Budget News: Board "draft" Budget includes 1.6% Raises for Admin& Admin Support

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.

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?

"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."
--Tim Culver/Admin Team

You can read the situation report here, but in a nutshell, here's the dealio:

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".

Boo Frick'n Hoo!

Pardon our French.
But seriously... we have had just about enough of this whining.


Who's whining now?
Well...since you asked...we're hearing that the Administrative Support staff are not happy with the package presented to them last night:

• 1%  pay raise
• pay 1% more towards the cost of health insurance premiums
• pay 2% more towards the cost of dental insurance premiums

We guess that, seeing that the district just received $1.75M from the feds, they believed that the candy store was back open for business.  Someone...a spokesperson for the group?...noted that the lowliest staffer will only receive a net $0.04 to $0.10 hourly increase.

---

An astute reader pointed out to us that the Admin Support staff ALSO gained a furlough day back AND get an increase that relates to where they fit on the "grid".

DOUBLE Boo Frick'n Hoo!

---

Again...BOO FRICK'N HOO!  Many people saw either NO increase or had their wages cut, or lost their jobs!!!!  What makes school district employees so damn special?
Welcome to the recession, folks.  Under the dome under which the school district seems to reside, things may be rosy.  But, for the rest of us, here in the real world, not so much.


Be happy you are employed....others aren't so lucky.
Be happy that you are actually getting a raise...many others got no raise and furlough days.
Be happy that you aren't having to pay as much towards healthcare as state employees or (heaven forbid) Local 60 staff.


These are the same people that received a very nice new pay grid LAST SUMMER.
Click here to see the salary grid...see if YOU think they are underpaid.



When is the sense of entitlement that runs rampant through this district going to end?



Maybe Y'all Can Keep These in Mind


Do you people not read the papers?

Have you ANY clue as to the state of the economy?

http://www.channel3000.com/money/24831004/detail.html  Wolf/SubZero Cutting 100 Madison Jobs [9-1-10]

http://www.channel3000.com/news/24922576/detail.html Harley-Davidson Could Cut 200 Jobs ]9-8-10]

http://www.nbc15.com/home/headlines/101414594.html Meriter Cutting 57 Jobs [9-3-10]

3-5% cuts for all Dane County employees

Loss of 2% raise plus 3% cut (16 furlough days) for state employees  in both 2010 and 2011




Sorry folks, but we...have had...ENOUGH!

Poker Tells

"Listen, here's the thing. If you can't spot the sucker in your first half hour at the table, then you ARE the sucker."
- Mike McDermott, "Rounders"

So...what's on the Human Resources agenda this week? Hmmm.
Seems innocent enough...Energy Educator/Manager Job Description revision.

Pure as the driven snow...until you recall a few recent events and think a few minutes.
So they want to CHANGE...check that...REVISE and UPDATE the job description for the Energy Educator/Manager.

Here's the part where you think back...to last July. The Energy Manager was the SOLITARY position that was "redlined", which is PC for "frozen". That's right...every one of the "Administrative Support" staff, EXCEPT the Energy Manager that is, got a raise last July.

At the time, we pointed out that it was this ONE position that actually saved the district money.
And so the Situation report notes:

Mr. Klaas’s Job Description Questionnaire did include most of his tasks. The district is fortunate that he approaches every aspect of operating building equipment from the perspective of how it impacts energy usage. After forty-five months of employment (through 12/2009) the district has avoided over 2.5 million dollars of energy usage.

Tom Brooks, Greg Klaas, Phil Frei, and Annette Mikula have reviewed and revised the current job description for the Energy Educator/Manager. The job description is now aligned with the work that is being performed by the position. We have also reviewed what we want the position to be able to do and feel that this is the work that will enable the district to see the greatest energy consumption reduction results. In addition, the district has contacted some other districts who do not use EEI to find out how they go about scheduling rooms and space for use and energy consumption. We have found that Janesville, Waunakee, and Deforest contract out this service with NAMI. NAMI is scheduling, monitoring, and providing scheduled maintenance like filter changes, greasing, etc. for these districts. NAMI's fee is $100 per hour.

And that's where the poker tell lies. Pat yourself on the back and consider a Vegas vacation if you picked up on it. Or ...maybe the district should refrain from playing any poker.
For those that don't occasionally play a friendly game of poker, a poker "tell" is a sign which suggests something about the hand someone is playing.

The key "tells" here are that (A) the job description is being revised, and (B) others that do this job are being paid $100/ hour.

Do we REALLY need to tell you what cards the district is holding?
Care to bet that the NEXT move will be to establish a new pay rate based on the "revised" job description?

The Energy Manager is currently paid $22.20/hour, and the job is not full time. In 45 months, Mr. Klaas has effectively "avoided" $2,500,000 in energy costs for the district. That comes to $55,555 per month. That's about 10-15 times what he grosses per month. File that under: Things that make you go, "Hmmmm".

So...Step 1: Update the JD. Step 2: Request a salary increase. How long before we see that one? Now, after all the pomp and circumstance of the whole admin support job review, we're going to revise things? NOW!? And where is that money coming from given the budget picture? Heck...maybe they'll use the revenue from personal appliance fees!

Wait...here is the bigger question to ask: which one got it wrong last year:

Was it the consultant whom we paid a ton of money to research ALL administrative support staff positions and determine an equitable rate of pay?

Or was it our district Human Resources staff, who really was not clear on what the responsibilities of the Energy Manager were and thus gave bad information to the consultant?

Oh...and did we forget to mention that the chair of Human Resources is none other than Caren Diedrich, who is up for re-election? Might want to watch her for more "tells".

Add another $79,371 in salaries to the budget

Administrative Compensation Pay Increases - Take 2.

At the Monday 8-17-09 H/R Committee meeting (5:30 PM, District Office)
the school board's H/R Committee will take up the issue of Administrative Support Staff increases (except for the Energy Educator, who gets a decrease...excuse us..."red-circled").

What does this wonderful plan (that has already been included in the proposed budget) do:

$$ Gives the "Business Manager" a $2.40/hr raise ON TOP OF the $2.50/hr raise received last year. Damn, life is good.

$$ Gives a whopping 22.4 to 28.9% increase to the minimum/maximums for the Communications Specialist

$$ Stiffs the secretaries and Administrative Assistants, while giving overly generous increases to the already well-padded salaries of "Program Managers"

$$ Avoids the subject of direct raises and instead focuses the report in terms of "range minima/maxima.

You can read the propaganda at
BoardDocs info for 8-17/09 H/R meeting

OR, you can revisit the actual data we presented earlier. These are the cold hard facts.

See the actual fat raises this proposal gives--something not shared with the public by the district unless you asked

See what the US Dept. of Labor says similar jobs in WI are worth

Life is good: Admin Support Raise Proposal

In our last episode related to Administrative Support staff pay increases, the school board's HR committee tabled the discussion until its August meeting--but ONLY after district residents voiced concerns [Read: pick and nit and nit and pick] that the information for the meeting had only been made available a couple of hours prior to the meeting.

That leaves about 2 weeks to prepare any comments you'd like the HR committee and board to hear. Speak now...or forever hold your piece.

SP-EYE asked for the complete proposed pay increases per staff member as well as their current salary. There's no real reason to put individual names to the position boxes, although those are certainly available. Some of them you know already.

Remember-- we were only provided with the following at that meeting:

1. a new pay grid,

2. a statement that increases would amount to a "3.8% total compensation package increase", and,

3. The total cost for the 30 employees would be $79,000 for 2009-10, or an average of $2633 per person per year.

Now you have the whole ball of wax with which to make your own assessment. Do these seem reasonable? Did YOU get a 4.3% pay raise for next year?

Note that the only position that did not get a raise (the new PC term is "red-circled") is the Energy Educator Manager. Look...we've "outted" some of the concerns with the whole energy management game in the past, but the question which can't be ignored is this: why is it that out of 30 positions, the ONE that you "red-circle" (freeze their pay) is the ONE position which theoretically saves the district a bundle of money every year? Make sense?

A follow-up question: if that position is so overpaid relative to the comparison districts, why did Admin and the board approve the pay grade initially? As a member of the $100K club, shouldn't we expect our HR manager to establish more reasonable salaries than that? And if the answer to that question is, "No"...then what's the chance that these other positions are being overpaid as well?

As always, click on the graphic images to obtain a larger, higher resolution image.

Recession-Proof

While the rest of the world, country, state, and county continue to struggle with mounting unemployment (now just shy of 10%), layoffs/furloughs/wage cuts, and foreclosures, at least we sit secure in the recession-proof Sunny Prairie school district!!!

At least that's what District Administrator/Super Nintendo Tim Culver desperately needs you to believe...at least until he can get his as yet unseen budget passed and sweet raises for everyone.

Culver was working his mega mojo at the school board meeting Monday night, stating that while other districts such as arch-nemesis [DAMN! They got named top city by Money; we only got Family Circle] Middleton are struggling, "...we're in great financial shape." [SP-EYE...shouldn't that little cheer be followed by a resounding, "naaa naaaa nuh boooo booooo"? ]

Let's summarize how wonderful life is in the Sun Prairie school district.

The teacher's contract is water under the bridge at this point, but those contracts will cost the taxpayers $1.5M this year and another $1.5M next July. That calls for a 4.2% salary increase this year and amounts to a 7.74% increase in salaries and benefits over 2 years. Since salaries and benefits account for over 80% of the annual operating budget, that means the budget will automatically increase by at least 6.0%.

Next up is the administration contracts. The board voted to accept their GRACIOUS offer to reduced their "entitlement" of 4.5% increase to 3.8%.

After that, the plan is to give Admin Support a "3.8% package" increase. Our calculations show that in salary increases alone, that translates to a 4.40% total increase, with at least one individual being awarded a 13% increase.
More little tidbits regarding the Admin Support package that you likely won't hear:

• 17 out of the 30 members of this group will get raises of at least $1.11 per hour
• 12 out of the 30 members of this group will get raises of at least $1.50 per hour
• 3 of the 30 members of this group (10%) will see raises of over $2.00 per hour ($2.14, $2.21, $2.90)
• The "Business Services Manager", who received a $2.50 per hour raise LAST July, will get a raise of $2.21 per hour effective THIS July. That's a $10,000 per year raise in ONE year's time!
  
• 10 of the 30 members of this group are "Program Managers"; each will have a per hour rate of at least $41.21 (max of $46.63). Can you say "top-heavy"?
• The program mangers only work 210 days per year. You and us? We work 2080 hrs/year, which means 260 days.

A 3.8% increase is also being offered to the Substitute Teachers.

Oh wait...we can't bat 1.000...Local 60 is stuck with 3.25% increases.

Dr. Culver has asked for a 0% increase. Geee...do you think the board will feel bad and give him one anyway? I mean...afterall...what's $5500 on top of a $70,000,000 general budget...right?

Property tax bills will also bear the brunt of the rest of the $100M borrowed for the high school construction.

The cost of the 4K program will be heavily borne this year, as we only get state aid for 1/3 of the kids this year. And enrollment hadn't reached projections when we last checked. Oh, and the plan was to operate the program at about a $600K loss this year. That would be what's known as a positive liability, sports fans.

Oh...and word on the street that the exodus of students from Sun Prairie, at least at the elementary level (where our growth has been coming from) outweighs the expected inodus [OK...that' not really a word; we just made that up...but it sounds cool, n'est ce pas?]. Less bodies means less state aid (which is already being cut). Less state aid means more has to come from property taxes.

Does anyone else think it's nuts to be talking raises at all??
Only fringe board member David Stackhouse had the intestinal fortitude to make a motion that furlough days be included to cut the costs. NONE of the other board members would second that motion. So...you know how things are goin'...right?

How long will the school board continue to write checks that the taxpayers can't cash?

So...Dr. Culver...you who keep chanting how great SPASD is because we tax below the allowable limit (like 20% of the districts, right Dr. C?]....so how long do you project that we'll continue to tax below the ceiling...like is that little feather in your cap just about macaroni tight now?


Oh...and McSeaBass? We're sure we're probably just making these numbers say whatever we want. So we anxiously await your explanation of how all these numbers should be properly reviewed using your new McFilet o' Math.

Slippin' It Past the Goalie Pt. 2: Admin Support Raises

Remember last summer when Admin tried to slip one by the goalie and give the Business Services position a $5.00 PER HOUR raise? And the school board was caught flatfooted (ex Prez Stackhouse> "I didn't see anything about a $5.00 per hour raise...")? So the board -- in their infinite wisdom, reduced the raise to only (ONLY!!!!) $2.50 PER HOUR? And then...they agreed to conduct a job survey (which...ahem.. cost us $9,000)?

Fast forward to Monday night's HR committee meeting, because it all comes together when they unveil their new plan for Administrative Support pay raises. The plan...which they have NOT shared as yet...calls for raising the pay grid maximums an AVERAGE of 10.6%. But there's a "lot of spread"...meaning some will increase far MORE than 10.6%!!!!! NEWSFLASH, sportsfans.....if the UPPER end is raised by an average of 10.6%...then so is the LOWER end!!! That's how these grids work.

Yep...you heard it right....pay RAISES. State workers took a 5% cut. Dane County workers are taking a 5% cut. And just this past week, the city of Fitchburg announced plans to furlough employees....or face cuts.

Isn't it grand to live in a bubble in Sun Prairie where the recession has no impact on you at all....if you work for the school district, that is. Family Circle even lists Sun Prairie as one of the nation's top 10 places for families to live. Yup...except the senior members of those families, the ones living on Social Security or retirement investments, will have to live elsewhere and just come to visit.

Had enough yet? Then speak your piece Monday night July 6th. Otherwise it will be rubber stamped by the board on July 13th.

Meeting: 07/06/2009 HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE,
5:30 p.m. at the District Office (Room 100), 501 S. Bird St., Sun Prairie.
Chair: Caren Diedrich

Report prepared by: Tim Culver, District Administrator & Annette Mikula, Executive Director of Human Resources
HISTORY/SITUATION/RELATED ACTIONS: On August 11, 2008 the School Board authorized an Administrative Support Staff Group Classification and Compensation Study to be done. The study used objective job evaluation to establish internal consistency; strategic market data to pay fairly in your employment markets.

It recognized the diversity of jobs and required levels of knowledge, skills, and abilities. The study also provided plan implementation that will be useful (and which is appropriately flexible) for many years. Charles Carlson presented the findings to the Administrative Support Group on June 30, 2009 which included a new salary schedule structure.

The new salary schedule incorporates nine steps with an approximately 22% range spread. Range maximums average 10.6% higher, but have considerable variance. The schedule is analytically sound with a balance between internal and external measurement.

RECOMMENDATION:
1. Management Team recommends adoption of the new pay plan.
[SP-EYE- But of course they do! ]
2. Management Team recommends that the board authorizes a 3.8% total package increase which is $79,371.00 for the 2009/2010 school year.
[SP-EYE- But they're not saying whhat it is for 2010-11, now are they? ]

Read the Sales Pitch on the Job Compensation Survey

See the CURRENT payscale...how much will these increase?

---