St. Vrain School District laying off 85 staff members

Posted by mjcmdc on March 26, 2008 at 9:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Watch and see how many administrators get axed, my guess is 0. Once again teachers, and students suffer, while the overpaid wannabe CEO's live high on the hog. One administrator's pay = 2-3 teachers pay, which impacts 400 to 600 students.

Most administrators couldn't ply their ass out of their chair and find a school if they had to.

I wonder how they got in this situation in the first place. Nice management.

Posted by ColoradoJoe on March 26, 2008 at 9:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

MJCMDC,

You took the words right out of my mouth. Why don't we see some sort of consolidation of administrative jobs in the SVVSD? Their roles seem duplicated throughout the district.

We can once again condemn the prevailing attitude of the administration, but I must confess, the teachers' "union" (well, it's called an "association") is partly to blame for allowing the district to run rough-shod over its teachers.

We need only to look at what happened a few years ago with the SVVSD accounting debacle. An administrator screwed-up, and the teachers paid (literally...with PAY CUTS...and out-of-pocket costs for necessary school supplies) while administrators went unscathed. Some of the blame for that must be placed on ex-State "Treasurer" Caufman and others who all but tout that "teachers are overpaid and underworked."

Notice in Fall 2008 how many good teachers flee to neighboring Boulder Valley School District, which actually respects and supports its teachers...and in essence, its students.

Posted by ra80501 on March 27, 2008 at 12:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Never let facts get in the way of a good rant.

Fact: During the 2002 budget crisis, all employees of the district, from administrators down to part-time lunch servers, had their pay reduced. No employee group has recovered fully from those reductions. Superintendent Zila, who had just come to the district 3 months before and inherited the crisis from a previous administration, voluntarily took a larger pay cut than anyone else.

Fact: Since the crisis, the district has made huge strides in its accounting and budget controls. Indeed, it has won numerous awards, and is widely held as a model for proper financial management of a school district.

Fact: The district central administration is already lean, to the point of actually being harmful to the successful operation of the district. The district spends less, per pupil, on central administration, than almost every other Front Range district.

Fact: Colorado law requires that the district present and approve a balanced budget by the beginning of the fiscal year (July 1). If cost reductions are needed to match the anticipated revenue, they must be made – it is not an option.

Fact: Teaching positions are cut because that’s where the money is. 85% or more of the district’s total operations budget is in salaries & benefits for employees. Teachers make up the biggest portion of that; thus, if you must cut to balance the budget, that’s where the cuts must come from.

Fact: Other district services are already lean. For example, the district’s grounds and custodial workers maintain about 50% more space than comparable workers in other districts.

Fact: SVVSD funding, like all school districts in Colorado, is set annually by the State Legislature, and is controlled largely by TABOR provisions. Local property taxes, even when they increase due to rising property values, only make up about 40% of the SVVSD funding; the balance comes from other state funds. Funding is set on a per-pupil basis; increases in property tax collections have no bearing on the per-pupil funding allotted to the district.

Fact: Unlike most other Colorado districts, SVVSD voters have not approved a mill-levy override to provide supplemental funding over-and-above the woefully inadequate amounts set by the Legislature. In two neighboring districts, voters have approved such overrides: Boulder Valley collects over $1,100 per student in supplemental revenue, and Thompson Valley collects almost $750 per student in supplemental revenue, all approved by voters in those districts. A $750 per-student override in SVVSD would generate about $18,000,000 annually.

All of this comes as a direct result of the Legislature’s inability to properly fund K-12 education in Colorado, along with the refusal of SVVSD voters to approve supplemental funding through a mill-levy override. As citizens of Colorado and residents of SVVSD, our votes have created this situation, and we have no one to blame but ourselves.

Posted by smarterlogic on March 27, 2008 at 9:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Where is our tax money going? To the schools chairmen??? For their big butts that don't do a thing to change the repulsive lunch menu! (or anything else for that matter!) The poor kids are very stressed out by this retarded information. Why would you do that to the poor children? Especially the middle schoolers! TRMS IS CHANGING THEIR SCHEDULE, The building was made for teams, not high school schedules!!!!! Middle school is a very confusing situation, you are going to make it more difficult for those poor children!

Posted by Getaclue on April 2, 2008 at 11:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)

1 administrator equals 2-3 teachers? This may be true if you get rid of the old guard of the teachers union and hire right out of college teachers with no expeience. Take a look at a teacher with 15 years expeience--$60,000 a year. More than Assitant Principals make!! Your words mean nothing, your vote means everything.