity for Local 60 staffers, who have been on the short end of the stick for many years. Yeah? More to the point...where is his concern for the taxpayers who ponied up $100M for the TajMah HighSchool and the CHUMS makeover? Who ELSE is "in the crosshairs"? How many district residents will be affected by Gov. Walker's mandate? There are a lot of folks on Sovcial Security who haven't had a raise--or a bonus--for 2 years. There are also a lot of state, county, and municipal workers who are all "in the crosshairs". Where's Culver's concern for them? They don't have a sugar daddy.
“I raised this as a matter of equity. Almost every school district in Dane County is doing the same thing. This group will be paying their WRS contributions through June 30. Because they’re not represented, they’re in the crosshairs. These 31 people are caught in this gap. I thought it was equitable that if everyone is going into this together, these employees are considered”---School District Administrator Tim Culver
We're NOT strapped for cash?
All we've heard for 2 years is how terrible the budget situation is and how it's only getting worse. NOW Culver's situation report indicates that the district is "not strapped for cash" and therefore paying the $32,000 is no problem. Plus...we budgeted for it!!! Yeah? and we budgeted $1.4M more than we needed last year, and it appears we budgeted $1.1M more than we needed THIS year. The issue here is that our budgets contain too much fluff...prompting these kinds of remarks. The district likes to say its saving money...but show us that in the budget in terms of cuts. All they ever point to is utilities savings...largely due to nature, not cutting back. When has the budget shown a substantial DECREASE in spending for specific line items?
Sunday, April 10, 2011
School Board & FTT Committee Agendas for Monday 4-11-11
FTT (FACILITIES, TECHNOLOGY & TRANSPORTATION) 6:00 PM at the Municipal Bldg
Greenhouse Pricetag: "not to exceed" $ 230,000
Link to agenda info
A greenhouse would be nice, but we haven't seen any fundraising effort to-date, and the pricetage increased from $150,000 when everyone realized there was plenty of referendum surplus dollars.
Policy DJ (Purchasing) Pricetag: anything under $25,000
Link to agenda info
Scary monsters? The District Administrator or his/her designee is authorized to purchase any single item or a quantity of the same item costing more than $5,000 but less than $25,000 upon the solicitation of at least three written bids. Time to tighten the leash.
2011-12 Buildings & Grounds Operating Budget Pricetag: $947,200 (+1.75%)
Link to agenda info
2011-12 Capital Projects Budget Pricetag: $975,000 (+37%)
Link to agenda info
Recalling the all too recent fiasco over the district office remodel, this one is worth digging into. Hmmm...if the Capital Projects budget this year was $950,000 and about $240,000 of that was for the ONE-TIME district office remodel, then doesn't a $975K budget represent a 37% increase? How believable is that given what we have learned recently? This one pegs the Funny Money meter.
2011-12 Technology Budget Pricetag: $486,579 (- 17.5%)
Link to agenda info
Moving School Board & Committee Meetings to the District Office Pricetag: at least $4,200/yr
REALLY! You're going to try AGAIN to move meetings to the district office? Really? After we paid fro broad band at the municipal building and they improved the microphone quality and K-SUN improved the video feed? Do you people just dream up more ways to spend money? Come on! Nothing ever does die with this board, does it?
Link to agenda info
===================================================================
SCHOOL BOARD 7:30 pm at the Municipal Bldg
Equity for employees... blah, blah, blah Pricetag: $ $32,495
Link to agenda info
Oh, PUH-llleeeeze! Tug at our frick'n heart strings one time! This one screams "NO"! Please Mr. Whalen...just once try something other than "All in favor, say aye...all opposed...same sign"
Retirement Rescissions Pricetag: $25,000-$30,000 per employee
Link to agenda info
2011-12 New Course Offerings Pricetag: $10,400
Link to agenda info
2011-12 Student Services Budget Pricetag: $94,055 (+2.44%)
Link to agenda info
2011-12 Instructional Services Budget Pricetag: $839,381 (+2.56%)
Link to agenda info
Greenhouse Pricetag: "not to exceed" $ 230,000
Link to agenda info
A greenhouse would be nice, but we haven't seen any fundraising effort to-date, and the pricetage increased from $150,000 when everyone realized there was plenty of referendum surplus dollars.
Policy DJ (Purchasing) Pricetag: anything under $25,000
Link to agenda info
Scary monsters? The District Administrator or his/her designee is authorized to purchase any single item or a quantity of the same item costing more than $5,000 but less than $25,000 upon the solicitation of at least three written bids. Time to tighten the leash.
 |
| $1M for Capital Projects and no District Office remodel costs??? |
Link to agenda info
2011-12 Capital Projects Budget Pricetag: $975,000 (+37%)
Link to agenda info
Recalling the all too recent fiasco over the district office remodel, this one is worth digging into. Hmmm...if the Capital Projects budget this year was $950,000 and about $240,000 of that was for the ONE-TIME district office remodel, then doesn't a $975K budget represent a 37% increase? How believable is that given what we have learned recently? This one pegs the Funny Money meter.
2011-12 Technology Budget Pricetag: $486,579 (- 17.5%)
Link to agenda info
REALLY! You're going to try AGAIN to move meetings to the district office? Really? After we paid fro broad band at the municipal building and they improved the microphone quality and K-SUN improved the video feed? Do you people just dream up more ways to spend money? Come on! Nothing ever does die with this board, does it?
Link to agenda info
===================================================================
SCHOOL BOARD 7:30 pm at the Municipal Bldg
Equity for employees... blah, blah, blah Pricetag: $ $32,495
Link to agenda info
Oh, PUH-llleeeeze! Tug at our frick'n heart strings one time! This one screams "NO"! Please Mr. Whalen...just once try something other than "All in favor, say aye...all opposed...same sign"
Retirement Rescissions Pricetag: $25,000-$30,000 per employee
Link to agenda info
2011-12 New Course Offerings Pricetag: $10,400
Link to agenda info
2011-12 Student Services Budget Pricetag: $94,055 (+2.44%)
Link to agenda info
2011-12 Instructional Services Budget Pricetag: $839,381 (+2.56%)
Link to agenda info
Saturday, April 9, 2011
...And the News Many of You Have Been Awaiting
We've been working to obtain documentation for Jim "Seabass" McCourt's meal reimbursement request for attending this year's school board conference.
We now know that (drum roll) McCourt DID NOT CHARGE FOR A a MEAL! Was that because he only attended for one day and didn't spend the night? That he left before the dinner hour? We don't know how long McCourt was at the conference, but we do know that he did not even charge for lunch.
The betting on this event was pretty much split evenly. 33% were sure that McCourt wouldn't bat an eye about submitting another receipt for an expensive dinner of his favorite dish. Another 33% felt that, under the pressure of the public (SP-)eye, he might settle for Perkins instead of some 5 star restaurant. Nobody guessed that he wouldn't submit any meal reimbursement at all
Is it possible that McCourt learned a little lesson? Whatever reason he had, we appreciate McCourt's
McCourt submitted reimbursement request for only $84.46, including $10.00 for parking and $74.46 for mileage. ($146 miles at $0.51.mile).
The betting on this event was pretty much split evenly. 33% were sure that McCourt wouldn't bat an eye about submitting another receipt for an expensive dinner of his favorite dish. Another 33% felt that, under the pressure of the public (SP-)eye, he might settle for Perkins instead of some 5 star restaurant. Nobody guessed that he wouldn't submit any meal reimbursement at all
Is it possible that McCourt learned a little lesson? Whatever reason he had, we appreciate McCourt's
McCourt submitted reimbursement request for only $84.46, including $10.00 for parking and $74.46 for mileage. ($146 miles at $0.51.mile).
The More you Poke into it, The More It Stinks
On Monday night, Tim Culver wants to be like the giving tree. He wants to give away $32,500 of your tax dollars under the thinly veiled guise of "equity". Will the school board stand for this nonsense?
The Administrative Support staff are the only staff member who are not under a contract. Therefore, these folks will have to pay 5.8% of their salary (their half of the Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) contribution) whenever the Capitol mess gets sorted out. This idea is wrong on sooooooo many levels.
This move circumvents law!
First of all, it would put the school board /district in a position of circumventing law. If the law says you pay it effective xx/xx/2011, you pay it. NOBODY has to LIKE it, mind you, but you gotta do it. We all have to pay our property taxes annually...right? You don;t just say..."hey...sorry you have to pay this so, tell you what, we';ll give you a lump sum salary increase to cover it." WTF???!!!
At $30/hr, They're Not Hurting
How many of you state/municipal/county employees are making $30 bucks an hour? Not many! The average salary of these 31 individuals is just a few pennies less than $30 per hour. At a typical worker's 2080 hours per year, that comes to $62,400 annually! And the RANGE is $18 to $46 per HOUR. Annualy, that translates to $37,000 to $96,000 per year. These people are hurting????
Why this sudden push for equity?
Especially when things aren't even equitable as it stands. The employees who belong to Local 60 AVERAGE about $15.00 per hour, yet for years they have paid a significantly higher share of their health and dental insurance than any other staff members. We're not seeing Dr. Culver rushing to "make them whole".
The average Local 60 employee makes about $15/hour and pays $1600 annually out of pocket for health and dental insurance. The average Administrative Support staffer makes $30/hr and pays only $785 out of pocket. Where's the equity there?
Why Would We Boost Retirement Income?
By giving these people a lump sum payment, we effectively increase their annual salary, on which retirement income is based. Why would we do that? The district is not in the business of providing retirement shelters or boosting retirement income.
The math doesn't make sense!
Do the math. If the lump sum payment Culver proposes represents 5.8% of 3 months worth of salary, then multiply that by 4 and you arrive at what these folks would pay under Walker's law annually. Then divide that number by 5.8% and that value represents what their annual salary is...right? WRONG! Because while we think these folks are (for the most part) pretty well compensated, our table of salary calculations suggests that these folks are being paid as much as $130,000 per year. And we DO KNOW that that's not the case. So why the funky math?
Uncovering the Funky Math
Inquiring minds asked a few questions. The first answer received was "Those are the numbers that our database produced when we queried the system for WRS payments from March 25 through June 25." WTF???
So more questions were asked. And what we learned was --and we're sure we're absolutely fracturing this--- but it's important you get SOME explanation before Monday's meeting. It's something along the lines of: For many staff, including these folks, the district defers out payments because the summer months cross into a new fiscal year. Their salaries taken out in previous (i.e.current) fiscal year and then paid out over summer (new fiscal year). So...wait....we heard that this was all about equity and these people having to pay from [some date] through June 25, 2001, while others do not. NOW we're saying that we're going to apply this gift to money paid out in the summer....theoretically when all others have the 5.8% taken out of their checks but they don't --and shouldn't-- get this gift?
As Judge Judy says, "If it doesn't make sense, it's not true".
"This would not make them entirely "whole"...We would be spending funds that were not mandated by law to do so...We aren't strapped for this $32,500 in this year’s budget."You can read the situation report here, but in a nutshell, here's the dealio:
--Tim Culver/Admin Team
The Administrative Support staff are the only staff member who are not under a contract. Therefore, these folks will have to pay 5.8% of their salary (their half of the Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) contribution) whenever the Capitol mess gets sorted out. This idea is wrong on sooooooo many levels.
This move circumvents law!
First of all, it would put the school board /district in a position of circumventing law. If the law says you pay it effective xx/xx/2011, you pay it. NOBODY has to LIKE it, mind you, but you gotta do it. We all have to pay our property taxes annually...right? You don;t just say..."hey...sorry you have to pay this so, tell you what, we';ll give you a lump sum salary increase to cover it." WTF???!!!
At $30/hr, They're Not Hurting
How many of you state/municipal/county employees are making $30 bucks an hour? Not many! The average salary of these 31 individuals is just a few pennies less than $30 per hour. At a typical worker's 2080 hours per year, that comes to $62,400 annually! And the RANGE is $18 to $46 per HOUR. Annualy, that translates to $37,000 to $96,000 per year. These people are hurting????
Why this sudden push for equity?
Especially when things aren't even equitable as it stands. The employees who belong to Local 60 AVERAGE about $15.00 per hour, yet for years they have paid a significantly higher share of their health and dental insurance than any other staff members. We're not seeing Dr. Culver rushing to "make them whole".
The average Local 60 employee makes about $15/hour and pays $1600 annually out of pocket for health and dental insurance. The average Administrative Support staffer makes $30/hr and pays only $785 out of pocket. Where's the equity there?
Why Would We Boost Retirement Income?
By giving these people a lump sum payment, we effectively increase their annual salary, on which retirement income is based. Why would we do that? The district is not in the business of providing retirement shelters or boosting retirement income.
The math doesn't make sense!
Do the math. If the lump sum payment Culver proposes represents 5.8% of 3 months worth of salary, then multiply that by 4 and you arrive at what these folks would pay under Walker's law annually. Then divide that number by 5.8% and that value represents what their annual salary is...right? WRONG! Because while we think these folks are (for the most part) pretty well compensated, our table of salary calculations suggests that these folks are being paid as much as $130,000 per year. And we DO KNOW that that's not the case. So why the funky math?
Uncovering the Funky Math
Inquiring minds asked a few questions. The first answer received was "Those are the numbers that our database produced when we queried the system for WRS payments from March 25 through June 25." WTF???
So more questions were asked. And what we learned was --and we're sure we're absolutely fracturing this--- but it's important you get SOME explanation before Monday's meeting. It's something along the lines of: For many staff, including these folks, the district defers out payments because the summer months cross into a new fiscal year. Their salaries taken out in previous (i.e.current) fiscal year and then paid out over summer (new fiscal year). So...wait....we heard that this was all about equity and these people having to pay from [some date] through June 25, 2001, while others do not. NOW we're saying that we're going to apply this gift to money paid out in the summer....theoretically when all others have the 5.8% taken out of their checks but they don't --and shouldn't-- get this gift?
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Re-Thinking Retirement
On Monday, it seems the school board is tasked with deciding whether or not to allow several of those who turned in retirement papers to rescind their decision:
Since the retirement acceptances on February 28, 2011, there have been several persons who have inquired about the ability to rescind their retirement. The School Board needs to determine as a matter of policy if they are willing to accept such a request. If the School Board votes to adopt a policy of considering rescissions of finalized retirements they then will need to either assign a committee or delegate to administration the task of determining criteria and parameters. This process will need to be detailed; and will require advice from legal counsel to ensure that no criteria or parameters would have any adverse action on an individual or a group of individuals that may belong to a protected class of employees.http://schoolboard.spasd.k12.wi.us/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=8FFL3Y54A8EC
RECOMMENDATION:
Since the budget and staffing decisions have been made based on SPEA member requests for retirement and those requests were accepted on February 28, 2011, it is the recommendation of the Management Team that the School Board not create a policy or practice that will allow staff members to rescind retirements.
Weber Grabs Top Vote Total
In a shades of 2010 result, when newcomer John Welke smoked the other incumbents, Tom Weber grabbed the most votes in the spring school board election. Kinda sounds like this city wants change on its school board.
Over 5000 votes for the leader? In 2006, Jim Gibbs set a school board election record with over 3,800 votes. Weber shattered that. Hmmm. It was almost like there was something dragging people to the polls in droves. Wonder what that could be? Just can't quite put a finger on it....
Weber - 5,277
Camber Davidson - 4,870
Stackhouse - 3,532
Flying saucers could land
And it wouldn't make much difference to our man
He could walk onboard and thank the lord
And leave this damn town in seconds flat
Check his bags and never come back
Oh, our love is
Like a fuse that's burned out
---B-52's "Ain't It a Shame"
Weber - 5,277
Camber Davidson - 4,870
Stackhouse - 3,532
Flying saucers could land
And it wouldn't make much difference to our man
He could walk onboard and thank the lord
And leave this damn town in seconds flat
Check his bags and never come back
Oh, our love is
Like a fuse that's burned out
---B-52's "Ain't It a Shame"
Monday, April 4, 2011
Election Eve Shocker: Stackhouse Withdraws
More to come from this late breaking news:
"This afternoon, I received a job offer that provides many opportunities for my family. As this position requires relocation, I am removing myself from the race for school board," Stackhouse said in the statement released just after 7 p.m.Read the detail at the STAR
"My decision was not easy. Over the past 13 years, I have immersed myself in the community and hope my contributions have been significant and have touched many lives in a positive way," he added.
"I thank all that have supported my efforts," Stackhouse said. "Please know that as difficult a decision this was, I believe it is the best opportunity for my family."
Sunday, April 3, 2011
Reality Check - 2010-11 WKCE Scores
Last week, school district "Key Communicators" received via e-mail a Spin-o-gram announcing that,
"WKCE Results Well Above the State Averages"
Link to SPASD data on DPI site
For those of you not on the coveted list, we didn't see this on the SPASD website, so we offer the key info at right.
How do we address this...let us count the ways.
Let's start with the "Well Above State Averages" claim
Our analysis? Where on earth did they pull that from? Did they even LOOK at the data? We did. Our first question is: "What exactly constitutes 'Well Above'?" We're thinking 20 or more percentage points. As in state average is 70%, Sun Prairie score is 90%. But maybe we're off base. Let's look at the numbers.
The way we see it, the numbers may not warrant the claim made. Only grade 10 students average a double digit (and barely) lead over the state average. Grades 4 and 8 average scores are only 4 and 5 percentage points higher than state averages. Not exactly what we'd call "well above". In fact, if you compare the 2010 data to 2009 results, it sure looks like the statewide average is gaining on us. But that's not something the district would ever shout from the mountaintops, now is it. We actually dug a little deeper and looked at comparisons over the past 5 years. district wide, our scores have consistently averaged only 3.8% to 5.1% better than the state averages. Consequently, we think it's a safer bet to declare that our scores are well above those of Madison...or Marshall...or Beloit. Saying that Sun Prairie scores are 'well above' state averages is kinda like saying that the Red Sox will win more games than the Brewers. It's kinda over-stating the obvious.
Comparing Sun Prairie to Other Dane Co Districts
Last year, Sun Prairie fared pretty well, ranking 7th overall in Dane Co. using our averaging system (averaging ranks in each of the 5 subject areas across grades 4, 8, and 10). This year, however, we slipped 5 spots to the #12 (out of 17) spot. We may be getting better, but it would seem that the other districts are getting better-ER. Our arch-nemesis, Middleton, remained steady in the #3 slot.
Grade 10, in fact, slipped most. Last year, 10th graders ranked 2nd in Dane Co. across all 5 subject areas. This year: 9th.
Looking at things a little differently, we can combine ranks of Grade 4,8, and 10 and review how Sun Prairie sits in terms of each of the 5 WKCE subject areas. From this angle, only in Social studies do we rank in the upper half--and just barely at #8. Our friends in Waunakee, McFarland, and Middleton take the #2,3,and 4 ranks. Like that proverbial mouse that churned the cream into butter and climbed its way out, little old Belleville rises to the top!
Newbie on the Block - 1st Wisconsin Virtual Academy Results
NOTE: We could not find this data on the DPI site. We used data presented by the Wisconsin State Journal.
Dane Co. Language Arts, Science Social studies scores
Dane Co. Reading & Math scores
This marks the first year that we include the Wisconsin Virtual Academy (WIVA)--which a number of Sun Prairie students attend-- in the Dane Co. ranks. The results are quite interesting. Overall, depending on whether you look at and average of all subjects across th3 3 grades, or whether you look at an average of all 3 grades across 5 subjects, "WIVA" ranks either 9th or 10th. Basically, middle of the pack, nothing to write home about.
WIVA fared pretty well in Reading, Language Arts, and Social Studies...not so good in Math and Science. In fact, the WIVA ranked last among Dane Co. districts in math at the grade 10 level, tieing with Madison at 75% proficient or advanced.
In Language Arts, 95% of 4th graders at the WIVA scored proficient or advanced, 84% of 8th graders, but only 55% of 10th graders.
Apples & Apples Time - Comparing Sun Prairie to Similar Sized School Districts
Now that we know how well we stack up against Dane Co, school districts, it's time to take a look at how we rate against schools our own size. We looked at the 20 districts closest in size--the 10 that are just larger, and the 10 that are just smaller.
Last year, Sun Prairie ranked 5th overall (tieing with Wauwautosa). Across all 5 subject areas, SPASD ranked 4th for grade 10, 7th for grade 8, and 9th for grade 4. Looking at grade 10 only, last year SP ranked 6th in Reading, 3rd in Math, 3rd in Language Arts, 6th in Science, and 3rd in social studies.
This year, unfortunately, Sun Prairie slides to either 9th or 11th (out of 21), depending on how you look at the results. Either way, that's just middle of the pack, and a fairly significant decline from last year.
Conclusions
That's a lot of data...we know. But take some time to let it sink in. We'll be looking at this from some other angles, but wanted you at least to get the full picture...not just the pretty "snapshots" offered by the district.
From our perspective, Sun Prairie may be improving, but all the other districts are improving as well...and at a faster pace than we are. Sure, a grade of "B" is great...but how does it look when everyone else is getting "B+" or better?
"WKCE Results Well Above the State Averages"
Link to SPASD data on DPI site
 |
| Stating the obvious? |
How do we address this...let us count the ways.
Let's start with the "Well Above State Averages" claim
Our analysis? Where on earth did they pull that from? Did they even LOOK at the data? We did. Our first question is: "What exactly constitutes 'Well Above'?" We're thinking 20 or more percentage points. As in state average is 70%, Sun Prairie score is 90%. But maybe we're off base. Let's look at the numbers.
Comparing Sun Prairie to Other Dane Co Districts
Grade 10, in fact, slipped most. Last year, 10th graders ranked 2nd in Dane Co. across all 5 subject areas. This year: 9th.
Looking at things a little differently, we can combine ranks of Grade 4,8, and 10 and review how Sun Prairie sits in terms of each of the 5 WKCE subject areas. From this angle, only in Social studies do we rank in the upper half--and just barely at #8. Our friends in Waunakee, McFarland, and Middleton take the #2,3,and 4 ranks. Like that proverbial mouse that churned the cream into butter and climbed its way out, little old Belleville rises to the top!
NOTE: We could not find this data on the DPI site. We used data presented by the Wisconsin State Journal.
Dane Co. Language Arts, Science Social studies scores
Dane Co. Reading & Math scores
This marks the first year that we include the Wisconsin Virtual Academy (WIVA)--which a number of Sun Prairie students attend-- in the Dane Co. ranks. The results are quite interesting. Overall, depending on whether you look at and average of all subjects across th3 3 grades, or whether you look at an average of all 3 grades across 5 subjects, "WIVA" ranks either 9th or 10th. Basically, middle of the pack, nothing to write home about.
WIVA fared pretty well in Reading, Language Arts, and Social Studies...not so good in Math and Science. In fact, the WIVA ranked last among Dane Co. districts in math at the grade 10 level, tieing with Madison at 75% proficient or advanced.
In Language Arts, 95% of 4th graders at the WIVA scored proficient or advanced, 84% of 8th graders, but only 55% of 10th graders.
Apples & Apples Time - Comparing Sun Prairie to Similar Sized School Districts
Last year, Sun Prairie ranked 5th overall (tieing with Wauwautosa). Across all 5 subject areas, SPASD ranked 4th for grade 10, 7th for grade 8, and 9th for grade 4. Looking at grade 10 only, last year SP ranked 6th in Reading, 3rd in Math, 3rd in Language Arts, 6th in Science, and 3rd in social studies.
Conclusions
That's a lot of data...we know. But take some time to let it sink in. We'll be looking at this from some other angles, but wanted you at least to get the full picture...not just the pretty "snapshots" offered by the district.
From our perspective, Sun Prairie may be improving, but all the other districts are improving as well...and at a faster pace than we are. Sure, a grade of "B" is great...but how does it look when everyone else is getting "B+" or better?
Saturday, April 2, 2011
Election Day - Time For More Change
The school board is slowly, but surely, becoming more aligned with what we the people expect in our representation. John Welke was a great addition last year...but he needs more support on the board. Welke needs someone who shares his (our) fiscal concerns and someone who won't play for the crowd--or a specific athletic group.
We think Tom Weber is that guy.
While the STAR (read: Chris Mertes) didn't care for Jill Camber Davidson's taking on advertising in our schools, we think that's exactly why she deserves another term. Is it really worth a 7-year exclusive contact and z little more than $10K a year from a certain soft drink manufacturer to subliminally advertise its wares to our kids? We don't think so. The board could find that money and a whole lot more if they would de-pants Phil Frei and take back OurDough.
While we appreciate Mr Stackhouse's efforts over the past 6 years, it's time for the face of our school board to change a little more. We don't quite see the steady hand that editor Mertes seems to see.
So on Tuesday, April 5, we say vote early and vote often.
But cast your votes for the two people that will best represent the Sun Prairie School District.
Vote for Tom Weber and Jill Camber Davidson
We think Tom Weber is that guy.
While the STAR (read: Chris Mertes) didn't care for Jill Camber Davidson's taking on advertising in our schools, we think that's exactly why she deserves another term. Is it really worth a 7-year exclusive contact and z little more than $10K a year from a certain soft drink manufacturer to subliminally advertise its wares to our kids? We don't think so. The board could find that money and a whole lot more if they would de-pants Phil Frei and take back OurDough.
While we appreciate Mr Stackhouse's efforts over the past 6 years, it's time for the face of our school board to change a little more. We don't quite see the steady hand that editor Mertes seems to see.
So on Tuesday, April 5, we say vote early and vote often.
But cast your votes for the two people that will best represent the Sun Prairie School District.
Vote for Tom Weber and Jill Camber Davidson
Sun Prairie School Board -- We find Jill Camber Davidson’s unwillingness to entertain advertising in school to be unrealistic, particularly with the current economy and potential future revenue cuts for schools.
Challenger Tom Weber’s approach relating to budgeting might be worth a look.
At the same time, we believe incumbent Dave Stackhouse should be returned to office. Despite his pursuit of upgrading Ashley Field, Stackhouse has proven to be a steady hand on the board.
Vote Stackhouse and either Camber Davidson or challenger Tom Weber April 5.
---Sun Prairie STAR 3-24-11
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
