Real Data: How Act 10 Affected SPASD

Act 10 was designed to provide school district and municipalities with "tools"....tools which could be used to lower property taxes and get a handle on exploding costs.

How did it work?
Well...we look at DPT salary and fringe benefit data available from DPI and compared apples to apples.  We looked at actual employees in both administration and teaching (support staff salary data is not available).  We looked at employees that were on staff both in 2010-11 and this year (2011-12).

We broke teachers down in to 3 classes:  the top shelf (most highly paid), those with salaries right in the middle, and those on the bottom rung.  Further, we initially obtained data on 32 individuals in each class, to make for a representative statistical sampling.

Weeding the Garden of Outliers
In each case, there were some employees with unusual circumstances that skewed the data, so we removed these statistical outliers.  For example, there was an administrator that was promoted last year whose salary was increased by $36,000 (46%).  They also increased their fringe  benefits by $2800.  Clearly things went very well for that individual.  And that was not the norm, so we excluded that one.  We also had staff that appeared to switch from single plan heal insurance to the family plan (and vice versa).  Those individuals were culled from the data as well.  Essentially, we were looking to compare this year to last year for staff that did not have any other changes that would skew the data.  We hoped to see ONLY the effects of Act 10.  Finally, we looked at the median values in each case because the data suggested that the medians were more representative of actual impacts.

Explaining the Data -Administrators
First, let us point out that our group of administrators also includes the Special Ed Program Managers who technically fall under the Administrative Support Classification.   Since DPI includes their data, and their salaries are similar to administrators' we included them.

The typical (median) administrator earned an additional $1,762 in 2011-12, a 1.9% increase.  In fringe benefits, however, our typical administrator lost $5,188 (-16.5%).  Recall that due to Act 10, they were to pay 5.8% (50% of retirement contribution formerly paid entirely by the district) of their salary towards the state retirement system.  In addition, all were required to pay at least 9% of their health insurance benefit (up from about 5% last year).

The net effect is only a 1.9% "hit" on total compensation (defined here as salary + fringes).  They lost a net $2,300 (less than $200/month) on an average salary with gross monthly pay of  $7,720.


Explaining the Data -Top 1/3 Teachers
The typical (median) highest paid teacher/professional educator earned only an additional $300 in 2011-12, a 0.4% increase.   The salary for this group ranged from $71,000 to $86,000.   In fringe benefits, however, our typical high end teacher lost $3,918 (-12.9%).  They lost 5.8%  of their salary towards the state retirement system.  In addition, all were required to pay at least 9% of their health insurance benefit (up from less than 2% last year).  In terms of total compensation, this group fared the worst, losing a net 3.4%.  Their total compensation (median) declined to $101,758 from $105,320.


Explaining the Data -Mid 1/3 Teachers

A look at 25-30 staff members in each group comparing
2010-11 compensation to 2011-12 compensation.

The typical (median) "average" teacher/professional educator earned an additional $1,976 in 2011-12, a 4.0% increase.   The salary for this group ranged from $49,800 to $52,200.   In fringe benefits, however, our typical mid-level teacher lost $2,975 (-13.8%).  They, too,  lost 5.8%  of their salary towards the state retirement system.  In addition, all were required to pay at least 9% of their health insurance benefit (up from less than 2% last year).  In terms of total compensation, this group fared similar to Administrators losing a net 1.8%.  Their total compensation (median) declined to $73,388 from $74,759.



Explaining the Data -Bottom 1/3 Teachers
The typical (median) "entry level" (1st few years) teacher/professional educator earned an additional $1,621 in 2011-12, a 5.0% increase.   The salary for this group ranged from $33,100 to $35,900.   In fringe benefits, however, our typical bottom rung teacher lost $1,754 (-13.8%).  They, too,  lost 5.8%  of their salary towards the state retirement system.  In addition, all were required to pay at least 9% of their health insurance benefit (up from less than 2% last year).  In terms of total compensation, this group fared better than all groups, actually GAINING a meager net 0.2%.  Their total compensation (median) increased slightly to $46,309 from $46,212.

We have no data to support this, but due to the significantly lower fringe benefits, our theory is that these teachers typically may be single and thus opt for the less expensive single health plan over the family plan chosen by older teachers.  They are also likely affected by a move--one we applaud-- to raise the starting salary for teachers.

Other anomalies
We did note that in several cases for each group, "overload" assignments were added in 2011-12, perhaps to make up for lost take-home pay due to Act 10.  In addition, we noticed what appeared to be a switch from family plan to either a single plan--or perhaps no health plan-- in 2011-12.  This could increase compensation in 2011-12.  Any employee who opts not to take health insurance is eligible for a payment of $3600 ($300/month) in lieu of the health benefit.  So if a staff member were to be covered under a spouse/significant other's plan, they could reduce actually increase their net compensation.

2011 Closeout - Was Act 10 ALL Bad?

We're in duck and cover mode...purely from the title of this entry.

But, you know what, folks?  Whether you are a Walker devotee or a Walker detractor, you have to admit that EVERYTHING that Act 10 did was not bad.  Yes, at its heart, Act 10 was a heinous attempt to cut public employees down at the knees.  That was neither right nor fair.  You can argue whatever you like, but the fact remains that for these scorned public workers, benefits were improved over the years IN LIEU OF salary increases.  Rightly or wrongly so, that is what it boiled down to.  Publicly, governors declared victory by giving public employees only modest raises (1-2%) each year.  In some years, they got nothing.  Quietly, however, behind the scenes, they negotiated with the unions to pick up the tab for a greater percentage of benefits...or offered another few days of annual leave(vacation).

This didn't happen overnight, people!  This process developed over the past 25-35 YEARS!  We know of many examples of private sector workers who took a job with in the public sector at a substantial demotion in terms of pay.  These workers made a choice to do so in exchange for enhanced job security.  Again...be it right or wrong, that's what they did.  It took many of these workers 10 years or more to be earning the same salary they did when they left the private sector. But it was a choice, and they were OK with their choice.

Don't tell us that the private sector is struggling.  Certainly, many private businesses and employees have suffered since the economic crisis which began over 3 years ago.  But many are faring much better.  We are hearing of BONUSES being given this holiday season.  Public employees have never and WILL never hear of such a thing.  We also know many private sector employees that have good to excellent health and retirement benefits.

What Governor Walker and Act 10 did was to institute an 8-10% reduction in take home pay for ALL public sector workers.  He made them pay more for benefits, but did so without increasing the salary that these folks gave up in return for the benefits.  Now he has proclaimed that state employees won't see a raise for the next 2 years... at least.   The last raise any state employees will have seen was back in 2008.

So...that's the despicable part.  There was however a silver lining.  What Walker did, along one tangent, was to do what none of the school boards across the state was willing to do: stop the madness.  If you think state and municipal employees had it good...you never looked into school teacher and administrative compensation.  In Sun Prairie, teachers and administrators were paying $200 per YEAR for health insurance that cost the tax payers more than $14,000 per year.  Yep...that's barely more than 1% of the premium cost.  And to make matters worse, teachers [still] work off a grid that gives them an automatic 3% salary increase every year.  Even if the board votes for a 0% salary increase, each teacher moves one step on the grid each year and gets awarded a 3% increase.  THAT is how a "2% salary increase" actually translated to a 5% increase in the salary budget...because in addition to any annual approved increases, the board still had to pay for automatic "step" increases.

To make matters worse, for every 6-12 credits earned by a teacher, they get a "lane increase" that adds another 2% to their salary.

How many of you receive an AUTOMATIC raise of at least 3% per year..EVERY year?  We thought so.
So, what the Governor did was to force districts and school boards to do what we all wonder why they hadn't done on their own.  After all...it's all for the children...right?

Act 10 cut revenue limits and then made rules for public employees to all pay a specific share of their retirement contributions and health insurance benefits.  Most districts rushed to use the "tools" which Walker provided.  Duh!!! They had too!  Without those savings, and with the reduced revenue caps, it was comply or cut staff (hello...Milwaukee?).  If only these school boards had done this on their own, maybe we wouldn't be in this position now.

In the end, nobody likes bully tactics.  So the way things were done was wrong.  We do not agree with Walker and his Act 10 in entirety. But something had to be done.  The state was writing checks it couldn't cash.  School districts were spending money like they printed it themselves.  Where else do the employees (e.g., district administration) earn more than the CEO (State Superintendent Tony Evers), the Governor, or even the President of the United States?  Yes, we have district administrators in this state that earn more than the President.  That doesn't make sense.

Walker is not good for this state.  He had a couple of good ideas, but the same can be said for some of history's greatest screwballs and monsters.  When one considers his absolute disregard for union rights,  the cronyism, his business interests, his sugar daddies, his lack of transparency, and the spectre of the John Doe probe, we need a do-over.  But, what we do NOT need is to go back to the way things were, either.

EVERYONE needs to be paid a fair wage and be treated equitably.  We cannot tolerate the way workers belonging to the former Local 60 have been treated....perennially forced to accept the short end of the stick.  School districts have always balanced their budget on these peoples' backs...the ones who can least tolerate the load.  We need to pay teachers a fair and decent starting wage (raise the floor), but at the same time, we can't have kindergarten teachers or elementary school "librarians" earning over $90,000 either.  We need a salary cap...just like in major league sports.  Statewide...hell, nationally...we need to rethink the compensation given to school district administrative staff.  Sure they are important in molding our children's futures.  But doctors and nurses save lives...and can be paid less than the average administrator.

2012 is  huge year for this school district, this state, and this country.  We have a number of major decisions at stake.  And we have this one chance to get it right.

Teachers....we appreciate what you do.  But please remember that you are paid for working only 9 months per year.  You can try to rationalize that if you like, but every worker can make the claims you do.  Do you honestly think that you are the only people that work "for free" on nights/weekends...or all summer?  Really? Now is the time for EVERYONE to GET REAL.

Happy New Year.  May 2012 be brighter...a LOT brighter...than 2011.

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!

You Can Put Lipstick on a Pool Manager...

OK...we can't get this whole Pool Manager salary thing out of our craw. That's right...Pool Manager. As our President so eloquently put it when he launched one of those quotes that will be forever etched in history:

" You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig. "

So you can use your creative writing skills to call a "Pool Manager" an "Aquatic Facilities Manager"....but at the end of the day, they still manage a frickin' pool!

Call us crazy...but it would seem that there are far more critical, far more challenging occupations in our district for which we pay far less. And apparently, we're OK with that...so why do we feel the need to "make it rain" for administrative positions?

Why is it that the minute we include a position under the umbrella of "Administration" or Administrative Support", there is a sense of entitlement to a whopping salary?

More importantly, the second a position falls under school district administration, it seems to carry with it a premium salary. Just a quick scan of the internet located a "Swimming Pool Manager" opening for the City of San Diego--that's right, in high priced southern Cali. It pays--drum roll--$15.12 to $18.19 per hour

Swimming Pool Managers lead, evaluate and supervise

the work of subordinates and volunteers; administer and teach

swimming classes; perform pool maintenance; administer first aid

and CPR as needed; keep records and write reports; publicize and market

new and existing aquatic programs; develop fund raising activities;

plan and conduct special aquatic events; coordinate staffing

schedules; conduct specialized staff training; and provide

information to the public...

Tell us how this position differ so much from our own "Pool Manager" position.

Who called this meeting, anyway?
So...did school board president John E Whalen call Tim Culver and say, "Hey Tim....set up a meeting, we need to rethink that salary that I got outvoted on" ? Or did Culver just set the meeting up because the "fish on the line" declined the salary after learning that the school board lowered it? Ya know...is the tail wagging the dog here? Or did the 5 school board members who voted to reduce the salary call John E up and say, "Hey John...can we hold a closed door session to rethink that Pool Manager salary"? Just askin'.....

Channelling Chopped Liver Here!
Um...hello...as school board members head into their closed door session to discuss "beefing up" the Pool Manager salary to "get their person", we suggest they keep in mind the teachers. The starting salary for a teacher...you know...those people that actually EDUCATE our kids...earn less than $32,000. But we're paying a Pool Manager $40,000? And the "desired candidate" apparently has turned the offer down --likely because they peruse the website and know that the original salary was slated to be $45,300.
Think about that.

Job Specs
The "Pool Manger" job description is:
A.Manages and supervises employees to assure that the facility and programs are staffed as required to provide safe and effective programs.
B. Manages the aquatic facility.
C. Coordinates all aquatic program activities.
D. Maintains compliance with state regulations and certification standards.

Compare that if you will to a bare bones position description for a teacher.
- Formulate lesson plans
- Teach 15-25 kids, at varying ability levels, per class for 7-8 classes every day
- Maintain certifications
- upgrade curriculum as district standards change
- attend training as required

Really? a pool manager is worth 25% MORE than a teacher as the school board already voted?
And now the "desired candidate" thinks the job is worth more like 40% more compensation than that of a teacher?

We don't think so.

District Administrator Compensation Under the Microscope

During tight times, every expense should come under the microscope. That should start with an organization's head...i.e., Tim Culver. Recently, Culver graciously asked the school board not to give him any raise this year. Good form, Tim.

But the school board couldn't leave it at that, so they generously raised his vacation days from 25 to 28 per year. Culver's contract is for 260 days, which for most people translates to the standard full-time 2,080 work hours per year. Of course, with 28 of those 260 days being paid vacation days (not to mention holidays), that really translates to about 80% work time.

Folks frequently ask if Culver makes more than the governor. Yes, with all that he pockets, that is true. Folks ask why we pay him so grandly. It's also true that Culver earns more than the State Superintendent of ALL schools, Tony Evers. Truth be told, there are other school "district administrators" in Wisconsin that earn even more! In fact, for districts our size, Culver is paid just slightly above the average. Therefore, any concern over how much we spend should be extended to the broader concern statewide. Yes, Virginia, education does come at a price. The question is: is it time for sweeping change of how these administrators are paid.

Is it realistic to pay Culver $325 per month for "travel around Dane County"? Shouldn't driving within the district be part of his (well compensated) job? Does the school board have evidence that he actually travels $325 worth within Dane County every month? NO! Because he gets this without filing any receipts or paperwork.

The same goes for the $125 per month we pay for "miscellaneous out-of-pocket expenses". Why doesn't he get reimbursed based on production of receipts like everyone else?

And then of course there's the $109,963 "separation pay" account that we reserve within fund balance. Ho nice that that money was insulated from the market crash that occurred last fall? Did any of you NOT lose a bunch of retirement money last year (and still haven't gotten it back)? Oh, they'll say it's not for retirement...it's "separation pay". That's right...on TOP of the Wisconsin Retirement System pension he'll receive when he finally hangs up his...whatever he has to hang up.

Change has to start small. Sweeping change begins with one stroke of a broom. Perhaps it's time that our school board "leaders" start leading, by taking a hard and fast look at Culver's --and all administrators' --- pay. Without question, we need teaching staff. THEY educate our kids. Nobody is leading any charge to cut teaching staff. But, in tight times, it takes a strong business leader to start looking at whether or not the business is too heavy at the top. Do we need all the Administrative and Admin Support positions?

Food for thought as the Annual Elector's meeting on the school district budget approaches.

Admin Support vs. Dept. of Labor Statistics

Ok...so simply put, here's the issue.

Many of the 30 "Administrative Support" positions have parallels outside of the high-priced world of school districts. SOME school district--a leader perhaps-- has to finally take a stand and re-evaluate these positions.

A simple check of the US Department of Labor Statistics website can provide median and mean salary data across the nation, or even just for a given position and state.

The following comparisons are taken directly from the May 2008 State Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates for Wisconsin. It's likely a safe bet that wages have not increased significantly since that a year ago May. Food for thought, school board members.
..............................................
Program Managers (Special Ed. and Instructional Services)
We have 10 employees classified at this level.
Current salary ranges: $39.29 to $45.52 per hour (1680 hr/yr positions
Proposed salary ranges: $41.21 to $46.63 per hour
Proposed raises: $1.11 to $2.90 (3.1 to 7.2%)
Compare to: Education Administrators, All Other. Median salary: $30.50/hr.
..............................................
Business Services Manager
We have 1 employee classified at this level.
2007-08 salary: $31.72 per hour
Current salary: $34.22 per hour (2080 hr/yr positions)
Proposed salary: $36.43 per hour
Proposed raise: $2.21 (6.5%)
Compare to: Business and Financial Operations, General. Median salary: $24.72/hr.
..............................................
Communications Specialist
We have 1 employee classified at this level.
Current salary: $23.39 per hour (1462 hr/yr positions)
Proposed salary: $25.10 per hour → %26.19/hr on 7/1/10
Proposed raise: $1.71 (7.31%) + $1.09/hr on 7/1/10
Compare to: Media and Communications Workers, All Other. Median salary: $20.66/hr.
Compare to: Writers and Artists. Median salary: $20.48/hr.
Compare to: Technical Writers . Median salary: $25.38/hr.
Note: This position is much less challenging than that of a Technical Writer.
..............................................
District Health Nurse
We have 1 employee classified at this level.
Current salary: $32.67 per hour (2080 hr/yr position)
Proposed salary: $33.98 per hr
Proposed raise: $1.31 (4.01%)
Compare to: Registered Nurse. Median salary: $29.27/hr.
Compare to: Licensed Practical and Vocational Nurses. Median salary: $19.06/hr.
Note: We have no information as to whether the employee is an RN or an LPN.
..............................................
Accountant
We have 1 employee classified at this level.
Current salary: $23.50 per hour (2080 hr/yr position)
Proposed salary: $24.20 per hr
Proposed raise: $0.70 (2.98 %)
Compare to: Bookkeeping, Accounting, and Auditing Clerks . Median salary: $14.96/hr.
Compare to: Accountants and Auditors. Median salary: $26.48/hr.
Note: We might be missing something, but we don't see this position as equivalent to an accountant as in CPA.
..............................................
Custodial Services Night
We have 1 employee classified at this level.
Current salary: $22.79 per hour (2080 hr/yr position)
Proposed salary: $23.60 per hr
Proposed raise: $0.81 (3.55%)
Compare to:
First-Line Supervisors/Managers of Housekeeping and Janitorial Workers. Median salary: $17.08/hr.
..............................................
District Administrator Secretary
We have 1 employee classified at this level.
Current salary: $21.85 per hour (2080 hr/yr position)
Proposed salary: $22.30 per hr
Proposed raise: $0.45 (2.06 %)
Compare to: Executive Secretaries and Administrative Assistants. Median salary: $17.49/hr.
..............................................
Administrative Assistant
We have 6 employees classified at this level.
Current salaries: $17.04 (1), $18.72 (1), and $19.27 (4) per hour (2080 hr/yr positions)
Proposed salary: $17.87, 19.31, and $19.80 per hr
Proposed raises: $0.53 to $0.83 per hr (2.75 - 4.87 %)
Compare to: Executive Secretaries and Administrative Assistants. Median salary: $17.49/hr.
..............................................
Payroll Specialist
We have 1 employee classified at this level.
Current salary: $19.27 per hour (2080 hr/yr position)
Proposed salary: $19.80 per hr
Proposed raise: $0.53 (2.75 %)
Compare to: Payroll and Timekeeping Clerks. Median salary: $16.52/hr.

---

We're just sayin'....

Of Sense & Sensability: Can We Talk?

After a lengthy illness, has Common Sense died?

Reminds us of a rhetorical question heard numerous times:

Q: "Boy? Why'd you do that? Where's your common sense gone?"
A: "He never had any."

The Death of Common Sense

Maxims that need to be firmly placed on the table for discussion:


This is not personal
Because...it's not. We are not on some personal vendetta against the school board (contrary to water cooler district talk). We raise issues like the proposed compensation increases because they are part of the overall problem. That problem is that Sun Prairie has grown to be a spend-happy school district. The answer we get in return is that things are great! We're a growing district! We can find the money. Those are all technically correct responses, but plain and simply we have to run this (or any) school district like a business. More to the point: like a business in which we have invested our personal life savings. When it's 'other peoples' money' it's just too easy to spend, spend , spend.


Our ultimate product here is providing our kids with a proper education. Does having TEN program mangers each getting pad over $40 per hour REALLY improve the quality of their education? Really? More so than if these same manager were paid...say $25/hour?


The issues here relate to people, and therefore its hard not to view things as getting personal. Sadly, we have no desire to make things personal. Ultimately, the people involved (sadly) are just pawns in the grand scheme.


It's not just about Sun Prairie
Ultimately, our views on the ludicrous state of school district salaries are not limited to Sun Prairie alone. But Sun Prairie likes to view itself as a leader...and this is OUR community. So we have to start here.


The average Joe on the street --once [s]he's aware that Tim Culver earns about $150K per year-- is flabbergasted. No one in their right mind believes that a school district administrator of 800 or so staff and 6,000 kids is worth more money than the governor, or surely the state school superintendent who oversees ALL 426 school districts! Or any of a whole host of occupations, for that matter.


The grim reality is that Dr. Culver is paid only moderately above average when compared to ALL 426 school district administrators. But that's not an excuse. That argument is akin to the age-old, "If Johnny Jones jumped off the Empire State building, would you?" conundrum.


More to the point is the trickle-down effect. Just as School district administrators are paid obscenely, so too are those beneath him: asst school district administrators, district administration, administration support, and so on down the line. Are teachers fairly compensated? Yes and No. Very few people can claim to retire at a salary of $70,000 or more. That's the argument that teachers are VERY fairly compensated. On the other hand, entry level teachers....not so much. The answer is easy: we need to raise the lower end and then compress the salary scale. Easily said; tough to do...especially when everyone else is doing it. An by "doing it" we don't mean the typical adolescent colloquialism. We mean that no other district is doing the right thing, so why should we?


This is not really about the economy
It's easy to point to the economy as the reason to speak out against arguably ridiculous raises, but the simple truth is, it has nothing to do with the economy. The issue was always here. The economy is just a convenient spotlight to use to highlight the problem.


We need to take this opportunity...even blame the economy if we so choose...to right this ship or else run the serious risk of sinking further down the road.


Nobody gets paid what they think they are (or their job is) worth
Here's the elephant in the room to which Caren Diedrich likes to refer. Let's be honest, folks. We all think we deserve more money. We don't blame the Administration folks, or the Admin Support folks...or anybody. It's human nature. Can you name ONE person who would honestly say, "I'm WAY overpaid for the work I do".

So...let's just get past that. Everyone thinks they are underpaid. Do you REALLY think all state workers are overpaid? Do you think that Gov. Doyle said, "Geee...all these guys are overpaid, so instead of giving raises, I'm going to cut pay 5 % by furloughing (3%) and rescind 2% raises previously agreed upon"?


This is precisely why doing a job survey (an unbiased survey) makes sense. However, paying $9,000 for it for 30 people is not so good an idea. And basing it on comparisons to other districts (for reasons previously discussed) just makes it more of a bad idea.



Nobody WANTS to assess the reasonableness of salaries
This is where the school board (and committee members) get squeamish. NO ONE wants to be the person to say..."that's too much money!" Unfortunately, this where the rubber meets the road for school board members. For all the gooey photo op moments and recognition ceremonies, this is where you pay the piper for the privilege of being elected by ALL the community residents. This is where you have to lead. And real leadership is tough.

Nobody wants to "be the bad guy"
We get it. The least enjoyable aspect of being a manager is when the bad news has to be delivered. But becoming TOO cozy with "the hired help" can make that an even more unpalatable proposition. You need to keep an arms length from the District administration. You need to be the boss...not the buddy.

That being said. You need to suck it up and MAKE the hard calls. Publicly and privately, you can apologize all you like and tell people you'd love to give them more. But ultimately, you're the boss, and the business can't afford more personnel costs. They have a VERY nice job situation./arrangement, and they DO have a rewarding career. There are many people that hate their job, but do it because it pays the bills. Pass that on as well.


We need to plan for the end game
We keep talking bout how the district is growing, growing, growing. But that growth is NOT endlessly self sustaining. In every district, a growth peak occurs, followed by a plateau, and inevitably declining enrollments.

The number of kids enrolled IS the lifeblood of the district as, until a change is made in school funding, kids = dollars (of state aid). But the rest has to be made up in property taxes, and there is a tax levy ceiling to factor in as well. All of these things get reduced when enrollment drops.

We've got about $175M of debt to pay over 20 years. Sure, some of that falls off sooner than that. We're adding new programs and paying huge inflated salaries. And let's not forget that over 80% of the district budget is eaten up by salaries and benefits.

We need to start projecting for when this end game (declining enrollments) will occur. It's quite possible that Tim Culver will long be retired when that happens, and your board terms will long have expired. But as an elected official it's your duty to plan for the future and NOT leave this mess for a future board.

And we need to start making decisions based on the end game rather than the time of growing enrollment. Hey...here's an idea...we need to run this district like a business. And YOU, not Tim Culver, are the CEOs.


We need to face the cold hard realities of real life.
In the REAL world, the reality is that there are a lot of quality people (many unemployed) that gladly would do most of these jobs...and do them well...for HALF of the salaries being paid.


The old adage of the business world is that NO ONE IS IRREPLACEABLE. The cold hard reality is that whether you retire, or leave to take another position, your job WILL be covered by someone else. And often, for less money. It's the really the Bill Bellichick model for success. Rather than paying megabucks for some prima donna, you pay someone veteran scale wages to come in, do the job, and be part of as team. Can you say Three Superbowl titles?


At some point, a quality school board will lay the personal coziness aside and make the cold hard business decisions.


New Mantra (proposed)
[Insert a job title here]? You're paid MORE than adequately. You got a $2.50/hr last year. That's it. Consider yourself red-circled. We appreciate the job you do--very much so-- but this is a business. And our decision is that no increase is warranted at this time. We hope you'll understand and have no hard feelings, but we'll also understand if you wish to seek employment elsewhere.

---

So, school board? This all ultimately rests in your hands. You want our advice? Seek out--that's right, get on the horn and call the average Joe---the community residents you DON'T know and ask what they think given ALL the data. That makes your job easy. Then you can be apologetic to the affected district staff and say, "Sorry. We'd like to pay you more, but we serve at the will of the people and we serve to DO the will of the people."

Peace. Out.

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.

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!!!

Stop Making Sense pt 1

"As we get older
and stop making sense... "
--the Talking Heads

Yep...the administration (some anyway) are getting older....and some would say they have stopped making sense as well.

What is wrong with the system when Tim Culver...or any district administrator makes more than the Governor....more then the head of the Department of Public Instruction himself!!!! That's the head of every school district in the state...the Super SUPREME Nintendo! But Culver earns more. There's something wrong with that, people. And it is our elected officials, the school board, who are the only ones who can stop the madness and start making sense. We're not saying these jobs aren't valuable. We're just saying that there's a reasonable salary line that needs to be established for these positions....and we may have crossed it.

We offer the following salary comparions, from verifiable sources. You decide....is there something wrong with this picture?

2008 Salary data (updated April 2009) obtained via Wisconsin Journal-Sentinel Watchdog Reports - state employees pay

Tim Culver SPASD District Administrator... $145,886^*
Michael Morgan___Secretary, State DOA......$142,109
Jim Doyle___Governor.......................$141,821
J.B. Van Hollen___Attorney General.........$137,622
Matt Frank___Secretary, State DNR..........$135,064
Tony Evers___Secretary, State DPI..........$132,809
Barabara Lawton___Lt. Governor.............$ 74,892
* includes $425/month "stipend"

Comparing other "high paid" occupations¹ to our District Administration
Surgeons......................... $218,610
Dentists, General............... $158,340
Phil Frei Business Manager, ADA $117,484
Lawyers ........................$110,700
Lisa Dawes Director of Spec. Ed. $109,586
Pharmacists....................... $109,350
Annette Mikula HR Manager .......$107,869
Alice Murphy Dir. of Instruction $107,621

¹ Source: US Department of Labor Statistics (Wisconsin) - May 2008

The only occupations paid better than Phil Frei are like surgeons (not just doctors) and dentisits?? He makes more than the average (notoriously overpaid) LAWYER? You gotta be kidding us!

The director of HR and Director of Instruction make a hair less than pharmacists--whose drug interaction knowledge (or lack thereof) could cost lives?

So the administrators want applause for being so kind as to "give up" 0.7% of their 4.5% "compensation package increases" to which they are entitled? What is the sound of one hand clapping?
N

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)

3.8% Across the Board RAISES!

Have our school board members been living in some remote hideaway with no access to the TV, radio, Internet or newspapers?

Must be...because while the rest of us....you know the ones that foot the bill for the expenses THEY approve....are struggling in this recession, they are on a spending spree.

Local 60 (support staff) are stuck with the 3.25% increase they negotiated last year. The board gave the teachers union a 3.8% "package" increase. Now mind you, if ANYONE deserves a raise, even in tight times, its the folks who are actually doing the educating. That being said, these ARE tight times, and no better reason could be given for negotiating a wage freeze. But...water over the dam, that contract has been settled.

Next up, however, are the Administrative Support Team, the Administration, and Dr. Culver. The Admin Support raises got tabled Monday night, so more on that later. In the meantime, we hear things. We understand that at last week's Negotiation meeting-- though details are sketchy and suggest no vote was taken--- Phil Frei was said to indicate something along the lines of: [Admin] is entitled to a 4.5% increase (as teachers got last year]...but...given the economy...we'll take 3.8%.

Gee? You'll "take" 3.8%? Well isn't THAT taking one on the chin for the team???

So...we're expecting that sometime tomorrow, when the school board agenda comes out for Monday's meeting, you'll see a quiet little item regarding contracts for Administration. Our sources indicate that the 3.8% is a done deal. Want to know what 3.8% means??? Another $110,000 to the taxpayers. Phil Frei will tell you that that means another couple of cents on your property tax...so how can you disagree?

Time to take stand folks. If you don't think it makes logical fiscal sense to be tossing around 3.8% raises when jobs and wages are being cut all around, then:

1. CALL your school board members.
2. E-mail your school board members
3. Come to the meeting Monday July 13 and TELL them.


Tell them, "NO More". Not until this economy changes.

What does 3.8% look like?
The chart below compares last year to what a 3.8% increase would look like. Yes...one administrator has retired. And yes, Paul Keats will not be with us. We know that. But you should at least know how things will look for others.

And we have a question....since the principal of Creekside is so much more highly paid than other elementary principals (because they were formally a top shelf Administrator)...shouldn't their salary be frozen anyway???????

And let's not forget that Culver gets $425/month in addition to his salary...pin money so to speak. Why do some folks get less benefit $? Several are opting out of health insurance because they have coverage from a significant other. And for that they get $300/month cash that isn't included here.

CLICK THE CHART FOR A LARGER VIEW---if you dare

Engaging the Community = Chastising Citizens who DO Care?

While the school board continues its quest on how to better engage the community, one has to wonder: by "engage" is the board intending the meaning "enter into conflict with" its citizens? Because the few times citizens have the courage to speak up about what they see, they seem to get lambasted.

OK, perhaps the few that do consistently speak up don't always sugar coat their message. But is that a reason to verbally slap them upside the head --or worse--ignore them? But perhaps the reason for these citizens' approach is their frustration at TRYING to speak to the board only to be perennially rebuffed. Has the board president ever considered talking one-on-one with the "troublesome" citizens? Is the board capable of listening and just once not simply voting against whatever these citizens speak about simply because they don't like the messenger? Once again, is THIS the role model these board members wish to be for our children?

At Monday's school board meeting, Roger Fetterly spoke out about what he (and many others who agree but don't wish to waste their time speaking to an unyielding board) believes to be overly generous contracts for administrators. Fetterly said,

"These contracts are overly generous. The people that are really doing some work in our society, putting their life on the line, are getting 3.5% increases and they get shot at every day. In every case, I don't think you're being realistic."

Board President David Stackhouse's ivory tower response to Fetterly:

"Why is it that you have to wait until the very end to say 'gotcha'? If you care about this district the way you say you do, you would have come to us earlier and shared your experience for the betterment of the district."

WHOA, Mr. Stackhouse. Your facts are grossly in error. SP-EYE has witnessed Mr. Fetterly stating similar concerns on this issue at numerous full school board meetings and finance committee meetings. He also attends many administrator compensation meetings...but the board NEVER asks his or anyone else's opinion at these sessions.

Furthermore...what is the purpose of the "public input" and "citizen presentation" segments at board meetings if not to speak to the board???

To be perfectly clear and accurate, input is taken committee meetings, but this board disregards those that believe differently. SP-EYE has attended these compensation negotiation sessions on occasion as well. In fact, citizen visitors to these meetings are treated quite coldly, making it clear that while state laws require that their attendance be allowed; they are tolerated, NOT welcomed.

It is unacceptable for you or anyone to use your board seat--to which no public response or rebuttal is allowed-- to mis-state the facts. You KNOW that this issue has been raised previously. You support all raises provided to administration and staff...we get that. Just try to remember that yours is ONE OPINION only, and that you represent the entire district.