* Why are we giving our administrators close to a 4% salary increase in this horrendous economy?
* Could we not save some teaching / paraprofessional jobs or reduce class room sizing if we simply freezed salaries for administrators in the 2009 - 2010 School Year Budget?
* Why are administrators getting MORE of an increase than our teachers who are receiving a 2% increase?
Also, what are the details behind the Warrant Articles' Capital Improvement and Technology Improvement plans? There is over $600,000 of tax payers' money earmarked for projects. Yet, I find very little detail and no justification for these funds on the ORCSD web site. I am sure there are valid and necessary projects, but I have no way of knowing what they are.
I've reviewed past Board meeting documents and still can't figure out what is truly being funded for these Improvement projects. In trying to better educate myself on the Warrant Articles, I have sent an email (sent out last week) and made a call to the ORCSD (made call this morning). I am still awaiting a reply.
If any one can shed light on the Warrant Articles, I would appreciate it. We are all feeling the economic pinch in some way. With this, every dollar the ORCSD spends should be spent wisely. What kind of message is our School Board sending when we hear that US unemployment is sky rocketing, yet ORCSD is giving already high paid administrators even more?
I want to vote in an informed manner on February 3rd at the Deliberative Session. Right now, I cannot support some of these Warrant Articles in their current instantiation.
I believe you raise very valid points. Because the Administration and several Board members have failed to clearly outline what exactly is needed and why, I will not be supporting funding for TIP or CIP. (as of today , these are Articles 5 & 6). As a parent and taxpayer I can not blindly follow or believe what is fed to me by some in our district. As a parent it is my job to ask questions! Despite the efforts to suppress public questions and comments, this voter will let her thoughts be known on election day! I will vote NO on Articles 5 & 6 and I hope others will consider doing the same.
ReplyDeleteI belive that the Capital Improvement and Technology Improvement plans are a multi-year effort; that may explain why the SB did not feel the need to explain them--or even mention them--in the budget deliberation session on January 14th.
ReplyDeleteBut that explanation begs the question: even IF we had full information before us as to what the money will be spent on, in light of the current downtown and in the face of teacher/administrator/paraprofessional cuts, should we stick to the 5- or 10- or whatever-year plan?
I believe we should hold off on capital or technology improvements (except for those things that are absolutely necessary, of course) in favor of retaining staff. I think our children are better served by having more teachers than they are by repaving the parking lot.
All of this begs another question: if the give the school board this kind of money, will they spend it wisely, or waste it?
ReplyDeleteEveryone should read the "Citizen's Audit" (posted here: http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dfp5twfd_37fs7k4rjv) and the archived discussions that flowed from it on this blog in September and October.
With the near total lack of fiscal controls, the absence of proper evaluation procedures, and the failure of administrators to adhere to District policy documented in the report, how are we voters/taxpayers supposed to have any faith that the money will be well-spent?
"Trust us" is not good enough, especially since some members of the school board have a history of stonewalling and misleading the public--which directly led to the waste of $74,000 on the networking contract alone last year. How many paraprofessionals would that fund? How much other waste are they hiding?
This taxpayer will be voting "NO" on any expenditures until he sees a willingness on the part of the school board to tackle the waste and mismangement that's run amok in our schools.
I speak as a student here
ReplyDeletei am a junior at oyster river
i do think that maybe the district spends a lot of money but i would like to say i understand the need for money to make technology upgrades
when i came in as a freshman to orhs, the technology was old and relatively useless, logging in to a computer could take 2 miniutes, over the last 2 years the IT team has worked to overcome some of these problems and the network is much better. Technology is used more and more in the classes i attend now. ive worked on classes where blogs are used as collabaration fronts to help students work togeter. Internet video is now something that teachers can use to help students stay in touch with issues. the problems i have visabely seen were needs for infastructure upgrades and for rewiring some of the other schools in the district
while i have not read the warrent, i plan to but i believe that the money being spent on technology upgrades is really money well spent
-Graham Wakefield
ORHS class of 2010
You should consider taking the time to research your comments on the Admin pay. I do not work for the school but know someone who applied to the Guidance Director position last year. I researched some of the pay and compared it to other towns in the local area. This person did not accept the position because it would have been 10,000 dollars less then the district he is in. Please take the time to do your homework. I do think 4% may be high but they do need to come to terms with making admin. competitive. Teachers make more and the Director works during the summer. huh
ReplyDeleteI also feel that it is tough right now. Many people we know in the education field (public and UNH) are really struggling with money. I think we should really consider what is most important and priority here and no more for at least this year.
Concerned too
If you saw the budget presentation done by Blaine Cox at the budget hearing he stated that the %4 increase included for administrative salaries is just a placeholder in the budget. As of this point in time there is no negotiated agreement with any of the administrators in the district. The %4 gives them a budget to negotiate from.
ReplyDeleteIf a computer is taking 2 minutes to log in then the technical adminstrator needs to be fired! Pie please!
ReplyDelete