Layoffs inevitable for cash-strapped school district

[stuartliroff]

Thank you to Heather Murtagh for writing the excellent article today on "Layoffs inevitable for cash-strapped school district".

I am a typical local Burlingame parent; I work, I try to parent my child, cope with life, etc. I don't get involved in political events but I go to my child's parent/teacher night, and I like to think that she's getting the best education that I can give her.

My purpose for writing to you today is to give you my first-hand report and opinion about what happened, today, when I dropped off my daughter at Burlingame High School. There were groups of teachers dressed in black handing out flyers. I think labor lawyers call it an "informational picket line".

In my ignorant style because I'm sure I do NOT know all the issues, but after reading your article AND after reading one of their flyers, I will try summarize the issues:

On the one side, it seems that some San Mateo District High School official(s) somewhow messed up and came up with an overall $3.5 M shortfall. It seems that the District's solution to this shortfall is to have between 26-61 District classified staff immediately fired (or fired very soon; I wasn't clear on the timing). The number of people to be fired depends upon a decision on the part of the certified employees (I'm guessing that most of these certified employees are teachers, but I'm also guessing that some are janitors, etc.). I don't know how many are administrators, secretaries, etc.

On the other side, it seems that the California Teachers Association has recommended some sort of voluntary strike (although they aren't calling it that). They have implemented a policy whereby "teachers and other certificated personnel will abstain from participating in voluntary, non-essential duties, especially those during lunch and after school". The result of the implentation of the CTA's policy, is, for example, that my friend's son can't get Chemistry tutoring because his teacher isn't going to be available to volunteer during his lunch time to be able to help the child. Of course, another result of all of this is that we have extremely stressed out credentialed teachers and and other employees, who are seriously worried about how to pay their rent, mortgages, put food on their table, etc. and are worried about whether they are going to get fired or not.

Here's my unsolicited opinion: I was a teacher many years ago, and a member of the California Teacher's Association (CTA) as part of the Oakland Public School District. At that time, nearly 31 years ago, the CTA made similar demands: "We'll reduce the services we give to your children unless you {increase my salary, reduce my class size, give me better health insurance, whatever; replace the argument with whatever was popular at the time}."

I would like to propose, instead, to the management of the CTA that your first official "act" should not be to divide and hurt your student and parent population! For crying out loud; you've already put yourself in a vulnerable position by becoming a teacher, and taking what in my opinion is a very low salary for what you do. But you've already made this committment to our children, to give them your services ( i.e. your teaching skills and your desire to volunteer and "go the extra mile") at a very low pay, and to give them your volunteeer time. I mean, come on, you are already "givers" and you should be appreciated for what you give. But, instead, why is it that you're first inclination, for your first political act, when fighting with the any administration, is to say "ok, I'll start hurting my students; that's certainly going to show you!". Well, it doesn't! All it does is alienate your students and parents from you, our teachers!

I will show up at today's 6pm budget meeting and speak if I'm aloud to.

I propose to the California Teachers Association, to the Parents of our Children, to the Teachers of our Children, and to our Children, that we meet TOGETHER, and propose a march on the School District that will immediately close down all of the San Mateo High Schools entirely, and march together, to the San Mateo Union High School District headquarters; yes, all of us: teachers, students, and parents, union leaders, all linked arm-in-arm together, in a march, to shutdown the entire school district. I would then offer a "teach in" where we will assign qualified representatives from all sides, to sit down, and peacefully figure out how to cut the salaries and costs of the administration in order to meet this shortfall WITHOUT firing ANY of our teachers, secretaries, janitors etc.

Humbly Submitted,
Stuart Liroff
stuart.liroff@gmail.com
http://stuart.plaxoed.com
cell (65) 218-6423

[wilburt]

stuartliroff, you said you are a former teacher and you don't know how to spell the word "allowed" (i.e., you spelled it "aloud")? No wonder students are having a tough time in school.

What a brilliant strategy you propose; shutting down the entire school district so that the teachers can use the students as their shills to protest layoffs. That is every slackers dream; school's out for protest. Unfortunately, today, many public school teachers appear to be more interested in their pay, benefit, and retirement packages then they are in teaching the students or the quality of the education they provide to their students.

As I see it, many public school teachers appear quite willing to sacrifice the education of students for their own personal gain by closing down schools or cutting back on the services they provide to protest their often petty grievances. What a great example for their students; if you don't give me what I want I'll cry, kick, and scream until you give into my demands. Nursery school bad behavior from the very same people entrusted with our children's education. Of course, that's just my opinion; I'm sure that the teachers will cry, scream, and yell in protest that this is not true.

Here's a simple answer; if you high school teachers don't want layoffs take a 20% -30% pay cut and reduce your benefits; there is only so much money in the SMUHSD budget. Therefore, larger salaries and richer benefit packages mean fewer jobs.

On another issue; the SMUHSD is now trying to soak San Mateo County taxpayers with the Measure M Bond issue. Taxpayers already passed Measure D in 2000, and are still paying for that Bond, and now the San Mateo Union High School District (SMUHSD) is back at the trough again trying to soak more money out of San Mateo County taxpayers. I think San Mateo County taxpayers are getting sick and tired of the failed economic policies of the people who allegedly manage the financial affairs of the SMUHSD. VOTE NO ON MEASURE M -- don't support financial mismanagement.

[stuartliroff]

I apologize for my spelling mistakes.

I do not propose using our students as shills. I propose that students, teachers, union leaders, janitors, secretaries and parents and join together as a coalition to act as 1 bargaining unit with the High Schoool District: the primary purpose of this is to get the District to own of to their own failure and to take the pain themselves. Why is it that they made the mistake in estimating the shortfall, and the teachers, secretaries, janitors and students all have to pay for it?

If the problem is as serious as I've been led to believe (ie. to immediately fire between 21-60) people, then that is why I am proposing a 1-day moratorium whereby the leaders of each group (CTA elected officials to represent the teachers, the School District Administration, heads of the various PTAs, and the elected school presidents from each grade/school) and come to a meeting at District Headquarters and solve this together, as a community. I proposed the shut down and march as a form of peaceful civil disobedience perhaps as an overreaction, but I feel that firing between 21-60 people is extremeley serious and needs for those of us in the community to stand up and help these teachers and our students through what seems like a really tough time.

[Roscoe_Beedle]

I agree with wilburt. I have for sometime noticed this trend by public service employees and teachers to over pay their members to a point where rasing taxes and floating bonds becomes mandatory to sustain.

And it's wrong.

Why is it unthinkable to lay off teachers or even firemen? Cisco announces layoffs last year of 4,500 and it hardly made a news story. Is a teacher's job anymore valuable to that teacher than the Cisco job was for that former employee?

One thing that does not get much press is the hard fact that enrollments are declining in many districts. This would necessitate lay offs in itself.

[wilburt]

stuartliroff, you wrote:

"I propose that students, teachers, union leaders, janitors, secretaries and parents and join together as a coalition to act as 1 bargaining unit"

Why should the parents and students join with the very same people who are responsible for holding the student's education hostage by closing down the schools or reducing services to protest their petty grievances? Why should the parents and students join with the very same people who want to bust the District's budget?

The goals of these two groups are incompatible so there is not a basis for them to unite and form a "bargaining unit". The students need, and in many cases want, a stable educational environment where the services teacher's provide are not yanked away from them and/or held hostage by the teachers to achieve, what in many cases are, the teacher's selfish personal economic goals. The parents also want a stable educational environment for their children and also don't want to end up spending 30 years paying for bond measures to meet the teacher's personal economic agendas.

[stuartliroff]

I've posted my article here: http://stuart.plaxoed.com/.

For those who prefer to read in inline text, here it is:

It seems that on the one side we have Superintendent Sam Johnson and his staff. He began the meeting by accusing the CTA (California Teachers Association) of abandoning their children whereby “teachers and other certificated personnel will abstain from participating in voluntary, non-essential duties, especially during lunch and after school”. I wouldn’t exactly call Mr. Johnson’s speech visionary, or inspiring. In fact, I would call his opening remarks arrogant, divisive and accusatory.

On another side, we have the California Teachers Association, claiming “gross malfeasance” and “ineptititude” on the part of Mr. Johnson and his aides for the $3.5M budget shortfall.

Sadly, students are suffering. “There is a rift between the teachers and the district. A rift that we are caught in between,” said Mitra Anoushiravani, a student trustee. She continued: “I am calling for an end to the damaging rift. Our teachers should be respected and valued for all the time, effort and love they put into their work.”

Many parents, teachers and certificated employees called for Mr. Johnson and his staff to resign, due to the fact that they have known about the budget problems for years, and that they did nothing to help it but did many things to exacerbate it. For instance, there were numerous claims by various parties that, even though the district knew last April that they were going to have a shortfall, they recruited and hired teachers (some who had already gotten a form of tenure from other districts), whom they are now firing.

And it seems the teachers are squeezed in the middle. They want to give good services to their children, while at the same time they are forced with pay cuts, with being fired, and with extremely short resources in their school classrooms (for instance, on the wish list in many classes are requests for xerox paper simply to print on, marking pens, and paper towels to erase boards).

For my part, as a parent, I am calling for Mr. Johnson and his staff to resign. I believe that his years of misleading the district has caused mistrust on the part of the teachers, administrators, children, parents and staff. His claims that they were “blindsided” by the shortfall are just not credible. Last year, at a Capuchino High School fcaculty meeting, questions were raised about the financial impact of the 7-Period Day. Superintendent Johnson said, “My philosophy is to shoot first and aim later.” That attitude, I believe, has gotten the school district into this $3.5M shortfall nightmare.

To the teachers, I implore you to stop this abstention from doing your volunteer work. It is incredulous to me, as an ex-CTA member as an ex-California School Teacher, that you would choose, as your first political act, to strike back at the administration, by hurting your own students through withholding such worthy activities as tutoring during lunch and after school. If you are going to do a political act, isn’t it better to march, together, to the Superintendent’s offices, and demand that he resign?

To the students, please support your teachers! They need your help. They are people who have literally dedicated their lives and their livelihoods to your betterment; they are our local heroes and I respectfully ask that you work together with them to find creative ways, in your own school, to save money and to help meet the budget shorttfall. The teachers did not create this $3.5M shortfall; they are merely victims of it, as are you.

Lastly, to the parents, please help your children understand that these are complex issues, with many sides, and many agendas. Please urge them to work with their teachers to find creative solutions to cut budgets. Also, please urge them to continue to have their club meetings, even though they have now been locked out of classrooms and hallways.

Humbly submitted,

Stuart Liroff

[Roscoe_Beedle]

Well Stuart I dont think we agree on this staffing/shortfall item. But then I may not know everything to do with the Superintendant's role in all this mess.

But I did want to congratulate you on your web-blog/ web-site. I found it very informative in a fun way. Loved the Calabria piece. Your writing style makes it interesting.

[stuartliroff]

....But I did want to congratulate you on your web-blog/ web-site. I found it very informative in a fun way. Loved the Calabria piece. Your writing style makes it interesting.

Roscoe, Thanks!
Sincerely,
Stuart Liroff

[wilburt]

Stuart,

You are wrong as wrong can be on this issue.

At your site, you state, in part:

"To the students, please support your teachers! They need your help. They are people who have literally dedicated their lives and their livelihoods to your betterment; they are our local heroes and I respectfully ask that you work together with them to find creative ways, in your own school, to save money and to help meet the budget shortfall. The teachers did not create this $3.5M shortfall; they are merely victims of it, as are you."

MY RESPONSE:

Heroes (local or otherwise) DO NOT hold the interests of the people they are charged with helping hostage, in order to achieve personal gain. This tactic, starting to be used by public service employees and in this case the teachers, of withholding services to the people (in this case innocent children) they are hired to protect and serve is, in a word, cowardly.

The interests of the students and the teachers in this case are at odds. The teachers appear to be attempting to hold the student's educations hostage so that the teachers can support, what in my opinion are, their unsupportable pay packages and make a case for jobs that the San Mateo Union High School District (SMUHSD) cannot afford. In addition, it appears that the teachers were offered an opportunity to help out the SMUHSD by taking pay cuts to save the jobs; but they refused.

In this case, the teachers are not in this fight for their students; they are in this fight for their own selfish reasons. These malcontents don't understand that they can't have it both ways. They can either continue receiving their already rich pay and benefit packages, with fewer positions, or they can take pay cuts so all their buddies can have a job.

You say that the teachers did not create this $3.5 million shortfall. Well, consider this, I think approximately 80% of the SMUHSD's budget is used to pay salaries and benefits. So, if the teacher's were not always demanding, what in my opinion are, outrageous pay and benefit demands and shoving these demands down the throat of the SMUHSD we would not have these severe budget problems. If the demands of these teachers continue to be met, they will kill the proverbial "goose that laid the golden egg" because sooner or later, if they continue to force the SMUHSD to meet their unrealistic demands, the SMUHSD may be put in a position where the SMUHSD will be insolvent. At that point, there will be no negotiations; only job/pay cuts and school closings. In the end, the people who will be hurt the most will be the students, because the teachers will just run off and find a job/paycheck somewhere else.

There is only so much money to go around in the SMUHSD and the teachers have already gotten more than their share. In my opinion, it is time for these teachers to live within the means of the SMUHSD's budget and work with the SMUHSD to solve this problem, quit withholding their services to the students, and stop their nursery school bad behavior.

[Roger Slocum]

Just a dumb question?
How many $ are put into the school budget from property taxes, and how many $ from the loteries? I realize assume is sometimes a stupid word, but we should be able to assume that barring missmanagement the school systems funding should be sufficient to satisfy both salary demands and the facilities and infrastructure that we entrust our children to each day.
Are the teachers demands for an adequate livelyhood out of line, probably not, teachers nation wide are in most cases inadequately compensated.
Has all the Millions of $ targeted for the education of the children been missmanaged, probably so, there is corruption running rampent in all industry's and in our government, stop the corruption, solve the problem.

[stuartliroff]

I am not qualified to give a precise answer, but I am qualified to give a sort of "backyard" answer.

My wife is an ex San Francisco Unified School Teacher and, apparently, after 12-years of service, her salary would have been something like $52,000 per year (if she had decided to stay with the district which she did not). She would have gotten approximately that salary, regardless of the fact that she is off during the summer.

So, if you just take a wild guess at how many hours she is in the classroom actually teaching (I don't know, something like 8am-3pm (7 hours) for about 40 weeks out of the year, that adds up (not counting all of the home prep, the after and before prep, and the many many hours of volunteerism these teachers do) to about 1,400 hours of classroom work. So, $52,000 divided by 1,400 hours or about $37/hour. If our average classroom has 20 students, then we (the citizens of San Mateo) are paying our school teachers $1.85/hr to teach our children.

So, Roger, I wasn't able to give you any kind of an answer to your "dumb question" (by the way, it isn't a dumb question and I'd be interested to hear a qualified answer). But, I thought I could give you another perspective.

For the administrator, Sam Johnson, and his staff, to propose to solve this budget crisis which they created themselves (remember, we're talking about Sam "I shoot first and aim later" Johnson) by proposing to fire between 20 and 60 people (teachers, janitors, temporary teachers, other credentialed workers) etc., and for the Administration to actually blame the teachers and their own malfeasance and ineptitude for this crisis in the first place, is abhorrent to me. Mr. Johnson et. al., to warn us 2-weeks before you are going to fire 20-60 people, when you knew about this shortfall many months ago, is absolute grounds for firing you, or for you to just quit.

The teachers are the heroes in this drama; Mr. Sam Johnson and his staff are the villains.

Mr. Johnson and your staff, please quit, quietly; that will at least help solve part of the $3.5M shortfall which you all created. Then, let's get the PTA, the CTA, the credentialed workers, and the students to work together, and solve this budget problem and move forward.

Humbly submitted,
Stuart Liroff
http://stuart.plaxoed.com

[wilburt]

I think the people responsible for this disaster are the teachers and their unions. They have made and are continuing to make these unrealistic demands knowing that the San Mateo Union High School District cannot afford to pay for both the high salary and benefit/retirement packages that the teachers receive and keep all of the teachers and support staff fully employed. As I said before, these teachers can't have it both ways. These teachers who don't seem to grasp the financial realities of this very serious situation must learn to live within the SMUHSD budget and tailor their demands to fit within the SMUHSD budget.

Also, stuartliroff, you wrote:

"Mr. Johnson and your staff, please quit, quietly; that will at least help solve part of the $3.5M shortfall which you all created. Then, let's get the PTA, the CTA, the credentialed workers, and the students to work together, and solve this budget problem and move forward."

Why should Mr. Johnson and his staff quit? They are staying on their job, not threatening to or actually withholding services from the students they are paid to serve. In my opinion, the only people who should quit are the teachers who are withholding their services to students and otherwise interferring with the ongoing operations of the SMUHSD.

[Roger Slocum]

Everyone in the nation agrees that teachers are grossly underpaid for the services that they render each day (in the public school system) to the nations children. Do you dissagree with that assesment? You seem to be blaiming only the teachers and not administration, why?
Unions have worked to not only enhance workers situations, but also to emboldend those workers to question their management, sic, missmanagement.
Those who choose to aspire to a teaching profession spend many $ and much time aquiring the credentials to teach, some are good at it, some are not, just like any other profession.
If the San Mateo Union High School District is under funded do not blame the teachers. It is time to not only question, but also lay some blame on the districts administraters. They after all control the purse strings, usually to their own benefit and without the control of others?
Your continueing dialog about teachers being the blame is getting old.
Go try the job!

[wilburt]

Is it any surprise that California ranks 30th out of the 50 States in the category of high school graduation rates:

http://www.unitedhealthfoundation.org/shr2005/components/hsgrad.html

Perhaps we should start basing the salaries and benefits being given to California's public high school teachers on their performance in the classroom instead of their performance on the picket line or while protesting at school board meetings. Let's add some private sector type incentive to the mix and see what happens. It would be interesting to see what would happen if a performance based salary/benefit structure were imposed on California's public high school teachers. How much money do you think a person should earn who is part of a team that comes in 30th out of 50?

Right here in the San Mateo Union High School District, most of the front page news about the SMUHSD is about SMUHSD teachers playing politics, protesting, and threatening to withhold or actually withholding services from the students they teach. I think this disruption to the student's educations poisons the academic environment.

Roger Slocum wrote:

"Everyone in the nation agrees that teachers are grossly underpaid for the services that they render each day (in the public school system) to the nations children."

My response:

I am sure that you knocked on everybody's door and found this to be the case. Unfortunately, this is simply not true. Most public high school teachers in California (we are talking about California here) earn handsome full time incomes and benefit packages for about 9-10 months work.

Roger Slocum wrote:

"Those who choose to aspire to a teaching profession spend many $ and much time aquiring the credentials to teach, some are good at it, some are not, just like any other profession."

My response:

I don't know if you went to college, but getting a teaching credential is fairly simple and not all that expensive.

Roger Slocum wrote:

"If the San Mateo Union High School District is under funded do not blame the teachers. It is time to not only question, but also lay some blame on the districts administraters."

My response:

The SMUHSD Administrators have solved the problem. They are going to cut 60 or more jobs. Once again, they are doing their job while the teachers appear to be running around engaging in nursery school bad behavior.

Roger Slocum wrote:

"Go try the job!"

My response:

Why? I already have a job. I always thought that the portion of my tax dollars being sent to the SMUHSD were being used to pay level headed, responsible, and mature professional teachers to teach our children.

[Roger Slocum]

Bad week for schools?

[Roscoe_Beedle]

No. I cannot believe the hoopla over laying off of 12 teachers. Is this teacher cabal for real? What planet do they live on to think they should be immune to what the rest of us face everyday?

And one good thing may have come out of this nonsense. The teachers are starting to talk about the waste in the upper reaches of their administration. Something most people are convinced about. The amount of waste and feather-bedding that occurs in administrating our schools.

For that wasteful spending to stop it may take the teachers themselves to expose it and deal with it. If not for our own pocketbook then maybe for their jobs.

I bet you there are more than 12 teachers a day out for sick leave on any given day in the SMUHSD. These twelve will not make a dent in the quality of education. This is really a non-issue - period. For those that lost their jobs I sympathize. I've been there before.

[Marko]

This budgetary crisis comes at a time when the SMUHSD has been tinkering with basic systems, such as terrible seven period day idea and associated hassles. For this to come on the heels of this divisive (on a high school vs high school basis, in some ways) time is insult to injury.

The SMUHSD has become fond of what IMHO is unethical behavior...not just making "hard decisions", but truly unethical...a small example: I have a pal (yes I may be biased, but this is how it went down...I saw the letter) who was hired to replace a teacher who had become ill, and was to be paid accordingly. The term was for more than six months. The district never gave the person a signed contract, but her reliance on their promises and those of the administrators at the school were clear. Two weeks into the assignment, an ass't superintendant (quite the hatchet person, how quickly they took to their position!) sends a letter saying no, we'll pay you a daily rate as a long-term sub, and forget the benefits or CALPERS time, take it or leave it. The HS administration was incensed, but they were not going to bat for this person and use brownie points.

She left, and I'm sure they hired a less qualified but more malleable person. Or maybe they just rotated subs in daily, that'll sure hold down costs!

At any rate, this small example is endemic...

Supt Johnson runs the SMUHSD like he ran Capuchino...into the ground.

At one point, this district was second to none...Prop 13 did a number on CA public edcuation, sure, but the recent problems are of a more local and personal angle...how did things get so bad so fast?

Can Tom Mohr come back as a consultant?

[Cerwyn]

Sorry to reopen this can of worms, but for all those keeping tabs on the issue, you will already know the can is still quite open. I am an alumnus of the district as well as a current substitute teacher. I have been doing my best to keep tabs on the budget crisis since the announcement of the $3.5 million deficit.

There are some who say that no matter how much money you give a school district they are always going to need / want more. This argument however isn't Oliver Twist with his bowl of pooridge; this is about finding simply enough to go around for our current needs. What are our needs? Are teachers underpaid? Yes. Do they deserve medical benefits? Yes. San Mateo County and the surrounding area is an incredibly expensive place to live and the costs of living are constantly on the rise. Is it so unreasonable then that teachers and administrators over time should desire a pay raise? We aren't talking about huge numbers here not 20% to 30% but 2% to 3%. The teachers are not being greedy but are simply being realistic about fair compensation for their work.

In response to the budge cut several schools lost their librarians, some lost janitors. These schools didn't have a surplus of people in these positions, they had just enough, and now they have none. 1 Librarian per library should not be an unreasonable expense. Several of the teachers that were removed were replaced by substitutes, and that's where I come in.

I am currently doing the work of a full time teacher. I don't get the same benefits package, I get paid well enough for my time spent in the classroom, however I devote hours of my time at home to grading papers, creating lesson plans, and so on, and I don't get a dime for that. I am an unfair solution to a serious problem. I am all the benefits of a fully paid teacher at a fraction of the cost, and I'm not the only one.

Did you know that the median household income in San Mateo County according to the most recent census is over $65k / year? Did you also know that a mere $13 and some odd cents per household would have eliminated the entire $3.5 million budget deficit?

Yes there are certainly places where the budget can and should be trimmed. However would the cost of a movie and soda (per household, not per person) really be such a big sacrifice to ensure some of the basics such as librarians, janitors, school supplies, etc?

Yes California may be low on the totem polls as far as test scores, but our district has always been a strong one. The teachers went on strike when I was a student in this district making themselves unavailable during lunch, before and after school, and it bothered me. I do feel that it hurts students; however the students suffer by budget cuts as well. Imagine what it must be like only weeks into the year for your teacher to be replaced by a substitute, and for that substitute to be constantly uncertain of the length of their stay?

Something certainly needs to change. All the skeletons need to be brought out of the closets and the budget needs to be examined. Teachers should not have to sacrifice their salaries or their benefits in order to save librarians or janitors, while at the same time having one should not exclude the others. If teachers were asking for plasma televisions in their classrooms or limousines to carry them to district meetings, I would say they are being unreasonable. However struggling to hold on to medical benefits and a 2 or 3 percentage of their pay is not unreasonable. (Also I would like to note teachers are not the only ones affected. Classified staff members (non-certificated staff) are likewise affected by these budget cuts.)

If you believe that tax-payers are already paying enough, or even too much money. Why are we having these issues? How much do you believe a teacher should be paid? How much do you think should be spent on staff? On books? On desks? Figure it out yourself and post it up here in a budget of your own. Compare it to tax payer spending per student. If your budget is greater we need more money, if your budget is less, we need to find out where the money has gone.

[Roscoe_Beedle]

You seem to be advocating for another of these endless Tax Increases to fund our teachers. And you also seem to say if you are against a tax increase you are against teachers.
This typical Union line is what is behind this problem within the school administration. The CTA is essentially a Union. And like all Unions their only true concern is salary and benefits of its members. Please note, educating children is not on their (Union) agenda.

More layoffs may be necessary before this entire System looks at their own wasteful spending. Administrators, administrator assistants, consultants, top heavy management. Look there.

I do support your conclusion about well paid teachers. But I don't agree on increasing the taxes to acheive this. I don't think students would notice if the adminstrative offices located many miles from their school was closed for one or two days a week, or had a few less admistrative staff. And how would that closing affect a teacher in a classroom? It wouldn't. Look within the system that is where the problem lies.

[Cerwyn]

I'm not neccessarily suggesting a tax increase. I merely meant to show that the amount in question is such a pittance of tax payer money. 3.5 million sounds like a lot of money, but it's pennies to san mateo county. I am curious however exactlly how much is spent per student per year. I have seen reports suggesting as low as 5 or 6 thousand, and as high as 8 to 10.

I think the district is our biggest weakness. I think that whatever the agreed spending is, that money should follow that student. For example:

Johnny Doe: $8,000 /year

We know that J.D. will have 2 semesters of 6 periods each (he doesn't partake of this silly 7th period and wastes it as do so many other students). So 12 teachers each get a slice of J.D.'s money. However each teacher may have around 300 students / year. 5 periods each x 30 students per period x 2 semesters. So we decide how much a teacher should be paid and 1 300th of that is subtracted from each student. Let's assume a teacher with benefits ammounts to 60k. Probably higher than it really is, but let's assume. So, 1 /300th of that is $200. (By the way, if I fail any of my math, forive me. It is not my stong point.) We already know that J.D. has 12 teachers, so $2400 will go to teachers' salaries.

Let us assume now that J.D. goes to a school with 1500 students. Let us assume now that the school is run by at least 40 other staff members ranging from janitors to the principal whose job it is to attend to then eeds of every student. Let us assume that their median cost is also $60,000 / year. That is a cost of $40 per student per year.

The district said when working out their budget that I believe (and someone correct me if I'm wrong) that 80% of their spending was on salaries. Well clearly if J.D.'s portion if $2440...heck, even let's double that and assume every one I mentioned is getting twice as much, $4880...that still leaves plenty of money left over to go towrads everything else. Anywhere from $1,000 to $5,000 per student, or $1,500,000 to $7,500,000 for J.D.'s school per year.

I think that the district has failed the students, and the politics that come from it are breaking down the school system. I agree that the time teachers spend as a union battling for their paychecks would be better spent providing for students, however I feel with the way things are now that fight is neccessary for their costs of living.

If money followed students then I think a fairness would be achieved for everyone. Suddenly school size, location, none of it would matter, since each would get an equal amount of funds for every student educated within. Then it would be up to each school's administration to decide how best to break up the funds. Sure there may still be quarrels between departments, but I think it's far better than the way things are now.

[Roscoe_Beedle]

Yes your ideas are vaild. But you still seem to avoid the over burdensome and top heavy Administration. That is where the waste is. And why don't the teachers expose this nonsense?

I used to tutor a few students here locally. And let me tell you, nothing they were learning was that different than what was taught 35 years ago. So why all the consultants, admininstartors, experts, and staff to teach something that has been taught the same for so many years? Algebra today is the same as algebra 100 years ago - not one equation has changed. Nor has reading and writing skills. Yet every year we must spend more and more disporportional to the size of the classroom.

My take on it is simple: It takes Government $150.00 to deliver $100 of services. That is the ingrained problem. More taxes will not change this inefficent delivery of resource, only make it more expensive.

And thank God for those required tests. It forces the whole enterprise to account for the time they have with these students. Finally we can judge the effectiveness in some small way.

[Nicola]

Yes your ideas are vaild. But you still seem to avoid the over burdensome and top heavy Administration. That is where the waste is. And why don't the teachers expose this nonsense?

I used to tutor a few students here locally. And let me tell you, nothing they were learning was that different than what was taught 35 years ago. So why all the consultants, admininstartors, experts, and staff to teach something that has been taught the same for so many years? Algebra today is the same as algebra 100 years ago - not one equation has changed. Nor has reading and writing skills. Yet every year we must spend more and more disporportional to the size of the classroom.

My take on it is simple: It takes Government $150.00 to deliver $100 of services. That is the ingrained problem. More taxes will not change this inefficent delivery of resource, only make it more expensive.

And thank God for those required tests. It forces the whole enterprise to account for the time they have with these students. Finally we can judge the effectiveness in some small way.

Yes, clean up the top heavy administration and offer a decent wage to teachers based on their teaching ability not tenure. In my school life I can only remember 3 teachers that made a difference, and I've never forgotten them for their contribution to me.