Fallout from the National Financial Crisis

Some school years we experience State fiscal crises, some school years we experience national fiscal crises.

And then there are years like 2008-2009 when we get to experience both.

It looks like the Wall Street meltdown will hit our District in the bank account pretty hard. The County Treasurer’s office had invested, as of July, about 11-12% of the District’s funds in debt instruments issued by Lehamn Brothers. While they were liquidating that position over the last few months, they still had about 6% of the funds invested in Lehman paper when Lehman declared bankruptcy. The value of those holdings is unclear. It’s certainly possible that they will be worth nothing.

If they do prove worthless, the District will stand to lose about $640,000 of its cash-on-hand.

Continue reading

Posted in budget, money | Leave a comment

Parcel Tax Authorized for November Ballot

Last Monday, the Board voted unanimously to place a parcel tax on the November 2008 ballot.

The measure would enhance and extend Measure D, the parcel tax previously approved by voters in June, 2003. The amount of the assessment would increase by $75 per parcel, to about $184 per year, and be levied until such time as the Board determined it was no longer necessary. As with Measure D, senior citizens could apply for an exemption from the tax (Measure D exemptions would be automatically carried forward to apply to the new measure).

This is an important decision for the kids of San Carlos, and for our community. But it’s going to take a lot of work to get the measure approved, because it needs a supermajority (2/3 of the ballots cast) to pass. There will be a need for lots of volunteers, for phone banks, voter registration efforts, etc. If you can spare any time at all, please consider volunteering to help the campaign.

There is also a need to raise money to pay for the campaign itself. By law, public agencies (e.g., school districts) are not allowed to spend public monies advocating for or against ballot measures. Consequently, community members who want to see this measure approved to help improve our K-8 schools need to raise the funds themselves.

That campaign effort is already being organized, but the specific individuals who are going to be handling different aspects of the campaign are not yet defined. Stay tuned for more information (both here and in the press). If you’re ready to commit time or money today, please contact either me (mark@arcabama.com) or Tom Quiggle (tom@quighome.com).

While our community is generally quite supportive of its local schools, we are going to have to work hard to ensure supporters know of the measure and remember to work their way down to the end of the ballot where it will be located (in presidential elections, many voters just vote the “top of the ticket” and stop). We also do not have an imminent fiscal crisis on our hands, as we did in 2002/2003, to galvanize supporters.

But with a bit of work and time I’m confident we can get this approved. I hope you’ll join me and the many other community members who want to see our schools get a more stable source of funding to offset current and future state budget cuts in working to get the measure passed.

Posted in budget, money, parcel tax | Leave a comment

Throw the Rascals Out!

Last Thursday’s public comment period had a number of interesting moments while teachers were chastising us for not putting a bigger compensation proposal on the table.

But there was one moment that stood out in my mind as surreal. Which was when we were warned the teachers would turn us out of office if we continued to behave the way we were behaving.

I give the speaker points for knowing that we don’t get paid, so our livelihood isn’t at stake. Instead, we were reminded that serving on the Board is an honor bestowed by the community on us, and we ought to be careful about risking that.

Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Who Do Trustees Represent?

Last Thursday on my way into the Board meeting I had a brand new experience: crossing a picket line. There were a good number of District teachers outside the building protesting and picketing the District’s failure to put forward an “acceptable” compensation proposal.

The action continued inside, with a number of teachers using their right to speak to the Board during the public comment period to chastise the Board as a whole, the superintendent and individual trustees. I won’t go into detail about everything that was said, except to say there appeared to be a lot of misinterpretation behind the comments. As well as over-reliance on the accuracy of news media accounts.

But there was one comment made where a response won’t be just rehashing the same viewpoints. The head of the union, Dan Liner, said our job, as trustees, was to represent the community and the teachers.

This is incorrect, and, if it is a widely-held view among teachers, a potential source of confusion and angst.

Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Minor Correction

I just tweaked the posting on “How Does the District’s Contract Compare?”. Turns out that, while some districts have columns in their salary schedules for teachers without credentials, San Carlos doesn’t. To keep things clean, I re-did my analysis and excluded those columns from the comparison.

The net effect of doing this was to shave a couple of percentage points off the bar graphs. For example, the updated statewide comparison shows that using San Carlos’ metrics would make things better for teachers in other districts in 79%, instead of 80%, of the typical salary schedule.

This doesn’t change any of the points I made, but I wanted readers to know about the change.

I also added one new chart to clarify an issue some may find confusing.

Posted in contract, teachers | Leave a comment

How Does the District’s Contract Compare?

Steve Mitrovich has published an article which, among other things, touches on how the District’s salary schedule stacks up against other San Mateo County districts.

I thought it might be interesting to explore that idea a little further, so I did an analysis comparing the District schedule to all the other elementary districts in California which use the same “philosophy” for compensating teachers (it turns out almost all of them — 411 out of 422 — do).

Continue reading

Posted in contract, teachers | Leave a comment

The Un-COLA*

* with apologies to 7-Up, and whoever owns the relevant intellectual property.

There’s been a lot of talk lately about teacher compensation and cost of living adjustments (COLAs). I’d like to clarify a few misconceptions.

When most people here the term “cost of living adjustment” they immediately think of labor contracts containing escalator clauses which automatically adjust wages for inflation. That’s the context where COLA first made its appearance.

But in California education funding, the COLA is something different. It’s not necessarily embedded in labor agreements (it isn’t for the District), and it doesn’t just cover wages and salaries. It covers many, but not all, of the budget items funded by the State (for the current school year it covered about 83% of the District’s budget). It also has to pay for increases in ancillary programs, like the District’s literacy support efforts.

Continue reading

Posted in budget, capacity, city, contract, enrollment, fields, money, teachers, Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Those Pesky Gophers

I was pleased to learn last night that the District’s maintenance team is assessing the condition of Heather’s field. That’s important for figuring out what kind of maintenance the District should do now that the City is going to let its use agreement for the field expire.

it’s also important for determining whether or not the District is satisfied with the job the City’s been doing maintaining the field. Under the current use agreement (which expires at the end of June) the City gets to use it for community athletics in exchange for maintaining it.

I’ve had my doubts over the years as to how well the quid matched the quo. I’ve yet to find (in admittedly unscientific surveys) a gopher hole on any City-owned field. But there sure are a lot of them at Heather. Maybe they all just like the view up there (it can be pretty spectacular).

In any event, I’m glad we’ll be getting some real data and expert input on conditions at Heather Field, and recommendations on what we should do.

Posted in city, fields | Leave a comment

Rabbits and Hats

We spent some time last night discussing the Governor’s latest budget proposal and how it will play into the Legislature’s budget process. The Governor is planning on borrowing against an “enhanced” State lottery and, if that fails, increasing the State’s sales tax by 1% to “balance” the budget.

Voters would have to approve the lottery change, but the Legislature could approve the sales tax increase itself…provided at least 4 or 5 Republican members vote for it to secure the necessary 2/3 supermajority. That’s considered extremely unlikely.

Continue reading

Posted in budget | Leave a comment

Negotiations Update

There’s a good article on the District website about how teacher compensation in the District compares to neighboring communities, and about what the District’s financial situation looks like.

It’s a PDF file, and you can find it here.

Posted in contract, teachers | Leave a comment