School Board Issues

I agree with you one hundred percent, knitwit. Unfortunately, administration is being paid a huge salary and the salary is going towards the administrators, not the people that work DIRECTLY with the kids. The principals too get paid well. The salary schedule is public. Take a look. I also have looked at the elementary school psychologist and what he/she makes (I will not comment on whom I speaking of). I have worked with this person for a number of years at the elementary level. Calculate what this person makes per hour and what Mrs. Downey makes as a first year administrator (she may be second year, I'm not sure). Anyways, if you compare the two, he/she makes more than Mrs. Downey and I believe that is the same for many of the principals. How can someone who is occupying two positions make less than the above mentioned? You are right to point that out. If you connect to EdJoin Knitwit, you will see that (if I've calculated correctly), she is making what she would make as a school psychologist down the hill. We will definitely lose her. She hasn't been taken care of and you are even more correct in mentioning that she shouldn't be paper pushing. It's unfortunate that much of special education has to do with paper pushing (and that's the teachers, too) but I believe Cynthia has been inundated with paperwork WITH ABSOLUTELY NO SUPPORT. She will be at another district next year, mark my words. And if I'm wrong, please do remind me next year. I have put my foot in my mouth more than once in my life.

I agree that MPH and Rim High have shown improvements. I guess I’m most impressed with MPH. Rim is good, but I view the problems for Rim High different than those of MPH. Mr. Turner and Mr. Smith are among the most dedicated and committed educators I have met. I was hoping their success was based on being left alone. It would be unfortunate for the district to micro manage something that seems to be working.

The D.O. has a long history of poor relations with the teachers and site staff. Nobody wants to work in that kind of environment. Some how, no matter how many times this fact gets pointed out to the D.O. they just don’t get it.

The financial problems of this district go back to Aycock, through Harwick and will continue for our next Sup. The problem is we were set on a bad financial path. We have new board members and hopefully will have a new direction with the new Sup.

Staff assigned to the district office is different than the overall staffing cost for the D.O. The actual cost is a difficult calculation to determine. The D.O. has a history of charging D.O. staff through school sites. Thus showing a smaller cost of staffing for the D.O. The finances of a school district can be very complicated or better put, the financials of our district are somewhat convoluted.

The D.O. is staffed by people just like us. I don’t consider them to be one large block of mind numbed robots lacking independent thought. Lets be realistic in our expectations of any employee of this district. If you stick your neck out you just might get your head cut off. These are men and women with bills and families. Most if not all need their jobs. Jobs that are hard to find on the mountain. What has been missing is fiscal responsibility and quality leadership, committed to the children and community they serve.

That’s just my opinion.

Kevin McCurry

Kevin-
I remember reading through those old budget reports... and I think Harwick was a better fiscal manager than Aycock.

However the district, like all districts in the state faces deep cuts in several different areas. I do not envy the person who gets the final say in what has to be cut. This will not be easy or pleasant.

Sabro,

The die was already cast when Harwick took over. Many of the financial issues the district is currently dealing with are as a result of Aycock. That said, all things being equal I don’t think Harwick would have made the same decisions Aycock did. We will never know for sure.

As much s I hate to get up on my soap box again, the district does still have options. They just wont exercise them. Sell all of the non school site properties, including the District office. Free up the equity in these properties to be used to the benefit of the students. I just don’t believe the district should be a property owner when they have difficulty providing the minimum services to our children.

I don't know if it is all that simple. Lets hope so.

As much as I never want to wade through a school district budget again... we are stuck with some programs cut 100%, others cut 10% and others cut 6.5%. In our district, I see no easy answers and we are having a comittee made up of stakeholder prioritize the cuts. I am meeting with a consultant on Friday and I will be honest with him about making the cuts as far away from the classroom as possible... even if it means my job. The extra counselor, the arts and PE grant, and class size reduction are all cut to zero. Special ed and many other programs are cut by 6.5%. No cost of living raise, no way to pay higher medical costs... I haven't a clue how to fix it.

Remember that Harwick balanced and still met the reserve... they were looking at similar cuts to these when he took over.

FYI - We have a daughter at Rim High (12th), MPH (7th) and CHE (5th). We help them with homework and keep close tabs on missing assignments. Our district is not horrible. We continue to be pleased with most of the school staff and teachers we interact with. I believe if the District management would truly extend an olive branch to the district employees and parents we could work together and have a greater positive impact. The D.O. management has in the past acted as if they have all the answers. Placating parents and disregarding staff input. The D.O. management has alienated staff and parents by their actions. Since the budgeting is the sole responsibility of the D.O. management it is their fault.

Sabro,

As far as it being that simple, projects were initiated under Aycock’s term that drained the district finances. Primarily real estate purchases. Non school site and non educational expenditures were recommended and authorized during Aycock’s term. Many of these were not 1 time costs. Brulte field and the D.O. require servicing and maintenance. If we leased the D.O. and did not own it we would still have that money and not have a servicing responsibility. We are stuck with Brulte Field. I do think we need Brulte field, but not at the detriment of education. The district is first responsible for educating our children, not building ball fields. I do know that some of the funds for Brulte field were provided to the district but not all and none of the servicing cost.

There are also other properties that were purchased and either have not or can not be developed. Perhaps I am too simple minded to see the big picture here. The district has equity in real estate that should be liquidated and made available for educating our children. The district has no business owning properties if they can’t meet the budget. As for Harwick balancing the budget, well that is a discussion for another time. One small point, driving up the ADA with the lure of free bus passes was a front loaded short term fix. It would be nice if Harwick would have stuck around long enough to deal with the back end costs.

I guess my point is that we can argue about the past. We can, could have, would have or should have this thing to death. The issue now is what do we do. I suggest we work together, but how do you work with a group that won’t work with you. The D.O. management has and will continue to get the heat for there actions as long as they don’t include others.

Harwick did balance the budget and provide an 3 year budget projection, but only after the SBCO Sup. advised him he must and the Fiscal Crisis Management Team Report. The F.C.M.T. report was forced on the district, not called for by the district as a result of financial mis management and failure to comply with budgeting rules. Use of reserve accounts with no repayment plan.

Kevin--

I stand corrected. I wasn't disagree with any particular point anyway. The aquisition of property may have been a huge error, but I'm not sure that selling it off at this market price would be a great idea. But a crisis is a crisis and this one is uniquely bad. We haven't seen cuts like this since Prop 13. Whatever keeps the cuts away from the classroom...

A past superintendant down in Fontana bought large pieces of property at a very low price after the mills began shutting down and that district has a pretty good cusion for maintanence and building... but the mountain is different. The population up here really isn't growing.

I was under the impression however that reserve minimums had been met over the past few years and that was no longer a problem. Whether he was ordered to or not, I think Harwick did a pretty capable job.

We talk constantly about the DO and district management...the lack of communication, the percieved "attitude"-- but most of that, most of the people, are gone now. (Including several specific "problematic" individuals) A new superintendant suggests that change is inevitable. We have two new board members... and two more comming up for election. I think this is a crucial election cycle.

Gimp-
I love our district, the teachers up here and the kids.

That being said, it isn't without problems. The problems have been around for quite some time and seem to have continued in one form or another through the last three superintendants.

Kevin did an excellent job organizing and researching for a recall campaign against the school board a few years back. He was able to obtain documentation, including all the budget information from the county. It was indeed a mess and there were problems hidden in the numbers. You can't even read that stuff without a guide.

Kevin spoke with dozens of people and collected a pile of complaints. There seem to be a few common threads among the complaints... especially the lack of communication, problems with special ed, and a definite perception of "attitude" toward parents who brought problems forward... and each seemed to validate the others. The initial problem that sparked public outrage was the transfer of a student who kept sexually harassing peers... but that is another story for another thread.

Although I found substance to the complaints, Kevin and I disagreed about a few things. I am neither a lawyer nor an accountant... I couldn't find anything blatantly illegal about the messy budgets the district had passed over the years. We also disagreed about the course of action needed to correct the other problems. I finally decided that it would be better to work with the then current board then to hold a recall election. I did learn that it pays to get involved and not to take it for granted. There is a reason that the school board is elected. They are there to do this kind of work-- to represent the interest of the community and the kids and we need to hold our elected officials and those they hire accountable.

Sabro,

Selling off excess properties the district owns would be a sign of solidarity with the district employees and parents. It is not the financial fix for the district. When every penny is being squeezed out of the school sites, every penny should be squeezed out of available funds and assets of the district. When Harwick was first asked to disclose these properties, there values and there intention for these properties, he declined. When he was asked to consider selling these properties he again declined. This all occurred when property values were high. I realize property values have decreased, but my argument is still the same. If the district is financial strapped they should utilize all assets and funding sources available.

Unfortunately the district has large, reoccurring costs that are fixed. Such as employee retirements, health care and payroll. With declining enrollment and eminent State cuts we need to be creative and work together to continue to provide a quality education for our children.

The district has some very difficult decisions ahead. I agree that many of the people in power now are not the same as the people who made the original decisions. I would like to see us start fresh and look at all possibilities.

I agree.

There may be some bizarre legal requirements though... especially if the property was purchased with restricted or bond money.

Talk about BIZARRE CHECK out the school board and chp threads......now that is BIZZARE!!!!!

Along with cutting costs, the school district should also be looking into generating more revenue. There is tons of ADA money that the district has lost because of an increasing number of home schooling students. For years I've wondered why the school hasn't done a better job of developing their independent study program and work with the home schooling community. Paul Loesch was supposed to have taken that challenge on but he never quite got around to it, go figure.

I don't think they have lost that many students to home school. There were quite a few home schoolers up here when we moved up here 17 years ago... and I don't know if there has been an increase. It does seem like the total number of school age kids on the mountain has declined moderately during the years.

It's been my experience that there are VERY FEW people who actually commute up to this mountain. Perhaps 2 or 3 individuals and that's generally because they have put in much time up here, had children attend the district and can't afford to move their years to another district. Most employees actually attended the schools up here themselves. Mr. Bohlender appears to be nice enough but I see him fitting into elementary school, not district office material. This is not to assume that if he is able to obtain more experience down the road that he wouldn't be a wonderful asst. superintendent. It has only been my observation (and what I have heard from elementary staff) that he's great at the elementary level, used to be an elementary principal and was brought in by Dr. Harwick. I suppose it's "nice" of him to commute up here, but if one believes that there are "several" that commute up here, why not give kudos to ALL INDIVIDUALS THAT COMMUTE???? Those that commute down the mountain to corporate organizations, those that commute to Los Angeles, those that commute to Orange County... THANK YOU TO ALL THAT COMMUTE AND WHAT YOU DO FOR OUR CHILDREN! Very interesting argument.

A friend of mine posed this question to me:

She is curious to know the amount of money the school district says it costs to educate one student per day.

Would the school district include the salaries of administrators, secretaries, and everyone else not involved directly in teaching that student in this figure?

Or would they just consider the costs of running the school site and it's auxillary employees and the teacher who is actually teaching the child in the figure?

Wouldn't it be great if we started with the direct needs of our students and worked our way backwards in deciding what is important and what isn't?

I would guess that extra superintendants, obnoxious special services department heads and their supporting staff would be at the end of the priority list and our teachers and their supporting staff would be at the top of the priority list.

What a concept!

Do school board members receive any financial compensation from the school district or are they straight volunteers?

Absolutely agree; once again it is time for a change. In November we have a chance to vote for three new board members who will not try to micro-manage the district.