Open Letter
to
Maine Township School District #207 Taxpayers
to
Maine Township School District #207 Taxpayers
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
This is my third “Open Letter” addressing District #207’s current financial crisis.
In the first letter, I posted a four-year study covering teacher salaries for 2005 through 2008 and asked school board members to hold the line on future payroll increases. The second letter criticized the teachers union for refusing to renegotiate scheduled 2011 and 2012 pay increases in order to save young teachers’ jobs. This third letter clearly prompts a call to action.
In attempting to resolve financial problems in the last few years, some of our neighboring school districts, resorted to tax increase referendums or the issuing of bonds to bring revenues and expenditures back into balance. Recently, District #207 found itself facing its own financial crisis. Rather than continuing to increase the District’s deficit further, the Board has chosen instead to address their financial issues in an aggressive, professional and timely manner… now.
Last week, Maine Teachers Association (MTA) members voted 345-224 to reject the District’s offer to save teacher jobs.
Surely MTA leadership was well aware of their vital role in resolving the district’s financial problem. Additionally, the union leadership was aware of the consequences to its most vulnerable members, the younger untenured teachers, when it refused to accept the District’s latest proposal. Moreover, at the time of the vote, union brass already knew MTA had lost a great deal of public support over this issue.
Before that vote, the tax-paying public wanted to know: Is the Teachers Union interested in saving jobs or more interested in their lining pockets? Now they know.
I have posted an updated five-year version of the payroll analysis, which includes additional information not available before. An additional document on how to read the report is also included. I urge you to study the analysis carefully. Upon completion, please tell your friends about these letters and reports and most importantly, communicate firmly, your thoughts and feelings about this subject to the District #207 School Board;
Joann Braam, jbramm@maine207board.org
Eldon Burk, eburk@maine207board.org
Eric Leys, eleys@maine207board.org
Margaret McGrath, mmcgrath@maine207board.org
Edward Mueller, emueller@maine207board.org
Donna Pellar, dpellar@maine207board.org
Sean Sullivan, ssullivan@maine207board.org
and the leadership of the MTA Teachers Union;
Emma Visee, President, maineteachersassociation@gmail.com.
Eldon Burk, eburk@maine207board.org
Eric Leys, eleys@maine207board.org
Margaret McGrath, mmcgrath@maine207board.org
Edward Mueller, emueller@maine207board.org
Donna Pellar, dpellar@maine207board.org
Sean Sullivan, ssullivan@maine207board.org
and the leadership of the MTA Teachers Union;
Emma Visee, President, maineteachersassociation@gmail.com.
Kenneth Butterly, Taxpayer
Maine Township District #207
In order to read the full report, click on Fullscreen view. Move your mouse over, and to the sides of the document. A cursor hand will appear. Click your mouse and you will be able to page through the report.
11 comments:
Mr. Butterly,
Thanks for preparing that report. Excellent info!
Very enlightening and elucidating report. Too bad other citizens aren't as capable, as thorough, or as honest...they just Blast-n-bitch...isn't that right Ken?
I had no idea the increases have been that high from year over year. I would also like to thank Mr. Butterly for this report. The teachers union members who voted down the raise reductions and are choosing to have their frllow teachers lose jobs should be ashamed of themselves.
That is a lot of data and a lot of work. Guess what? It will change zero minds. If you fall in the group that thinks that theachers are a bunch of selfish over paid louts, you will find some examples in this data to go off. If you do not feel that way there is ample data to support your psoition as well.
I am wondering why he included Administration in his data. They were not a part of the recent vote and no admin will be laid off.
In response to “Anon 5:06” let me first of all say that yes, doing this report required a lot of work. Let me address your questions:
Will minds be changed?
The report was designed to inform D#207 School Board, Board of Education and taxpayers. Some minds will be changed after reading the report, others will not. It’s their decision.
Teaching and administrative salaries represent anywhere from 80% to 85% of a school district’s budget. Yes, after-school programs can be eliminated. Yes, additional fees can be assessed. Yes, some services can be curtailed. But you’ll never get to the heart of the problem until you adequately address the district’s skyrocketing-salary issue.
Ragarding your second question, the inclusion of Administrators within the report. You will notice that Administrators individually and as a group have received extraordinary increases over this period. I believe should not be exempt from additional scrutiny.
Kenneth Butterly
I agree about the scrutiny. The problems is that unless it is made clear that the administration numbers are not a part of the vote that took place, you end up with false impressions. If someone reads your report related to the topic at hand (you remember, selfish teachers, right???) the will see all these 6 figure numbers and be outraged. "Someone making 150K would not vote to save a fellow worker?!?!! AHHHHH!!! The fact is that the vast majority of these 6 to mid 6 figure numbers are admin and not even included in the topic at hand.
What about the diversity innitiative? Isn't it time for acceptance? Down with xenophobia!
I want to thank the MTA for the public service it has performed in proving definitively that a majority of its members don't care about the students they teach or the taxpayers who so handsomely pay them for a nine-month work year.
Let's hope the D-207 school board members stay strong and not cave to those 345 union members who voted not to cut their RAISES and, instead, throw 75 of their fellow teachers under the bus. Those 345 are the ones responsible for EVERY bad thing that results from those teacher cuts, they are the ones whose greed did in the 75.
8:47:
How do you do it? I mean this is a hell of a choice you have to make!! You either send your kids to a school where ther will be taught by teachers who "don't care about the students they teach" and are greedy or you send them to one of the Catholic schools in town where they care sooooo much about their fellow man that they would have a PADS shelter in town if they had their way. Which one is it going to be??? I say you flip a coin.
In response to “Anon 8:10.”
Let me talk to the point of excluding “Administrator” data from the report.
Administrators, generally, are teachers performing dedicated administrative functions. For example: look at Administrator “C…” located on page 24. Teachers do not give up being teachers when they take these jobs. They generally continue to pay toward their retirement as well as their union dues. If an administrator looses his or her administrative job, he or she can always revert back to teaching. That means that the benefits in salary, step increases and access to “paid overtime” activities won by MTA, become theirs.
Focusing only on teachers or administrators making more than $150k makes one tend to loose sight of the big picture; skyrocketing overall payroll growth.
Look at the full report again. This time, focus on the blue-yellow dollars and percentages. Those figures represent the top to bottom year dollar and percent increases for that employee. 2005 through 2009 were lean years for most families. Average pay increases in this geographic area were in the 1.5% to 3.0% range. Many families experienced no income increases at all. Some even took pay cuts. How many people do you know, made the kind of dollar or percentage increases shown in this report?
Personally, I don’t know anyone!
Kenneth Butterly
10:35 AM
Who said the Catholic school teachers or parents wanted the PADS shelter? I'm a St. Paul parishioner with no kids in the school, and I don't know of more than a double handful of parishioners, most of whom were Fr. Carl groupies, who wanted the PADS shelter at SPC.
Post a Comment