The Funding Could Come From "Raising Our Revenue"

...or?
Zip. Zero. Zed. Zilch. Cero. 零

That's it.  No options.  Simpy YOUR tax dollars at work.  Other People's Money.

The school district desperately wants to spend an additional $219,000 for new initiatives next year, but insists that there is absolutely ZERO leeway in the projected revenues.
So they want to increase the tax levy by 0.5%.  Excuse us....by 0.45% to cover the cost.

How disingenuous! (To say the least).
When we last saw their slide show (July 18th) this the slide they used:

so...what has changed?  Why the sudden switch from " increase the tax levy..." to "funding could come from raising our revenue"?

What they mean is...

THEY WANT TO RAISE YOUR TAXES!

...they just have lost the stones to say that.  Instead, they hide behind the innocuous sounding "raise revenues".  Shee...AHH!  Like they're gonna hold a car wash for RTI!

Wisconsin Act 16 implemented revenue limits beginning with the 1993-94 school year. A district's revenue limit is the maximum amount of revenue that may be raised through state general aid and property tax for the General, Non-Referendum Debt (authorized after August 12, 1993), and Capital Expansion Funds, also referred to as Funds 10, 38, and 41 respectively. (Prior to 01-02, the Community Service Fund levy was included in the revenue limit.)

In July, district administration at least recognized that they could reduce other areas of the budget.  They didn't LIKE that idea...but it was at least on the table.  Now...at a salary of at least $125,000 each, all they can come up with is to raise taxes.

Board member John Welke rattled off several areas of the budget that added up to at least the amount needed to fund initiative #1.  None of the other board members or administrators denied the availability of that money.  But they wouldn't budge.

Folks....if you care about this, it seems that YOUR hand is being forced.  YOU only have one option left....to reduce the tax levy at the Annual Elector's Meeting.

Not to be all Henry Hopeless or anything....the budget still has not been presented to or approved by the full board.  There remains a slight chance that 4 board members can come together and direct administration to enact the top 2 critical initiatives WITHOUT increasing the tax levy.
But we're not holding our breath.

Sensible? Responsible? Not the Sun Prairie School District

There's a great article in the Wisconsin State Journal today regarding the looming national debt crisis. The parallels here in Sun Prairie are simply uncanny. Here we are facing massive cuts to education in the form of state aid. The governor has declared that, "Wisconsin is broke".

"A family, if they get over-extended ...what they do is, they say, how do we start cutting our monthly costs?
We don't stop sending our kids to college, we don't stop fixing the boiler or the roof that's leaking. We do things in a sensible, responsible way."
---President Barack Obama

What the President is talking about is MAINTAINING.  He's talking about choosing NEEDS over WANTS.  Our school district administration wants to discuss MORE spending tomorrow night. Their own public hearing slide show (slide19) says:

Ok...so we added in the individual costs of each initiative...which the district conveniently left out. "Let's not talk cost...let's just look at the value and not worry about cost, eh?" Do any of you REALLY just go buy something without looking at the price? (Ok...so maybe if you are in the $100K club, that's how you operate). When you go buy a car...do you just write a check for the sticker price plus tax? (please, please, say no) Or do you negotiate...haggle? Do you maybe decide that as much as you'd like to get a Mercedes, you're going to settle for a nice, sensible, reliable, economy car?

So...when a family (or the nation) is struggling, what they do is they cut costs. What does the school district want to do? Keep spending and simply raise your taxes!
Why can't this school district say, "Hey...maybe we could do without that administrator position...after all we managed just fine for a number of months with a substitute for far less cost"?
Why can't the district say, "Hey..maybe our principals' cabinet money is being used too much to stock up on Twinkies and Ho-Hos. Maybe we cut that expense."?

Certainly some of the district's initiatives are worthy of funding. But there's only so much money to go around, and we can't just keep on tapping the taxpayers for every whim. Many average Sun Prairie families (not one of the $100K club) says, "Gee, it would be really nice to spend a couple of days at the Kalahari and enjoy the awesome waterpark, but money is tight, so why don't we just go camping instead?". Or, maybe they're saying, "Ok, let's spend the money and go to the Dells, but in return, there'll be no dining out for the next month". Reasonable people make reasonable compromises. If the district wants to fund some of their desired initiatives, they need to take the taxpayer off the table and give something else up instead.

How come the district was able to (using their words here), "aggressively bid the district’s insurance (worker’s compensation, liability, and property), such that the district will save $150,000", yet they seem incapable of "aggressively" scrutinizing their own internal spending?"

Over the last few years, we've heard these property tax increases likened to "just a couple of less pizzas per month" for the average family. Has anybody actually thought about how many pizzas per month we've done away with over the past 5 years? Did any of us really ever eat that much pizza to begin with?  And what is the long-term increase we've paid?

More to the point...what "bang" did we get for all our bucks?  Well...other than a few palatrial schools? Are our kids any brighter?  Absolutely... if your metric is the honor roll or the number of graduates receiving "high honors".  But what if you look at a less skewed metric...like...say...WKCE scores relative to districts our size?  How about National Merit Scholars (or scholarships) relative to other districts our size?  How about grades in college relative to grades in high school?  Is SPASD really juicing our kids' brain cells?  Or are they just juicing the GPA?

Just sayin...

1% of WHAT?

If administrators are getting a 1% raise....and the raise is a "pool" of 1% of administrator salaries for 2010-11...
But...but....that includes the salaries of 3 administrators that have left the building.
Why should their salaries be included in determining "the pool"....if new administrators are ineligible for raises???

Why, to boost their individual raises of course!

Think about it....the 3 administrators who have resigned made a combined $300,000.
1% of that is $3,000.
That means that the "raise pool" of  roughly $25,000 is high by $3,000
What a nice way to increase your raise by 13%

They must be learning from DeForest!

Meanwhile....Back In Sun Prairie....Can You Hear The Music?

...as in the Sound of Sun Prairie?

We keep hearing that that issue continues to heat up and is in danger of boiling over.  We hear more resignations are coming down the pipe.  We also hear that this issue of program unity and being delegated the authority to manage a program are the root issue...not passports.  There seems to be talk that the whole program could collapse like a house of cards.  That's pretty serious, folks.  We all know how valuable--and renowned-- the Sound is.  And next year will be the program's 40th anniversary.  Gutting or killing the program would be an unwise move.

The word on the street from multiple sources seems to indicate that the problem is most definitely not within the Sound.  The problem appears to be at the top of the pecking order, as in District Administrator Culver and Deputy DA Phil Frei.

In a shades of the boys basketball fiasco several years back (and who wouldn't have thought Administration would have learned there lesson there?), we're hearing multiple corroborations that 1, possible 2 parents (out of 99-100), took issue with having to obtain a passport to travel into Canada.

Get past for a moment that all kids sign a Commitment form that they will be one as a team and do what the team decides.  Because signing that form basically committed every kid to getting  a passport--because THAT is what "the Sound" said was the the way things would work.

Get past for a moment that the Sound has worked like this for many years.  It's not like they haven't gone to Canada before.  It's not like this getting passports was a new thing.

And then think about the fact that not one, but TWO administrators are purported to have told the disgruntled parents that, while they understand their position that passports are not absolutely required (and they are not), the program is requiring passports.  For the safety of the kids and for program unity, the program made a decision that passports would be required.  And 98 or 99% of parents were OK with that.  The other 1 or 2 went to the big dog with their complaint.

So...what's the problem?

Again...these are allegations until the wash cycle is complete, but we hear that the top level administration backed the disgruntled parents and indicated that passports would not be required. Geee...way to cut the program manager off at the knees.  Can you blame them for turning in their resignation?

Stay tuned, folks..and grab your hard hats.

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.

So...How's That Appliance Fee Workin' For Ya?

We've asked administration a number of times: HOW MUCH DID YOU ACTUALLY COLLECT in appliance fees?

You know...that HUGE --genius--permanent budget reduction initiative designed to save us $6,000 per year on a $72.3 M dollar budget. That's 0.0083% for you folks keeping score at home.

Well...the only answer we ever got out of administration was, "All that money goes into the one pot". So...how much went into that pot? No answer.

Well...we have the answer for you: A whopping $3,001 dollars.

Since admin refused to tell us, we smelled something rather ripe...so we decided to review all the accounts receivable and check registers for the past several month and filtered out of them all records related to appliance fees. Here's the actual data.

2009-10 Appliance Fee Collection

-------->Collected - Refunded
February -- $ 120
March ----- $1,256
April ----- $1,235 ----- $180
May ------- $ 585 ------ $ 15
------------------------------
Sum ------- $3,196 ----- $195
Net -- ----- $3,001

Accordingly, we have a few follow-up questions for administration.

1. WAS this ridiculous appliance fee assessed equitably? Or are there staff members (and we don't blame them) that just said, "No frickin' way am I paying your stupid little fee!". And if that's true--and we believe it is-- how fair is that to those that paid?

2. How come those that have been through the building tell us repeatedly that they see personal appliances without the de rigueur "super special SPASD approved and paid personal appliance fee sticker"?

3. How much did all the monitoring, invoicing, accounts receivable, and stickering COST?

4. Are you really serious about continuing to implement this two-bit, cheesy budget reduction initiative? (we apologize if we indicated our feeling about this in any way).

5. Assuming your pride is going to once again get in your way and you continue this practice...how do you plan to make up for the shortfall in projected budget reductions that you sold to the public?

We have an idea. If the school board insist on this silliness, let;s exercise our power of the electors and reduce school board member salaries by $3,000 in October!

Maybe that will drive the message home (and we apologize to the 1 or 2 school board members that DO think that appliance fees are silly).

Do You Like Apples?

Well...how do you like THESE apples?

As the school board gets to thinking about pay raises for administration, let's look at how administrators have fared over the past 7 years.

7 years...

22 Administrators...

An AVERAGE raise of 4.6% per year

And these are the people that are making --on average-- $90,000 per year.

No wonder!

The starting salary for administrators is $70,000.

7 years of 4.6% per year raise increases $70,000 to $96,000

8 years as an Administrator...and you're in the $100K club.

And...just for reference...during at least 3 of those years, state employees received 0.0% increases, and NEVER received an increase of more than 2.5-3%.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Welcome to the Adminosphere

It's that time of year again, when the board starts discussing raises for the administrators and Admin Support. Recall that "policy" is for administrators to receive the percentage increase that the teachers (SPEA) received in the prior year. As some of them would say, then, they are entitled to a 3.8% raise.

The 28 administrators earn a cumulative total of $2,500,000 in 2009-10. 3.8% of that comes to about $95,000. Ka-chiiiing!

Retiring from the Sun Prairie Area School District (2010)

"Retiring from the Sun Prairie school district" is consistently the single greatest search performed on the SP-EYE website. We get e-mails requesting for updates. People want to know. Subsequently, we try to update this data at least annually. It's time.

We have collected retirement data over the past 4 years. Our databank now includes 33 teachers, 12 AFSCME Local 60 members, and 2 administrators. This year we had 7 teachers (SPEA) retire. Of course, a $6,000 "golden handshake" incentive was offered to any teachers who filed retirement paperwork (effective June 2010) prior to October 15, 2009.

Retirement Statistics

The mean salary at retirement for teachers in Sun Prairie is $69,500; the mean $69,900; and the mode $70,000. Statisticians will tell you that for most data sets of at least 20 points, when the mean, median, and mode are all equal, it indicates a very consistent data set. In fact we applied Grubbs' outlier test, and n one of the data points was statistically identified to be an outlier. The range of salaries at retirement is $52,400 to $80,800.

The average teacher retires at 59 1/2 years old, has worked as a teacher for 32.4 years, and has a Master's degree. In our dataset, 77% of teachers retiring have earned their Master's degree. In addition to their average salary of $69,500, they also earn, on average, $27,100 in fringe benefits. Adjusted for 190 contracted work day, the hourly pay for a teacher at retirement is $45.72 (per hour). That number is obtained by dividing the retirement salary by 190 contacted days, and then by 8, for the number of salaried hours per workday.

Contracts: 260 vs. 190 days

For most occupations, the annualized standard is to work 2080 hours. 2080 hours divided by 8 hours per workday, translates to 260 "contract" days. Of course, some of these days will become paid vacation days. Where did the 260 days come from? 365 days in a year - 104 for the 2 weekend days that occur in each of the 52 weeks. That leaves us with (52) 40 hour work weeks. Teachers are only contracted for 190 days. That translates to 180 school days plus 5 days one either end of the school year to set up and take down.

"When I started in the district, I was paid only $10,000 per year"

We did get approached by one reader to address the fact that many of the more tenured teachers, may indeed be earning upwards of $70,000 today (at retirement), but these same staff were only paid as little as $10,000 per year at hire. Using the 190 contracted 8-hour days, that translates to about $6.57 per hour!

The reader is correct...but that average starting salary was pretty much what the rest of the world earned 30+ years ago. In fact, Mr. Average Retiring Teacher, who has worked for 32 years, with a starting salary of $10,000 actually earned an average annual raise of 6.25%! State workers receive an average raise of 2%, with many biennial contracts calling for NO raises.

When we talk about salary equity, the Consumer Price Index frequently comes into play. Frequently it is argues that teacher raises don't even keep up with the Consumer Price Index (CPI). In fact, since 1940, the AVERAGE rate of inflation has been 4.48%. Therefore, teachers HAVE been ahead of the CPI. State workers have not.

State worker parallel

For a real life example, consider the situation of a state worker we'll call Notch...Notch Johnson. Notch started working for the state in 1973 as a Senior Scientist at a salary of.....drum roll.....$4.50 per hour. At the standard 260 x 8-hour days, that translates to a whopping $9,360 per year. ...and Notch thought he was rich! 36, years later,however, in 2009, Notch retired as a "Section Chief" at a salary of $75,200. Pretty equivalent, eh?

In fact, Notch's average annual salary increase only comes out to 5.95%. That's 5% less that the average annual increase (6.25%) experienced by teachers in Sun Prairie.

1978 Price Points for reference

Year End Close Dow Jones Industrial Average: 805

Interest Rates Year End Federal Reserve 11.75%

Average Cost of new house $54,800.00

Average Household Income per year $17,000.00

Minimum Wage: $2.65 per hour

Average Monthly Rent $260.00

New Car: $6,379

Cost of a gallon of Gas 63 cents

Dozen Eggs 48 Cents

Bread: 34 cents per loaf
Postage Stamp: 15 cents

Teachers work more hours/days that the 190 8-hour contract

The other argument which invariably surfaces is that teacher devote a great deal of their time for free...working beyond their 8-hour days and working on non-contracted days.

We agree...teachers (most, anyway) do work more than 8 hours a day, and often work on days when they are not required to be in school. But, ya know what? So do many folks in other occupations. In fact, the term "salaried employee" to the rest of the working world means, "We pay you X amount as salary; you do what it takes to get the job done". Many a relationship has been strained by folks who work nights and weekends to "get the job done" and keep that salary. Therefore, we think this argument should be considered a push.

...........................................................................

We're not expecting a lot of love from the teacher's union on this post....but we're not in this game to please the union...or anyone else for that matter. At the heart of this blog is the desire to present straight-forward factual information. Spin-free. We're not taking any sides, because there is no war. We just want to make sure that people have the facts.

And the facts are that teachers in Sun Prairie are retiring at a pretty decent salary...more than most occupations. What other occupation do you know that earns an average salary increase of 6.25% over 32 years? Or gets paid over $45 per hour?

Behind Closed Doors: Appliance Fee-ass-co Update

You'll recall that in our last episode, the school board stood firm and voted to retain the appliance fees as previously established.

Weeeelllllllll...it seems that there've been some changes. You didn't hear about them either, did ya? Nope...no discussion from the board table...YET we find that some changes have indeed been made.

SP-EYE sidenote: dontcha just HATE it when the board and the district make a big public fuss of something --usually moving to quickly cover what for many are quite ample derrieres, we might add. They staunchly defend the position du jour and THEN the shenanigans begin. Quietly, behind the comfort of closed doors, they DO take action. You see, while they like to put on a good game face in public, in reality, they don't particularly like to have their drawers a-droopin. Why? cuz inevitably they get made out to look like big sillies. And we can't have that...what with decorum and all.

You remember them buying like $300 of KitKats per year from employees' birthdays? Publicly supported. Privately: that policy has been given the boot. Those silly, inconsistent class supply lists? Gonzo. Pizza? Not being ordered.

Our only question is this: why do they make such an effort to make the citizens complaining about the silliness look silly, when it is the admin that ends up with egg on their faces? That's neither decorum, nor logical, people!

Ok...commercial over...back to the appliance fee-ass-co. But...you guessed it, they did all this stuff outside the public eye. They must enjoy eating crow in private. Of course they wouldn;t have to eat crow if they'd simply learn to say, "You know what? You're right...it's dumb and we're not gonna do it". That Pavlov guy never got the dogs to do that.

Many thanks to the individual who provided this update on the silly appliance fee-assco:

[Administration] have now determined that microwaves and coffee pots are okay...and refrigerators are only going to be $15 [not $30]. Great news, but proves the point that nobody did any kind of research on the true cost of running these appliances...they just grabbed numbers from who knows where. And I would be surprised if they have yet calculated the cost of truly running these appliances. So to get your microwave money refunded, here are all of the hoops you must jump through...(taken from an e-mail sent to all employees):

The following is the text of an e-mail sent out to all staff:

I jusfound out yesterday that we are refunding teachers who paid a microwave appliance fee for this year. This is the procedure that needs to be followed:

1) Teacher will contact School Secretary and ask for a refund

2) School Secretary will make a copy of the personal appliance fee form and give it to the teacher

3) School Secretary will direct the teacher to fill out an expense reimbursement form and attach the copy of the personal appliance fee form to it

4) Completed forms will be sent to Rhonda Page for an account code and payment
**In order to get a refund by April 26th all forms must be turned into Rhonda by Friday April 16th.

So what I would love to see is the actual calculations for the amount of manhours spent on originally collecting the fees, issuing stickers, the cost of the stickers and printing, and now the cost of all of this paperwork...both printing and paper costs, but also manhours spent filing and cutting checks. Not to mention the hours accumulated by all of the teachers having to take time to complete yet MORE paperwork to justify the over abundance of admin and secretaries in the district.

According to ( this website ) ONE compact dorm fridge should cost about $36 to run in a year. Assuming it is used 9.5 months of the year..that would be a pro-rated cost of $28.50. So the fact that the district is charging $15 to break even on energy cost means they did no calculations and this is nothing more than punishment and politics. If energy costs were truly a concern, they would:
a. charge for ALL appliances and not just refrigerators
b. they would have done their homework and calculated the true cost
c. they would also charge employees who work in the office for their extra energy. The offices are ALWAYs warm in the winter and cool in the summer. Ever wonder why?

SP-EYE: What an awesome insider look at more of the silliness. Thanks again for sharing.

Suggested motto for administration:

Learning by Doing: We just make it up as we go along.

Second Verse? Same as the First!

Wisconsin State Journal Channel3000.com

Here we go again. Basketball players (girls this time) and their parents are upset with the coaches. Facts from there are a tad hazy (and being held close to the vest). It IS clear that the girls AND the parents complained. That much is factual.

" Both coaches for Sun Prairie High School's varsity girls basketball team have been put on paid leave pending an investigation triggered by complaints from players and their parents, according to Superintendent Tim Culver. "

It's clear that there was a meeting last Thursday involving the parents, players, and Athletic Director Jim McClowry. McClowry present a resolution plan; the parents rejected it [ahem...WHO's running this show????] and so plan B--putting the coaches on leave--- was put into place. Ummm...anyone else get the idea that Plan B was exactly what the disgruntled parents wanted in the first place? So, to summarize, McClowry presented some option; parents rejected it, so the coaches suffer.

The bottom line, however, is that in the prime portion of the Big 8 conference play, the head basketball coach (Liz Hrodey) and Assistant Coach (Steve Bartow) were placed on (paid) administrative leave. Of course, Culver wasn't very clear that the suspension is for the rest of the season. Hmmm...even if the coaches are absolved...they still lose, huh?

Sure looks pretty darn close to the way boys varsity BBall coach Jeff Boos was railroaded because of disgruntled parents 2 years ago...right? Not so says Culver:

But Culver said that situation appears different than the latest one, and he
denied that some disgruntled parents are running the show.

It would be "premature to draw that conclusion," he said.

We're wondering why Culver is so certain about anything being premature. Hmmm?

Here's Our Analysis
1. Administration has screwed up again. Did we learn NOTHING from the Boos fiasco? Didn't the school board say "Never again."?

2. Who got what they wanted? Not the coaches. If the girls wanted the coaches gone...guess what...THEY got what they wanted.

3. It has been verified by the media that the complaints involved are not of a sexual, physical, or criminal nature. So...what's left? And--more to the point-- doesn't this smack directly of a classic winning grievance on the part of the suspended coached? How exactly did they violate their contracts in any way?

4. Newsflash, people. Do any of the administrators actually FOLLOW any sports? Coaches MUST be in complete command of their players. The players aren't in charge. Neither are the parents. This isn't Tee Ball.

5. Here's another newsflash, girls. God forbid you want to play this game beyond high school. Because if you think college coaches will put up with your crap, you have another think coming. And, in college, mommy and daddy can't intimidate the coach or administration.

6. Here's an idea the administration didn't--(but should have)---consider for Plan "A": "Girls...here's the deal. Your coaches are Coach Hrodey and Coach Bartow, If you do not like that, may we point out that the door is over there. You want to walk out? Don't let the door hit your overly pampered keesters on the way out. You walk out? Fine. We'll just a forfeit the rest of the games this season. If you can live with that, so can we."

Aren't we in a budget crisis?
How can we be paying TWO MORE coaches? The suspended coaches are on PAID leave (as they should be). But what about the two replacement coaches? As SPEA members, their contract specifies a coaching stipend. You're not telling us that they VOLUNTEERED without pay...are you? We doubt the union would approve of THAT. So where is that--unbudgeted-- expense coming from?

And it's clear that Coach Hrodey has retained an attorney. Good for her! Excellent move. You don't really think the district is going to win on this, do you? So HOW much in legal fees is it going to cost us THIS time? School Board? Ferris Bueller? Anyone?


What does our spinally challenged school board say?

...the school board president said he worries about a perception that parents are telling administrators what to do. John Whalen said the coaches' paid leave could send that kind of message, and he said he finds the whole thing "troubling."

You're worried about PERCEPTION, John? Good grief! How about being a little concerned that the administrative staff of YOUR employee [Culver] has screwed this up again. Look...if you had reason to replace either/both basketball coaches, don't you think that should have been done BEFORE or AFTER the season? Once in it, unless violations of a sexual/physical/criminal nature are alleged, administration's job is to BACK their people.

You find it "troubling", do you, John? How about "unacceptable"?

"The coaching community is pretty tight, think a lot of us want stories like this to come out so that people know the kinds of things we deal with."
--suspended coach Steve Bartow (who resigned Monday

What the community is saying (Are you LISTENING School Board )?

"Our AD and administration is hanging this woman out to dry in the community and our employees deserve better that this. Plus the $4,000.00 they are paying the two interim coaches also [frustrates the hell out of me]. Just when I think they can't screw something up any worse they prove me wrong !!!"

" The S.P. Administration needs to get a backbone and stop feeding into parents egos. I
understand ,from personal experience, how hurtful untrue accusations by the district can ruin good teachers for everyone. Hang in there Mrs. Hrodey."

" This is just typical, gutless cowering by the SP Schools Admin. The people in charge of the district need to tell the cry baby parents, whose precious little gem athlete isn't really all that good, to go screw themselves when faced with complaints about their kid....As usual, the SP Schools Admin. acted gutlessly and copped out. Absolute stoneless milque toasts running the Admin. that make these kinds of gutless decisions!! "

" 99% of coaching complaints on ANY level come from disgruntled parents who are delusional about their child's actual ability. Good Luck, Coaches Hrodey and Bartow...hoping you stay in the game and coach at place where you are actually appreciated and respected. Shame on you Sun Prairie! "

"...the administrators are afraid to make" mommy & daddy" mad or are uncomfortable doing the right thing and support the coaching staff because they may feel uncomfortable in social settings in a small town? Get over it and do the right thing this time- because it seems as though you totally screwed up on the Boos situation. "

" Money, power and politics = Sun Prairie "

" We don't even know what the complaints are; yet, they suspend these coaches w/o a hearing. It gives the appearance of something serious even if it is not and ruins these peoples reputations even before it is know if they have done anything wrong. If you are going to name the coaches then you also need to name the parents that are complaining. "

" Sun Prairie has a long history of letting power-charged parents throw fits and RUN the school. Isn't the first coach they've tried to run out of town and sadly won't be the last. "

" Sure sounds to me like a bunch of over-involved parents having a hissy fit because their daughters didn't get enough playing time. If the issue is not of a sexual, physical, or criminal nature, what else could it be? "

" While it is true that the players had some legit concerns and complaints (I had heard that the players went as a whole to the admin and said they wouldn't play for Hrodey anymore), there is no way admin can get rid of her. The complaints were about her coaching style and her coaching in general, not over the safety of the players. This sets an awful precedent that the coach is not in control, what happens when players in the future don't like a coach, does that mean every coach in Sun Prairie will get run out of town? Of course what do you expect from admin that thought it was a good idea to have co-coaches in the boys basketball program a few years back. Shows a high level of incompetency in the Sun Prairie admin. "

Readers Write: Administrative Audacity

Sp-Eye,
I can't help but raise a few questions as a result of reading your recent post "Whatever Happened To No Take Backs". I am perplexed at the timing and quite frankly the audacity of this request by the Administration.

Is this request being made by the same Administration/School Board that ridiculed and thumbed it's noses at the those who pleaded with them to recognize the seriousness of the financial circumstances that the citizens of this community are experiencing? Is this request being made by the same Administration/School Board that has the gall to claim that the citizens of this community do not understand the budgetary process and funding procedures necessary to run the SPASD? Is this the same Administration/School Board that sends home notes to Parent's that give the impression that "the community" is making them turn down the thermostats in schools in order to save money. (I personally found that note particularly juvenile). Isn't it funny how "the community" can make budget cuts when necessary? That was a poor attempt to stoke the fires of class warfare in this community.

I just don't understand. Maybe its because I am not as highly "educated" as those running the SPASD and the School Board, but if all the indicators were there regarding the current financial climate, the reduction in State aid, knowledge of the QEO being repealed, etc. why would anybody agree to the contract in the first place and then force a double digit tax increase up the back side of tax payers?

My personal opinion is that this Administration and School Board have taken their cue from our State and Federal "representatives". One only need to openly and honestly look at the reckless way money is being spent and the lack of representation of "we the people". It is a little understandable, after all, Government employees, like those in the SPASD Administration, as well as the School Board, are not responsible for producing anything tangible. Their salary and budget funding sources as well as their salaries come from a magical pot of money that they have the "power" to tap into on a yearly basis. This past year should serve as a wake up call to the citizens of Sun Prairie. There needs to be some significant change in the way business is conducted or we can only expect double digit increases in our bill to support this out of control cash cow that the SPASD has become.

Wow, talk about leadership. Where's that "lead by example" spirit? Where's all that talk about caring for the Teachers? All of the faux compassion that was demonstrated at the Electors Meeting when outrage was expressed over the lack of foresight by this Administration and School Board in the contract negotiations. I've got a funny feeling that even by forcing a furlough day or two on the Teachers won't affect the Administration's wallet one dime!

A supportive reader.

Skewed Sense of Equality at SPASD

Word on the street is that administration is forcing Local 60 workers to reduce their hours to what would amount to ONE "furlough day" (the same number of furlough days being imposed on administration). The mantra being preached is "Equality"....Everybody 'takes one for the team' and takes a furlough day to help save money and reduce the budget.

The Perfect Storm is raging upon us. SP-Eye predicted it on July 5th 2009...now the storm is upon us and the lowly paid Local 60 support staff is going to take the brunt of the storms force square on the chin while admin and teachers get raises. ...talk about driving a wedge between the teachers and their support staff!

We understand that the District Office is telling Local 60 workers that they should take a voluntary furlough day. Local 60 said, "No", so the DO will impose it in the next contract. Morale is very bad and Local 60 see the administrators and teachers getting raises but they are getting bussed by admin. A true group of leaders would take another furlough day to prevent local 60 from a forced furlough day. The teachers (SPEA) voted against a voluntary furlough day.

Here's a novel idea. If the average Local 60 worker makes about $15 bucks per hour, while members of the $100K Club earn $50-60 per hour, why aren't administrators forced to take FOUR furlough days for every ONE day (8 hours) cut that is forced upon Local 60?

Who, exactly, is hurting these days? Do you think it's the fat cat administration sipping on their venti mocha lattes with real whipped cream and dark chocolate shavings? Or is it the Local 60 folks that get paid barely enough to operate from check to check?

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?

The 21 administrators for which we have 2009-10 raise information received a whopping cumulative increase of $88,128! That's an average of $ 4,197 EACH per year!

Raise your hand if you received anything CLOSE to that as a raise this year. How about a loud raspberry if you LOST salary this year. We thought so.

21 Administrators

$88,128 in annual salary increases.

Raises as much as $6,050 per year!

And collectively going all "boo-hoo" on us at the thought (GASP!) of having their wages cut by ONE day via a 1-day furlough.

And what is it they want the school board to cut? Hmm?
Ferris Bueller? Anyone?
It's up to the school board to stop the madness at the meeting tonite.
We're sunk.

"3.8%" Package Increase Means Average 4.9% Salary Increase

You'll recall that the administration group graciously declined their "full merited compensation increase" and instead asked that the deal be capped at 3.8%.

[insert forlorn-sounding violin sequence]

So finally we know how that all translated into salary increases. Because you SHOULD know by now that a "package" increase amount usually translates to a much higher salary increase. But the district/board would prefer you not understand that.
So...here you have it...the actual raises received. Nice, huh?

Athletic Director Jim McClowry and Director of Food Service Renee Slotten-Beauchamp hit the jackpot with respective raises of 7.5% and 7.2%.

You'll see that Dr. Culver is at the bottom as he requested that he receive no raise. Funny...he still shows an increase!

The average raise received was 4.9%. At the bottom (excluding Culver)was Chad Wiedmeyer, Principal of Bird Elementary, who received only a 2.4% raise.

Hmmm. Historically, all salary dollars allocated for raises are placed in a "pot", and the amount of raise one receives is based on the result of their annual performance review. And Culver makes these determinations. Could this be an indication that Wiedmeyer has accumulated too many trips to Culver's woodshed?

7 administrators received raises of at least 5.0%.
It definitely cannot suck to be a member of the SPASD Administration.

22% Increase to the $100K Club Membership!

Well, the economy isn't all sour.
The school district has added 22% more members to the district administration $100K Club!
Currently 11 of 27.5 (40%) administrative positions are paid more than $100,000 per year.

If Obama really wants to fix the economy we just need to create more school districts and school district administration jobs.

Title__________________Administrator_____2009-10 salary
District Administrator...Culver..........$ 140,786
Asst DA, Business Mgr....Frei............$ 121,900
Director, Spec Ed........Dawes...........$ 113,964
Principal, PMMS..........Luessman........$ 112,496
Principal, PVMS..........Hery............$ 112,172
Director, Instruction....Murphy..........$ 112,088
Director, HR.............Mikula..........$ 111,844
Principal, SPHS..........Heipl...........$ 110,000
Principal, CS............Smojver.........$ 106,892
Principal, UMS...........Ruggles.........$ 100,711
Principal, HO............Klaas...........$ 100,118

Who'dathunk that middle school principals would be paid more than a high school principal?
or that an Upper middle school principal would be paid LESS than an elementary school principal?

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.

Stop Making Sense II - The Principals

So...the Administration kind of opened the door for comparisons when they recently spent $9,000 to do a job study (read: How do we get these people more money?) for Administration Support staff. As part of that study, as directed by none other than Tim Culver, of course, 11 school districts were chosen as "comparable" to Sun Prairie. Thus...we have our basis.

So...how do we compare? We looked at a number of positions to see how we stack up. Particularly in tight times, it IS important to see the lay of the land. We only wish that either (A) the school board had directed Administration to provide them with similar data, or (B) the board members did this work themselves. Neither is going to happen. Also...as a side note...no $9,000 was needed...this data is readily available from the DPI website. Yes, the consultant did a little bit more in-depth work, but did we really need all that? As always, YOU be the judge.

All data is 2008-09 salary data reported to DPI.

High school principals: Average salary = $105,222. Range = $92,000 to $114,000. Sun Prairie pays its principal the 3rd most. Note: new principal Lisa Heipl's salary for 2009-10 is $110,000.

Middle school principals: Average salary = $96,705. Range = $85,000 to $109,000. Sun Prairie pays its two principals more than any other district in the comparison.
Elementary school principals: Average salary = $88,908. Range = $70,000 to $110,000. One of Sun Prairie's principals, as a former District Office administrator, is paid in the top 5. Should this salary be frozen?


Average Elementary school salaries
Beloit $79,256
Fond du Lac $84,881
Oregon $85,762
DeForest $86,638
Middleton-CP $86,859
Elmbrook $90,964
SunPrairie $92,018
Waunakee $94,416
Mukwonago $98,520
Verona $99,977
WestBend $101,019

Remember as well that the board approves only the compensation "package" dollar amount. Tim Culver (at least for now) holds the purse strings in terms of doling the raises out. Raises are tied to scores on evaluations (which we know are subjective). So Culver gets to reward his pets...and penalize those that don't march properly. Dontcha think that the board should request to see and approve or modify any raises at an open meeting??? Maybe that would stop those crazy $5.00 per hour raises!!!

Correction! Admin is "entitled" to a 4.5% increase

As predicted, the school board packages are out...and guess what? Admin compensation for 2009-10 is indeed on the agenda!

Read it and weep

The Situation Report clarifies that the school board (in their eminent wisdom) voted to approve an increase of 4.5% for 2009-10 in May 2008.

Our apologies for the confusion. But....the landscape has not necessarily changed.

Just as the governor "took back" contractually agreed upon salary increases for state workers, and forced unpaid furlough days over the next 2 years, so too can the school board--the EMPLOYER-- decide that similar actions are in order "...in light of the cuts to public education funding and the present downturn in the economic cycle...". Why not furlough some of these high-priced Administrators over the summer months? Or even for a number of days during the year--as was done for state employees.
[ OK...you want 3.8% raise...fine...but we're going to furlough you each for 10 days without pay.]

The bottom line is that a contract is a contract until it is changed....whether forcibly or voluntarily.

Of course...it would take a school board equipped with a set of stones to actually do something that favors the taxpayers instead of the Administration---their EMPLOYEEs.

We DO appreciate the willingness of the %100K club and other Administrators to reduce their "entitlement". We just don't quite think it hits the mark.

====================================

HISTORY/SITUATION/RELATED ACTIONS:
On May 27, 2008 the School Board adopted changes to the Administrative Contractual Benefits and Evaluation Plan that included, among other things, a total compensation package increase (salaries and benefits combined)for the 2009-2010 fiscal year in an amount equivalent to that provided to members of the Sun Prairie Education association during the 2008-2009 school year. This was a 4.5% total package increase. This was in compliance with Wis. Stat. 118.245, Limitation on salary and fringe benefit costs for professional employees. Another change was that administrators would pay for an increasing percentage of their health care premiums.

The administrative team appreciates the support of the School Board and this attempt to keep pace with other licensed employees. However, the administrative team felt that in light of the cuts to public education funding and the present downturn in the economic cycle, it would be best to ask the School Board to reduce the salary and benefits package from what teachers received last year to what teachers received for 2009-2010: a 3.8% total salary and benefit package.

Administrative representatives (Ms. Smojver, Mr. Widiker, Mr. Luessman, and Mr. Frei) met with members of the School Board (Mr. Whalen, Mr. Shimek, and Ms. Diedrich) on July 1, 2009, to confer on this requested reduction.

The Board’s representatives unanimously passed a motion that appears as the recommendation to the school board. (Motion by Whalen, second by Shimek)

How Wrong Is This? ...Let Us Count the Ways

First...let's be crystal clear upfront in very simple terms:
1. AcaDec good.
2. AcaDec preparation past practice "policy" bad.

What is AcaDec? It's the Academic Decathlon...a kind of Survivor Meets Who Wants to be a Millionaire without the desolate territory, poor hygiene (well....we guess that depends...), and the Million Dollar Prize. It's a fast-paced, oral and written exam based school competition that begins at the local level, progresses to Regionals, then States, and finally to a National Competition. We think this AcaDec concept is great as a sports-alternative club/team building opportunity. Where we draw the line, however is the costs that have gone into it because of "past practice" (see what happens when you aren't informed as to how tax dollars are being spent?)

OK...so why is it so wrong? For starters, how about $1,575 in hotel room costs for a 3 night WEEKEND stay (Sat., Sun., Mon,) for a competition that is (A) about 10 miles away, and (B)began Monday morning and ended Tuesday afternoon? OK...if the contest were in some distant land like Hedapimp, Idaho...and they needed to get settled the night before...then fine. But this was in MADISON during the week!

Oh...and toss in $132 for a brunch for 10 students and 1 advisor. We'll do the math for you...that's $12.00 apiece! And the board has imposed a $6.00 per meal limit for staff? Oh...wait...that doesn't include students!


Administration was asked to provide more information on this expense. Rhonda Page, SP Business Manager, responded with the following:

3 day hotel stay for Academic Decathlon: This is the response we got from [Athletic Director] Jim McClowry: Sun Prairie is one of the schools that doesn't tie the Acadec program to a semester class. Instead the kids essentially take 3 days to "cram" a semesters work into those days. They work from dusk until dawn to prepare for the event during those days. As this information was given to the School Board in prior years, the practice was continued this year. If so directed by the School Board, this practice will be eliminated. Management Team will be revisiting this topic in the near future.

REALLY?! So now Administration is tossing the BOARD under the bus? It's the Board's fault? Because they were asleep at the wheel and rubber stamped this like they do everything else? OK. You're right. It IS their fault. It is the board's duty to rein in wayward administrative spending. Of course, since the administration is, in theory, composed of intelligent tax-paying adults, we'd like to believe that the board doesn't have to back up the goalie on this one. Admin should have denied this expenses years ago. Oh...and this was the one that on Monday night Phil Frei and Jim McCourt were trying to hang on Paul Keats!

Wow! We could market and make a mint off a Sun Prairie version of the old board game, "Clue". Aha! It was Colonel Keats! In the Doubletree Hotel. With a graphing calculator! Get it? Get a "clue"? Huh?! Huh?!

Do you hear that, school board? Administration is going to "revisit" this topic in the near future...but ultimately, they're relying on you to say "NO". Honestly...this is like a 2-year old that tests his/her parents by stretching the lines of what he/she can or can't do ...not stopping until mom or dad firmly says NO!".

Oh...and NOW the Management Team is going to "revisit" the topic? Shheeeaaaah! Hello! This was complained about LAST year (again, only by a citizen or two). So, what is it...One complaint you ignore...but two complaints in a row and you "revisit the topic" ???

And exactly what message or life lesson does this pass on to the children in the school district?

So...here are the top 5 best defenses to the AcaDec expense "rationale"

5. It costs less to stay in a hotel than to heat up a school for 2 days.

This was priceless...and it came from none other than Phil Frei. We like Phil. He's really a nice guy. Our criticism though is that he has to learn to say nothing rather than coming up with a quick offhand excuse for these things. That approach isn't working well for him (see the whole building permit fiasco).

Do you REALLY want us to even remotely believe that, Phil? I don't think so. Not that we even for a moment considered it, but nevertheless we looked at the heating bills during that month. There's just no way you can convince us that it would have cost $1600 to heat a zone within a school like Creekside for 12 hours on each of Saturday and Sunday.

And imagine the possibilities...instead of being cooped up in that awful hotel for 3 days, you could have had the kids in Creekside and made use of those awesome new SmartBoards as part of their cramming session!

Bottom line: There is no acceptable reason to spend money for 2 nights of hotel stay the weekend before the competition begins...and CERTAINLY not when the competition is only in downtown Madison! We'd even argue that since competitions don't begin until 8 or 9 am Monday and Tuesday, even a 1-night hotel stay is not warranted.

4. We did this last year....and even spent more!

Correct! You spent $2,226 to be exact (check #85470, 3-11-08 ) to stay at the Concourse hotel. And don't even THINK about asking to be rewarded for cutting back on your costs by $500 this year. If you and your teen successfully go to court and argue down the cost of a speeding ticket and the number of points assessed, is that reason to celebrate? Do you think your insurance company sees it any differently? Your surcharge isn't going to be any less.

It's wrong...and being slightly LESS wrong does nothing to validate what was done.

3. Other schools have a semester-long course designed to prep. We cram.
This sounds like a 21st Century response to mom's favorite come back to just about anything: "...and I suppose if Johnny wanted to jump off the ______ you would too".
Perhaps one of the advisors should put together a similar course for us. They would save the taxpayers the hotel costs, and put some money in their own pocket for putting together a new course. It seems like if that's what other schools are doing...geee...maybe THEY have it right.

2. The kids work hard and they're exhausted. They work from dusk till dawn.

Newsflash! That's what life is going to be like when these kids get out into the real world! Perhaps this is a good life lesson.

Come on! The competition day schedules are printed below. The six individual exams are done from 9 am to Noon. That's not exactly dawn. And the afternoon sessions doesn't exactly go till dusk, either (in fact it was already Daylight Savings Time!)

This excuse also begs the question ...if the football [or fill in any sport] team travels to Beloit for a game that goes into overtime, shouldn't all the kids and coaches just stay at a Beloit hotel for the night? Heck, it could be 10 or 11:00 or even later by the time the games over. You don't think THOSE kids are exhausted? Oh...and they also went to school all day. And traveled quite a bit further than the AcaDec Team does.

Do we even need to discuss the whole shenanigans potential? [Remember that classic line from Juno MacGuff in "Juno": "... I'm already pregnant, what other shenanigans can I get into?" ] Three nights times 10 teens plus 1 adult advisor adds up to a googolplex of possibilities for shenanigans. I don't think we need to remind people of recent events. These kids should be at home with their parents, 10 miles away.

Oh...and doesn't every teacher worth his/her salt tell kids that cramming before a test doesn't improve knowledge retention? It just makes you more tired and thus less likely to do your best on a given test. Yeah...many of us did just that in college...but we all know that it didn't work then and it doesn't work now.

1. Two-thirds was paid out of activity club fees.
This is the best one. So....should the French Club hook up with the Aviation Club and charter the Concorde [we know...we know...the Concorde is no more...but you get the point...right?] for lunch at the Eiffel Tower? And the last time we checked, Activity Club funds DO come from the taxpayers, too.

We repeat...COME ON! $1700 is ridiculous. Let's not even start down the road of "Is every club afforded the opportunity to go on a 3 night, $1700 trip 10 miles from home 2 nights before a competition even begins?"?

---

Nice digs, eh? The calendar tells it all

---

This schedule doesn't even reflect the need for a hotel


SP-EYE: Let's face it folks. This was wrong from no matter what angle you look at it. Management Team...don't make the school board micromanage this....you know the very thought of micro-managing makes JohnE Whalen squidgy. Instead, how about doing the right thing, and ending the practice on your own and then reporting such to the school board. How about taking the opportunity to publicly be a role model and tell the students that you made some poor decisions in the past and that you are going to own them and fix them. Of course, you can always do what we have come to expect: quietly (or not) explain to the students that their worldly experience has to end because of just a couple of uptight citizens.