|
Education and Our Schools
The latest Issues - News and Editorials
|
|
Why is the School Committee Considering contracts for several employees who do not have education certification and are not part of a bargaining unit?
What is the financial justification of providing contracts ?
How will this impact potential consolidation efforts?
|
Punctuation Delays NKSD Contract Vote
North East Independent News Article
A decision to offer contracts to several non-union supervisors in the School Department was delayed thanks to an apostrophe. In a bizarre turn of events at the June 24 meeting,
|
Letter to the Editor
Contracts Are Irresponsible
Through the past year, we have heard repeated complaints from certain North Kingstown School Committee members [about] the high cost of union contracts and "financial irresponsibility."
|
NE Independent Editorial: Making Real-World Decisions
A punctuation error and the threat of an Open Meetings Act violation halted a vote by the North Kingstown School Committee that, if approved, would have offered contracts to several School Department employees not already covered
|
|
Dear School Committee Members,
Since 62% of our local spending goes to the School Department, the School Committee and its decisions has a direct affect on our local taxes. It is no longer possible in Rhode Island to continue to look to the taxpayers for an ever-increasing supply of money. High taxes are driving citizens away, eliminating industry and associated jobs, and compelling our young adults to find greener pastures in other states. Additionally, our high taxes will now slow our housing market’s recovery. It is time for dramatic change and you should lead it.
Why are we hiring a new superintendent and his associated support staff? Our student enrollment is decreasing and consolidation with another school district should be considered of the highest priority. There are many school districts out there with 2, 3 or 5 times the students we have and they only have one administrative department. A new superintendent, once entrenched, will only add a roadblock to our ability to consolidate with other schools.. Will he really support any action that will cause him to lose his $150,000 salary and have his job eliminated? Do you expect another district to let their superintendent go if we consolidate with them? Won’t a merge be easier and less expensive without top management in place? Are you really serious about consolidation?
Our current teacher’s contract gives all teachers’ step raises that average 6%. Is anyone else in Rhode Island getting a guaranteed 6% pay increase each year? And then getting advance degree increments and longevity raises, etc., etc. It is true that the previous School Committee negotiated an increase in co-pay from 10% to 12% to15% but are you aware that the increase was from 10% of the School’s 2008’s medical premiums to, the following year, 12% of the same 2008’s premium and then again, the following year, 15% of the 2 year old 2008 premium! That’s correct, the co-pay went up but it went up on the old 2008 premium and does not reflect the higher cost the school pays for the 2009 and the 2010 premium. The net effect is a near zero increase in the amount of money actually co-payed! Who negotiated that? It is time to ask NEANK to return to the table because we do not have the money to meet the contract obligations. You might point out that their lack of willingness will become a major contractual issue in the next negotiation.
It also seems there is resistance to merge with the Town on both IT and administrative management. Why? Why not give these functions to the town and reduce school-side staffing? How else are you going to reduce costs? Meaningful consolidation means giving up turf. To hold onto that turf in the face of reduced budgets only means loss of face-to face student- teacher contact and that will definitely hurt our schools ability to educate.
I think you should realize that the taxpayers are at wits end with the dying economy, the already high taxes and the possibility of waste and redundancy. It is time for you to demonstrate leadership, control any increase in budget and cut the citizens of North Kingstown a break.
It is time for dramatic cost-saving action.
Thank you,
Vic Fasolino
Punctuation delays North Kingstown School Department contract vote
From North Kingstown/East Greenwich Independent
NORTH KINGSTOWN - A decision to offer contracts to several non-union supervisors in the School Department was delayed thanks to an apostrophe.
In a bizarre turn of events at the June 24 meeting, the issue was debated for more than an hour before solicitor Mary Ann Carroll pointed out that the advertised agenda item read "Supervisor's Contracts," which could be interpreted as a discussion involving one supervisor as opposed to the nine the board was discussing, and could lead to an Open Meetings Act violation.
In fact, School Committee member Melvoid Benson hinted to her colleagues that if a vote were to take place on the agenda item, she might be the one to file the OMA complaint.
The discussion involved awarding three-year contracts to the administrative assistant to the superintendent, the network manager, the human resources supervisor and the controller; two-year contracts to the plant and grounds supervisor, transportation supervisor and payroll supervisor; and one-year contracts to the superintendent office assistant and food service supervisor.
The salaries for the nine positions, when totaled together, are $534,959 according to this year's budget.
Residents at the meeting questioned why the committee found it necessary to award more than a half of a million dollars in contracts to School Department employees who have been working without any contracts and said it flew in the face of ongoing consolidation efforts.
"You're give these contracts to people ... giving," said Dick Bee, a member of the Asset Management Commission. "They're not being earned they're being given with really nothing in return. I ask you, is it the position or is it the person, and who is being helped by this?"
Jim McGwin, the recently named president of the North Kingstown Taxpayer's Organization, said that if the contracts were awarded it would be the "epitome of financial irresponsibility."
"There's a lot of reasons not to do this and you haven't given yourselves or the public a lot of justification why you have to do it now," he said, pointing out that Police Chief Edward Charboneau and Fire Chief David Murray work for the town without a contract.
School Committee member Kimberly Page, who later motioned to avoid the multi-year contracts and give one-year contracts to the supervisors, said she resented the insinuation by some people who questioned the quality of the people in those positions.
"This is not a reward, this is not a gift, but this is saying to them: 'We'd like to keep you on for another year, we've budgeted for you and we think you've done a good job in the past,' and my motion reflects that we give a one-year contract and I don't think that's too much too ask."
In order to bridge a $2.3 million shortfall in this year's budget, recently departed Superintendent Priscilla Feir was forced to make a number of cuts, including layoffs for 10 teachers, 15 paraprofessionals and a vice principal.
Next year it is anticipated there will still be a $1.1 million shortfall, and School Committee Vice Chairman Larry Ceresi said the discussion was not based on job performance, but rather on policy.
He said that there was no legal obligation to offer contracts to the supervisors and to do so would take away any flexibility the school district has in budget discussions.
"When we go above and beyond and outside of that to offer contracts to, basically, everyone in the district who never had contracts before, I question that process and that philosophy," Ceresi said. "The state is facing its worst economic downturn. Why, in this time, would we be offering contracts to employees that we've never offered contracts to before?"
Interim Superintendent Phil Thornton said he supported giving the supervisors a one-year contract because it didn't differ much from the letters of appointment that are given to them each year.
"This, in my mind, would be a much cleaner process," he said on Monday. "Our teachers, administrators and paraprofessionals all have contracts, so, just in terms of equity, I support it."
School Committee member Doug Roth said he felt that those in opposition to the contracts were using selective reasoning and said the district needed to be consistent with their hiring practices.
"The committee leadership proposed votes for three-year deals for some principals and not others," he said. "The finance director who has been with the district for less than a year received a three-year extension and a raise against a previous vote of the committee and that vote was forced together with a one-year deal for the athletic director."
In the future, Roth said that he would only support one-year contracts (with the exception of the superintendent), if at all.
|
|
Editorial
|
N. Kingstown School board priorities are way out of whack
Published in the Providence Journal
Through the past year we have heard repeated complaints from certain North Kingstown school committee members complaining of the high cost of union contracts and “financial irresponsibility.” Then why would these same School committee members be pushing to give contracts to employees who are not either part of a union or are not required to have contracts by RI Dept of Education?
How does this compare with the way the Town and other school districts operate? Is this financially irresponsible? During a period budget crisis at both the state and local level, while people are being taxed out of their homes, what is being cut? What is being increased? And where are the priorities?
The Town and most other school districts do not have contracts for employees who do not have teaching certification or are not part of a bargaining unit, such as secretaries and other administrative support staff.
What is the financial justification of providing contracts for employees who do not have education certification or are not part of a bargaining unit? This practice will only tie the hands of the, now future, administration and school committee to manage budgets through consolidation with Town departments or to make mid-year cuts if next year’s budget falls short because of fuel increases or “supplemental” cuts in State funding.
These new contracts run contrary to the realities of the school district’s current financial situation. Supt. Feir initially projected a shortfall of $2.3 million for the July 2008 to June 2009 fiscal year and $3.2 million for the following year (July ‘09 to June ’10). She proposed cutting 50 plus employees, mostly teachers and paraprofessionals with face-to-face contact with students, to balance the 2009 budget. This still leaves a projected $1.1 million deficit for the following year. These numbers were based on the MAXIMUM 5% INCREASE allowed under RI law in funding from the Town and level funding from the State.
The same school committee members that are in favor of this new round of unnecessary contracts, essentially protecting support staff, pushed through a 2008-2009 budget that eliminated:
- 10 teachers
- 15 paraprofessionals
- 1 middle school vice principal
- 4 cafeteria workers
- 6 clerical/ custodians
- 1 manager
- 2 central office positions that had remained unfilled since last year
- 3 policemen providing safety in the High School and two Middle Schools as part of the COPS program.
* Thankfully, the Town Council thought more of safety and agreed to pay for 2 of the three positions to be restored.
Priorities? While they supported deep cuts to education and safety, as evidenced above, the same members allowed the Athletic budget to increase substantially. Since 2005, the athletic budget spending has increased each year from a budget of $549K in 2005 to $625K in 2009. In addition, there is $87K in Sports Camps revenue, an unknown amount of vending revenue plus a significant portion of the $765K in Activity Fund Expenditures. However, most extracurricular activities, even some interscholastic sports do not benefit from the Athletic budget, vending revenue or sports camps proceeds.
Also, the NK Police Chief and Fire Chief do not have contracts, yet at the last school committee meeting the proposal was made to give a three-year contract to the Athletic Director, even though he does not have the certification required in his job description. Most of the other similar sized school districts in the State have part-time Athletic Directors who also have teaching certification.
Not being able to shed employees that are non-critical builds in “structural deficits” for the School Committee to struggle with in managing next year’s budget as well as the estimated $1.1 million additional deficit for the 2009-2010 school year.
We need more financial responsibility similar to both the Town and other school departments, which are looking for increased flexibility while maintaining the core services.
We also need an adjustment in the financial priorities set by the school committee. People see the “value” in educating our children and giving them extracurricular opportunities, along with maintaining roads and dams, providing services for senior citizens, and providing public safety.
Jim McGwin, The writer is the President of the North Kingstown Taxpayers Organization.
|
|
|