Hey! We're Number 45!

Phil Frei and his Traveling Pie-in-the-Sky Budget Show like to compare Sun Prairie administrative costs to the state average.  And we look great! That trick's not working so well anymore.  As they say in the deep south, "that dog don't hunt".  Heck even the new associate editor for the STAR, covering the recent budget hearing, asked if we didn't have a more realistic comparison.

Well... here's where we rank:  45th.  Not even in the top 10%. At least when we look at Administrative costs per student
.
Now, if we talk Administrative costs as a percent of operating expenses....now we look a little better: 25th.
Check it out for yourselves; data is from the Wisconsin Taxpayers' Alliance:

http://www.oshkosh.k12.wi.us/site_uploads/uploads/2010_school_admin_costs.pdf

In both cases, 12 out of the 20 similar-sized districts to Sun Prairie rank higher than us.
It is what it is people.

You're Not Gonna Believe This!

Are you sitting down?
Calm? Cool? Collected?
OK...then we can tell you...
Our administrators are underpaid.

That's right.  You heard it here, on SP-EYE. Unlike the district, that spins things only one way and shares only the information that makes them look good, we offer you the facts.  Sometimes the facts support our contentions...and sometimes they don't.

We looked at DPI Administrative Salary data for 2010-11.  We focused on the 20 school districts closest in size to Sun Prairie.  And we found that if you gasp for breath every time you read about administrator pay in Sun Prairie, you should be thankful we're not like other districts our size.

Of course, there are at least a few bleeding heart school board members that will leap upon this opportunity to pay our administrators more.  In fact, the board is in negotiations now to give administrators as much as a 2% increase in salary.

Do we need to follow a new leader?

Pause, Take  a Deep Breath...and Stop the Insanity!
What are we?  Lemmings?  Just because Acme School district wants to pay its administrators ridiculous wages, do we need to follow suit?  Who REALLY makes $100K plus in this society?  The average US physician earns about $140K.  The average dentist earns $102K.  The average engineer earns about $75K. (Source: http://www.worldsalaries.org/usa.shtml).  Sure, school district administrators have some responsibility.  But more than an engineer? dentist? doctor?  After all....these folks aren't TEACHING our kids.  So let's not use that rationale.

A review of the 2010 Census shows that only 8% of US households earn more than $125,000.  8%!  Do school administrators REALLY belong in the top 8% of all wage earners?  There's something wrong with this picture!  Hopefully our school board will give some consideration to this before casting their votes when the Administrator contracts come up in the very near future. New data shows that the median household income in 2009 was $50,221 which is down from $52,029 in 2008.  This drop of 3.6 percent comes at a time when many U.S. households are struggling to make payments on mortgages.   Really? The median household income is $50,000 and we pay school administrators DOUBLE or TRIPLE that?
 

Download a file of WI school 
district administrator compensation

Is Common Sense Really Dead?
The tide may finally be turning.  In these tight times, people are starting to wake up and pay attention.  The governor of New York is currently proposing legislation which would establish a tier system )based on enrollment) under which school district administrator (superintendent) salaries would be capped.  Currently, one-third of district administrators in New York earn over $175,000.  The 6th (top) tier, under which Sun Prairie would fall, would limit compensation to $175,000.  And that's New York, people!  As in the New York whose cost of living far exceeds ours.  Interestingly enough, the district administrator from New Berlin, WI is currently in negotiations to be district administrator in New York.  He was compensated over $200K last year.  How will this affect him? Read the article below.

District's pick for superintendent has sixth-highest education salary in Wisconsin

Is our Administration over-staffed?
Nobody wants to discuss the 800 lb gorilla in the room, but eventually those discussions must occur before the gorilla overtakes us.  Two aspects of administrative costs stuck out like a sore thumb when we looked at the 20 similar-sized districts.

First, Sun Prairie happens to have the most amount of administrators dedicated to Special Education. Kids with special need are an important part of our district, but let's face the facts, these administrators aren't typically working one-on-one with these kids.  That responsibility falls on Local 60 staffers largely earning less than $15/hour.   But lets toss in another fact that may make you pause to think.  We also looked at the DPI data for the numbers and percentage of enrollment comprised by special needs kids.  While Sun Prairie may have the highest number of Special Ed. administrators, we have the second LOWEST percentage of special need s kids in districts our size.   We'll take "Things That Make You Go, 'Hmmmm' for $500, Alex".

Top Heavy? (and not in a good way)
Second.  If we look at the ratio of principals to assistant principals in the district, we also stick out like a sore thumb in comparison to similar-sized districts.  Remember when the board voted on a heated split-vote to spend the money to hire an additional assistant principal at the high school?  Maybe if the board had looked at these hard facts, they would have given more though to that move.  After all, aren't we supposed to be a district that bases its decisions on data?   Are we looking at the wrong (or censored) data?  Or just not looking at the data at all?

Wrapping it All Up
So...are our administrators under paid?  Or is it better a question of : are our administrators simply not as excessively paid as other in similar sized school districts?  As we have to tighten our budgetary belts, it is this where we need to focus our attention...not on the teachers in the classrooms.

Spotlight on Administrative Costs

Administrators are bucking for raises. Phil Frei told us that he/the district has budgeted for 1.6% increases in salary. At last week's board "work-study" session, Frei shared a graphic which purports that Sun Prairie spends the least percentage of its budget on "Administrative and Operating Expenses" than the 7 school districts closest in size to ours.

Not only does such a figure look good when one is tryingf to "sell" a budget, but it also looks really nice when one is trying to sell a community--or school board--on the idea of raises.


We're not sure what constitutes "Administrative and Operating Expenses". It's kinda nebulous. We'd rather look at absolutes...tangibles. You know? So we went data mining on the DPI site. Perfect timing, as DPI just posted data for 2010-11. Frei indicated that his data was "the most recent" available on the DPI site. It is noteworthy that for most "reports" available for school district, the most current available data is 2-3 years old. Let's use current information, dontcha think?

We looked--initially-- at three variables:
1. Total Salary and Fringe benefit costs for staff classified as "Administrators"
2. Salary and Fringe Costs (dollars) per child (based on 2010-11 enrollment)
3. Number of kids enrolled per Administrative staff member.

Take a look at our data. It seems a tad different than the picture the District wanted to leave you with. But you decide.

More to come on this topic.

What'll it be for TV? The Pack? Or the Shimek Shuffle

Tomorrow night is gonna be a tough one, folks.
Of course, there's the Packer game to watch.
But...like all those enticing new fall shows, you also have the option of seeing if Terry Shimek will once again do the Shimek Shimmy & Shuffle and change his original vote, this time voting to spend $69,000 to hire a NEW administrative position.  Just what we need...right?  For a guy that wants to be pegged a fiscal conservative, he sure changes his votes and supports a lot of administrative fluff.

And of course they say $69,000...but that's ONLY salary.  Tack on another $30,000 or so to cover benefits.
Yes...we DO need to increase the diversity of our district staff.
But...and without going into detail...this district KNOWS that there's some....shall we call it "housekeeping" to be done before we're really ready to do that.

The community is hurting, the district is in need of serious climate changing...so we think this position needs to be put on hold...as the board voted 2 weeks ago.

Minutes of the September 13, 2010 school board meeting.
5.04 Approval of a 2010-2011 Proposed Budget
Motion by John Whalen, second by Jim McCourt
 TO APPROVE THE2010-11 PROPOSED BUDGET WITH A REDUCTION OF $670,000, AND ADD
HUMAN RELATIONS AND RECRUITMENT SPECIALIST FOR $69,000.
Motion Failed
Board members who WANTED to add the position:
Yea: Caren Diedrich, Jim McCourt, John Whalen


Board members that did not
Nay: David Stackhouse, Jill Camber Davidson, John M Welke, Terry Shimek

For those keeping score at home...if this vote passes tomorrow night, you may wanna chalk up another $100,000 that the tax levy can be reduced in 2 weeks.  They can vote for it, but we, the people, do not have to support a levy to do so.

No Doesn't Mean No Anymore

Here we go again!
After being voted down 3-4 , suddenly appearing on the Board agenda for Monday 9-27-2010 is a recommendation to hire a  HUMAN RELATIONS AND RECRUITMENT SPECIALIST 


Cost: At least $67,000 PLUS benefits

"During the budget and Edu-Jobs Program funding discussions at the Finance Committee on September 13, 2010 there was an approved motion from the Finance committee to approve the funding for this position in the 2010-2011 budget.  This motion failed on a 3-4 vote at the Board table. It was requested by Pastor Rayford to prepare a situation report to formally bring this matter to the board that would contain all of the appropriate support and background materials so this could be more adequately discussed and decided upon."

From the 9-13-2010 Meeting

TO AMEND THE MOTION AND CHANGE THE AMOUNT IN ITEM #6 TO $670,000 APPROVE THE PROPOSED 2010-2011 BUDGET AS PRESENTED WITHOUT ADDITION OF NEW PERSONNEL. ESTABLISH THE FOLLOWING AS A BUDGET PLANNING PARAMETER FOR THE 2011-2012 SCHOOL YEAR: "USE APPROXIMATELY $175,000 OF EDJOBS PROGRAM FUNDING TO RETAIN TITLE ONE ARRA FUNDED STAFF THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE LAID OFF IN SPRING 2011 FOR THE 2011-12 SCHOOL YEAR." CONSIDER THE USE OF EDJOBS PROGRAM TO FUND RETIREMENT INCENTIVES AS AN SPEA NEGOTIATIONS ITEM TO ASSIST IN THE RETENTION OF STAFF IN FUTURE YEARS. ESTABLISH THE FOLLOWING AS A BUDGET PLANNING PARAMETER FOR THE 2011-2012 SCHOOL YEAR: "TO USE THE EDJOBS PROGRAM FUNDING TO RETAIN EMPLOYEES WHO PROVIDE SCHOOL-LEVEL EDUCATIONAL AND RELATED SERVICES IN 2011-12 IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN PRESENT LEVEL OF SERVICES AND TO REDUCE THE LOCAL TAX LEVY TO THE GREATEST EXTENT POSSIBLE." EXTABLISH THE FOLLOWING AS A BUDGET PLANNING PARAMETER FOR THE 2011-2012 SCHOOL YEAR: "RECONSIDER THE POSSIBILITY OF ADDING THE FOLLOWING NEW POSITIONS FOR THE 2011-2012 SCHOOL YEAR, PENDING OVERALL BUDGET PARAMETERS AND WHEN MORE DETAILS ARE KNOWN? (A) HUMAN RELATIONS AND RECRUITMENT SPECIALIST, (B) ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNING STAFFING, AND (C) LITERACY COACHES."

Motion by Jill Camber Davidson, second by John M Welke.

Motion Carried

Yea: David Stackhouse, Jill Camber Davidson, John M Welke, Terry Shimek

Nay: Caren Diedrich, Jim McCourt, John Whalen

Sounds like the perfect opportunity for Terry Shimek to flipflop his original vote.


Didn't the board also vote (6-1) that the 2010-11 budget would contain NO NEW POSITIONS?
TO ACCEPT THE AMENDED MOTION RECOMMENDATIONS AS PRESENTED BY THE MANAGEMENT TEAM OF 9-2-10 APPROVE THE PROPOSED 2010-2011 BUDGET AS PRESENTED WITHOUT ADDITION OF NEW PERSONNEL.

Motion by Jim McCourt, second by John Whalen.

Final Resolution: Motion Carried

Yea: David Stackhouse, Jill Camber Davidson, Jim McCourt, John M Welke, John Whalen, Terry Shimek

Nay: Caren Diedrich

Read the Minority Recruitment plan and costs to-date. Note that the salary including benefits was listed as about $43,000 for November 2008. How did it increase to $67,000 salary alone now?

YOU Do the Math: One Day Without Pay

Haven't you heard? "Grease" used to be the word. Now, "furlough" is the word!
Google "furlough Wisconsin" and you get over 597,000 hits.

In the 80's we had pet rocks.
In the 90's we got technical and got Tamagotchis.
Early in the "aughts", we just got weird, and had Furbies.
Now? In the middle of a severe economic crisis? We're getting furloughs under the holiday tree!

State employees got 'em (8 days each in fiscal 2010 and fiscal 2011).
County and municipal employees got 'em.
Private sector workers fared even worse.
The lucky ones took pay cuts; the not so lucky took unemployment.

How does business function in a deep recession? When revenues [for any organization] drop, and salaries and fringe benefits account for over 80% of one's operating budget, what, realistically, can one cut to reduce operating costs?

Sometimes the gorilla in the room is personnel costs.

As the Sun Prairie school district mounts its own struggle in the wake of the community voting to slash the tax levy by $2M, the answer, unfortunately, has to lie in real people. The reality is that the district is trying to cut $1,200,000 from the budget adopted on October 26. Sure, there will be proposals suggested to raise the hackles of the community, perhaps to encourage them to re-think this terrible hand they dealt school district administration and the school board. You might hear cries to cut art, or languages, music, or even (gulp!) sports programs.

What you have to do, dear community residents, is not fall for the bait and switch. You may need to find the time to attend school board meetings and state YOUR case. After all, is it really too silly to believe that school board members who were elected by the people, to serve the people, might actually LISTEN to the people?

How Much does ONE Day Cost?
Because you likely will be hearing the word, "furlough", let's look at what it costs for just one day. We apologize in advance for over-simplifying things. You see...all we have is that which is already public record to guide us--the annual report from the annual meeting. Sure, we could lay a lot of detailed open records requests on the district to get the info we need to get numbers that are more refined, but those folks have enough to do right now...and these numbers are close enough for government work.

A Day Without Teachers
So what if administration proposes furloughing teachers. What does that "save" us?
If you add the "Subtotal Instruction", to lines "210 000 Pupil Services", and "220 000 Instructional Staff Services" from the annual meeting booklet, you find that the annual cost of instruction (teaching) is $40,850,000.
Instruction cost (salaries + benefits) per year: $40,850,000
Contract length: 190 days (including 3 convention days, 3 work days, 2 professional development days, and 2 new teacher work days)
Instruction cost per contract day: ~ $215,000
Instruction cost (salary only) per contract day: ~ $150,000

So we trim about $150,000 (12.5% of the target budget cut) by furloughing teachers just one day???!
Hold the phone, Joan! We need to think this through. If we furlough teachers...who actually teaches the kids? Oh...yeah...we'd have to pay substitute teachers. And that cost is about $125 per day per substitute. Let's use 550 as the number of teachers. That sum alone means it would cost about $70,000 to replace the teaching staff, putting a large dent in the cost savings.

A Day Without Administration
Again from the annual meeting data, Administration, Admin Support, Business Admin, and Central Services combined costs the district $14,900,000 per year. Again, let's assume that on average, 30% of total cost is accounted for by fringe benefits.

Admin/Support Services) cost (salaries + benefits) per year: $14,90,000
Admin/Support Contract length: 210 (principals) or 260 days
Admin/Support cost per contract day: ~ $61,000
Admin/Support cost (salary only) per contract day: ~ $42,500

We're just sayin'.....