The numbers being proposed for teacher cuts does not look correct!
Original post made by Chad, Birdland, on Mar 1, 2009
Since teachers have to pay for their own benefits and their salaries are adjusted upward to cover that pay-out, there is no way we are paying teachers $36K per year. Even at the lower end for a new teacher in this market.
Either the School Board wants to cut more teachers than what would be required to meet the revenue shortfall or they don't understand their own math.
Second Point: The parcel tax being proposed does not take into account increases over the next four years (such as cost of living or salary increases). In an open public forum in February, it was brought to everyone's attention that the numbers being proposed by the Board would only cover 2009-10 fiscal year. That means we could have a repeat of another ballot initiative next June if this in not handled correctly (include a CPI/other increase multiplier or request a higher parcel tax amount that will cover expenses for the next four years).
If the Board is afraid the parcel tax won't pass if set too high, I can guarantee you it won't pass again next year if they have to "go back to the well". We need to get it right the first time!
'General Lee' banned; political correctness gone too far?
By Gina Channell-Allen | 4 comments | 227 views
When Students Consider Non-Portfolio Design Schools
By Elizabeth LaScala | 0 comments | 222 views