|
|
Post by slt on Feb 23, 2010 11:40:05 GMT -5
www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=361214Official: Dist. 204 cuts may be 'unprecedented' By Justin Kmitch | Daily Herald Staff Indian Prairie school officials have circled Monday, March 22, on their calendars, but not for a celebratory reason. They have a date with fiscal reality. By the end of that school day, the district will have notified nontenured teachers who won't be returning next year. And Monday night, Assistant Superintendent for Business and Finance Dave Holm said the cuts could be unprecedented. "It's fairly common that a percentage of the nontenured faculty are not retained each year, but this will be unlike anything we have ever seen," Holm said. "No one is looking forward to (March 22)." Later that evening, board members will discuss the administration's plan to reduce next year's spending by another $12 million. District officials said the state's nearly $14 billion debt is forcing the legislature to reduce payments to individual school districts. Compounding the district's problem is the $7.8 million the state already is months late in paying. That money largely is earmarked for special education and transportation. Program cuts, larger class sizes, potential building closings and an untold number of other suggestions from the district staff and the community finance committee are likely to be presented to the board March 22. But after cutting a combined $15.7 million from the 2009 and 2010 budgets, Holm admitted cost-cutting options are becoming fewer and farther between. "We're turning over every rock we can to bring you the next phase of the austerity plan," Holm said. "But as you can imagine, it's not easy. It's getting more difficult." Earlier this month, Superintendent Kathryn Birkett said it is very likely that several of its roughly 680 nontenured teachers may be released. Paying staff salaries for this budget year, however, is about to get a little easier. The state board of education has announced a plan to release a total of $3.5 million to $4 million in federal stimulus money to the district between now and March 19. "Paying us our general state aid with federal dollars frees up the state to hopefully start paying down that $7.8 million," Holm said. "But ultimately, it just pushes the entire problem into next year. But getting some money is better than getting none, so it's a constant battle."
|
|
|
|
Post by educateme on Feb 23, 2010 12:43:09 GMT -5
www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=361214Official: Dist. 204 cuts may be 'unprecedented' By Justin Kmitch | Daily Herald Staff Indian Prairie school officials have circled Monday, March 22, on their calendars, but not for a celebratory reason. They have a date with fiscal reality. By the end of that school day, the district will have notified nontenured teachers who won't be returning next year. And Monday night, Assistant Superintendent for Business and Finance Dave Holm said the cuts could be unprecedented. "It's fairly common that a percentage of the nontenured faculty are not retained each year, but this will be unlike anything we have ever seen," Holm said. "No one is looking forward to (March 22)." Later that evening, board members will discuss the administration's plan to reduce next year's spending by another $12 million. District officials said the state's nearly $14 billion debt is forcing the legislature to reduce payments to individual school districts. Compounding the district's problem is the $7.8 million the state already is months late in paying. That money largely is earmarked for special education and transportation. Program cuts, larger class sizes, potential building closings and an untold number of other suggestions from the district staff and the community finance committee are likely to be presented to the board March 22. But after cutting a combined $15.7 million from the 2009 and 2010 budgets, Holm admitted cost-cutting options are becoming fewer and farther between. "We're turning over every rock we can to bring you the next phase of the austerity plan," Holm said. "But as you can imagine, it's not easy. It's getting more difficult." Earlier this month, Superintendent Kathryn Birkett said it is very likely that several of its roughly 680 nontenured teachers may be released. Paying staff salaries for this budget year, however, is about to get a little easier. The state board of education has announced a plan to release a total of $3.5 million to $4 million in federal stimulus money to the district between now and March 19. "Paying us our general state aid with federal dollars frees up the state to hopefully start paying down that $7.8 million," Holm said. "But ultimately, it just pushes the entire problem into next year. But getting some money is better than getting none, so it's a constant battle." What!?!?? Didn't we just open a $150mil school and reconfigure a middle school to alieviate OVERCROWDING!?!  ? You have got to be kidding me.  |
|
|
|
Post by slt on Feb 23, 2010 12:47:52 GMT -5
www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=361214Official: Dist. 204 cuts may be 'unprecedented' By Justin Kmitch | Daily Herald Staff Indian Prairie school officials have circled Monday, March 22, on their calendars, but not for a celebratory reason. They have a date with fiscal reality. By the end of that school day, the district will have notified nontenured teachers who won't be returning next year. And Monday night, Assistant Superintendent for Business and Finance Dave Holm said the cuts could be unprecedented. "It's fairly common that a percentage of the nontenured faculty are not retained each year, but this will be unlike anything we have ever seen," Holm said. "No one is looking forward to (March 22)." Later that evening, board members will discuss the administration's plan to reduce next year's spending by another $12 million. District officials said the state's nearly $14 billion debt is forcing the legislature to reduce payments to individual school districts. Compounding the district's problem is the $7.8 million the state already is months late in paying. That money largely is earmarked for special education and transportation. Program cuts, larger class sizes, potential building closings and an untold number of other suggestions from the district staff and the community finance committee are likely to be presented to the board March 22. But after cutting a combined $15.7 million from the 2009 and 2010 budgets, Holm admitted cost-cutting options are becoming fewer and farther between. "We're turning over every rock we can to bring you the next phase of the austerity plan," Holm said. "But as you can imagine, it's not easy. It's getting more difficult." Earlier this month, Superintendent Kathryn Birkett said it is very likely that several of its roughly 680 nontenured teachers may be released. Paying staff salaries for this budget year, however, is about to get a little easier. The state board of education has announced a plan to release a total of $3.5 million to $4 million in federal stimulus money to the district between now and March 19. "Paying us our general state aid with federal dollars frees up the state to hopefully start paying down that $7.8 million," Holm said. "But ultimately, it just pushes the entire problem into next year. But getting some money is better than getting none, so it's a constant battle." What!?!?? Didn't we just open a $150mil school and reconfigure a middle school to alieviate OVERCROWDING!?! ? You have got to be kidding me. We don't know where the list in that paragraph came from or which cuts that will be discussed are likely to become reality. |
|
|
|
Post by concerned on Feb 23, 2010 13:41:36 GMT -5
Our SB had the chance to stop this 3rd high school after BB site became too expensive. This is not all the states fault that we are in this position. The SB also knew at the time that they decided to build this 3rd high school that the 10,000 plus student population was not going to happen. How about they cut some administration jobs? Such a waste of our tax money and how sad for the children of 204. Also lets not forget the 6 million we spent on the BB land that is still sitting there. 6 MILLION of wasted money that sure would help us now!!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by slt on Feb 23, 2010 14:02:36 GMT -5
Our SB had the chance to stop this 3rd high school after BB site became too expensive. This is not all the states fault that we are in this position. The SB also knew at the time that they decided to build this 3rd high school that the 10,000 plus student population was not going to happen. How about they cut some administration jobs? Such a waste of our tax money and how sad for the children of 204. Also lets not forget the 6 million we spent on the BB land that is still sitting there. 6 MILLION of wasted money that sure would help us now!!!!! We could go round and round in circles on this one. The question now is what we do starting from where we are today. As for admin, as far as I know we are on the low side already. |
|
|
|
Post by concerned on Feb 23, 2010 14:15:50 GMT -5
When our SB makes the decision to put up signs on our children's schools saying the state owes us money, I think we need to start looking at our SB and all the mistakes they have made to put us in this situation. They had the chance to stop this mess and they did not.
|
|
|
|
Post by slt on Feb 23, 2010 14:20:01 GMT -5
When our SB makes the decision to put up signs on our children's schools saying the state owes us money, I think we need to start looking at our SB and all the mistakes they have made to put us in this situation. They had the chance to stop this mess and they did not. I don't understand why it was a mistake for our district and several others to use school signs for a short time to make this information known to the public. Not everyone gets 204 enews, IMO this was a good way to reach people throughout the district for free. The school board did not cause the state to stop paying bills or to propose paying our district a lower amount going forward so could not have stopped these things from happening. |
|
|
|
Post by concerned on Feb 23, 2010 14:32:13 GMT -5
I found it embarrassing and how unpleasant for the teacher's and students to walk into school everyday and see those signs. The kids do not need to know financial state our district is in. Did any other district take this low road??
This was the SB way of trying to blame the state for the mess we are in instead of looking at themselves.
|
|
|
|
Post by slt on Feb 23, 2010 14:38:39 GMT -5
I found it embarrassing and how unpleasant for the teacher's and students to walk into school everyday and see those signs. The kids do not need to know financial state our district is in. Did any other district take this low road?? I don't personally know of any students or teachers who had a bad reaction to this particular fact being posted on the signs. Yes, other districts did choose this same method to let the public know of the current dire situation, see an article I posted earlier today about it. What bothers you about it? |
|
|
|
Post by concerned on Feb 23, 2010 14:55:54 GMT -5
So the district has no other way of communicating to the public about our financial state? I think I posted my reason. The kids do not need to be made aware and I believe this was our SB way of trying to take the blame off of them and the teacher's did not need to be reminded when they walked into to work that their jobs are on the line. I know I am not the only one who thought it was done in poor taste. We need to look at our mistakes and see how we got to this point. Building at 150 million brand new high school cost us and now we are in financial difficulty where we just built a new school and now we are looking to close schools? ? |
|
doc
Frosh
Posts: 0
|
Post by doc on Feb 23, 2010 14:58:25 GMT -5
I found it embarrassing and how unpleasant for the teacher's and students to walk into school everyday and see those signs. The kids do not need to know financial state our district is in. Did any other district take this low road?? I don't personally know of any students or teachers who had a bad reaction to this particular fact being posted on the signs. Yes, other districts did choose this same method to let the public know of the current dire situation, see an article I posted earlier today about it. What bothers you about it? sorry, I and others do of know students ( of differing ages) who came home very upset because their favorite teachers told them they were losing their jobs due to the state... is that the learning environment you want for your kids ? Sorry, not me. It was a classless move IMHO. Unless we are teaching microeconomics on resource balancing of limited resources at all ages now, it had no place there. And in the spirit of the vastly increased communications scores, maybe the signshould have had a footnote about the $17M of added cost built into MVHS for favorable rates on the bond issues that we now have to pay over the next 20 years ? Maybe they can ask at the next board meeting instead of having those discussions in the classroom. |
|
doc
Frosh
Posts: 0
|
Post by doc on Feb 23, 2010 15:04:11 GMT -5
When our SB makes the decision to put up signs on our children's schools saying the state owes us money, I think we need to start looking at our SB and all the mistakes they have made to put us in this situation. They had the chance to stop this mess and they did not. I don't understand why it was a mistake for our district and several others to use school signs for a short time to make this information known to the public. Not everyone gets 204 enews, IMO this was a good way to reach people throughout the district for free. The school board did not cause the state to stop paying bills or to propose paying our district a lower amount going forward so could not have stopped these things from happening. and the state did not spend $150M on a new HS when now it will be looking to consolidate/close buildings, or refinance it's debt out even further. The state mess is well documented and yes they own a lot of the fuding issue, but not all - don't be surprised if someone from the state eventually calls 204 on it's part in the crisis here. More than a few people in Springfield are aware also, and we lost some friends over the condemnation issue. we could not stop the state part of the problem, but we surely could have acted more fiscally responsible and eased that burden some. We consciously chose not to, and to ignore the CPI issue even when many people brought it to their attention. They knew revenue would not be increasing because 10,400+ worth of taxpayers was never ever coming- and they knew that when they made the decision to build anyway - adding even more operating costs to the district. it's about time they step up and take ownership of their part of the mess here. Maybe a sign on the capital about the spending here ? |
|
doc
Frosh
Posts: 0
|
Post by doc on Feb 23, 2010 15:06:47 GMT -5
Our SB had the chance to stop this 3rd high school after BB site became too expensive. This is not all the states fault that we are in this position. The SB also knew at the time that they decided to build this 3rd high school that the 10,000 plus student population was not going to happen. How about they cut some administration jobs? Such a waste of our tax money and how sad for the children of 204. Also lets not forget the 6 million we spent on the BB land that is still sitting there. 6 MILLION of wasted money that sure would help us now!!!!! We could go round and round in circles on this one. The question now is what we do starting from where we are today. As for admin, as far as I know we are on the low side already. so forgive and forget ? Those who helped dig this hole deeper are still making the decisions, I am glad you trust them to make better ones, more every day do not. |
|
|
|
Post by gatordog on Feb 24, 2010 22:23:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by gatordog on Feb 26, 2010 13:22:37 GMT -5
Here is my guesstimate on how much savings closing a ES would be.
Assume most of staff (teachers) move where the students move to.
Lets say you loss 1 bldg worth of admin types. Assume about 15 employees. (Quite a few of these might be somewhat lower paid). Say 50,000 salary/benefits reduction per employee.
Then salary savings = 0.75 mil. Lets round this to $1 mil.
How much does it cost to operate an maintain an ES? Well, total SD Operations & Maintenance expenditures is $23.8 mil. My estimate/guess will be that an ES O & M scales with student population: $24 mil x 500 students/30,000 students = 0.4 mil. Round it to $0.5 mil.
So maybe total cost reduction is ~ $1.5 mil.
|
|
? You have got to be kidding me. 
