Two of these issues were finalized - the MS building is being built and will include a pool, and the use of eminent domain will not occur against the Calandra's (at least for now).
This leaves the budget. Arlene Martinez has an article on this subject in today's Morning Call (read it here).
I've reported on the budget in numerous posts (read newer posts here and older ones here).
I think the comments and list from January bears repeating especially now that we need to watch every dollar being spent:
The discussion (from the January Board Meeting) showed me that we have serious financial challenges. What surprised me most was that the cuts are framed in such a limited fashion. I'm no expert and I don't regularly attend these meetings (I'll stick to Council and if Brad can keep attending I'll be as happy as can be), but here are some areas that ought to be considered:
- Not once was regular transportation noted as a place where money could be saved. A 5% cut $3 million would result in $150,000. We recently purchased new software for busing and each day I watch half filled buses pull into the elementary school. We could actually increase state revenue and reduce expenses if we maximized our bus utilization.
- If we are going to roll back or cut, let's start in areas that don't directly impact student learning and activities. Support Services line items (2300, 2500, & 2800) for Admin, Business, and Central Office are budgeted for $4.6 million. A 5% reduction in these areas would result in $231,000 in savings. Five years ago these services cost a little less than $3.1 million and eight years ago it cost $2.4 million.
- Budgetary Reserve. This may be a case of not planning well, but up until 2006 we did not contribute money to the reserve in the budget. This year we are scheduled to spend $150,000 on this item. Again, I don't know what we are carrying, but if we don't spend it why cut programs to add to it? Maybe it is that low, but if it is how can we even have the discussion of borrowing from it?
- There is a line item I'm unfamiliar with so if someone can explain it that would be great - community services. We are budgeted for $145,000 for this item. Until 2002 this amount was mid $30,000's, then it jumped to $54,000, $82,000, $93,000, and up over $100,000.
- The Blue Eagle Education Foundation is in place to assist with professional development and grants. It would be insightful to know what money and programs they have available that could be used to offset cuts in teacher development. It would also be important to know if any funds exist to sponsor student activities led by staff (EPED positions) or in what other ways the Foundation could assist the NASD financially as there is support the other way around.
- Finally, there is not much that can be done in the way of revenue. There are big changes with the shift to EIT and reduction in property. One area we can realize some additional revenues is in Facility Use. Obviously the NASD walks a fine line between providing space for the public and charging for that space, but it is an area that could be examined in more detail. Often fees are waived for groups and there is often good reason, but at the same time if we are looking at cutting teachers (by not replacing retiring ones), cutting teacher development, cutting paid positions for student activities, we should at least look at this.
Since this was written in January there have been some changes. Brad noted to me that the latest budget (available here) has cut the Community Services line from $145,000 to $45,000. Dr. Lesky noted that the retiring teachers would be replaced and the savings were reflective of hiring individuals at the start of the teachers salary scale. There may be some other small changes, but I didn't hear any discussion about these areas during the most recent budget talks.
Where can we save?
6 comments:
Where can we cut? Let me suggest that we look at Administrative salaries and golden parachutes. We have 26 administrators and yet not one of them lost a job or had a salary cut. We cut a 59K janitor. and a number of lower level people. Then let's look at transportation? Why don't we have competitive bidding on transportation? Why don't we do something about half filled buses? I realize that will require action in Harrisburg so what are we waiting for. I also, hold on to your hat, beleive we need to take a look at curriculum and is there any garbage in there. There is a lot of Goals 2000 out there, the program that made the school the nanny for all the parents and if you think I am talking through my hat think again. There are folks in the public education system who believe that the schools should be rearing our children because they can do a better job then the parents. Albeit I believe there are parents who agree. The schools no longer educate, they are in the business of trainig people for jobs aka the rat race.
Ross,
I don't believe we're done on the revenue side. I beleive that our school administrators and Board need to be much more creative relative to raising funds for projects such as the pool, all-weather track and field, etc. The McDonald's football classic is held at Nazareth. Why doesn't our administration approach McDonalds or any other business and look for sponsorship from them if we name the field after them , put their logo on the field ,etc.
If the district wants all the niceties, we should vote people with a Marketing background on to the school board or the district should hire a marketing consultant or firm. We need to get creative.
Instead of contacting the ACLU I think the pool supporters could spend their time trying to generate review. One indidvual at the Board meeting did bring up a pool management company that the district could look at.
At this point the district is spending $300K to develop plans for the pool. Surely they could spend $50K to try to generate revenue.
Gentlemen; com-pe-ti-tion, four little syllables with a great deal of meaning. Most of what is placed on the budget balancing agenda are only scrapes or crumbs in the real debate about improving education while reducing its overall cost.
The first doable change it to replace the current board of education as soon as possible. We do not need individuals who are sold on the concept that the government must be the primary source for public education (public meaning the general population). Retired schoolteachers are not entrepreneurs (generally) and typically are part of the government public education quagmire. Engineer’s could be good but when they also look to the government teat for their livelihood the results tend to be all about them and not about the students. We need new blood. And we need to replace them if the problems are not addressed.
Certainly the public schools have far more bureaucrats then private schools and this needs to change. In fact the whole process of how schools are build, manned and maintained needs to be changed. Before I start shoveling sleet (six inches of sleet that is!) let me make a reading recommendation. Milton (Nobel Prize laureate in economics) and his wife Rose (really smart lady) Friedman wrote a book in 1980 it is “Free to Choose”. On pages 150-188 they address much of what we are debating and offer good solutions. Believe me the NEA does not like the Friedman’s ideas and that alone makes it worth considering.
Al
You'll get in trouble hanging around with guys like Friedman, but you are right on the money. You might be surprised where some of us old time teachers stand. And we do need to replace that board. Al, you would make a great candidate to replace someone.
were getting a pool
...and not soon enough
don't get ready for your swim just yet---the fat lady ain't sung yet--as they say
Post a Comment