Slog
News & ArtsWednesday, September 22, 2010
City / Election Teachers Union Votes to Support School Levy
Posted by Riya Bhattacharjee on Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 2:03 PM
The local teachers union, the Seattle Education Association, voted this week to endorse the $48.2 million schools operations levy that will be on the November ballot—despite some who say it's a bad idea.
Seattle voters already approved a $700 million schools levy earlier this year. However, state budget cuts to education prompted legislators lift the levy lid so that school districts could ask voters for money once again. "Education in Washington state is underfunded," said SEA President Olga Addae when asked why the union supports the levy. "The state has failed to do its paramount duty. Levies are the only way to bring money back into the schools, to support our children."
Nineteen million dollars from the levy, if passed in November, would fund stipends and one percent-increases in teacher pay in the second and third year of a new three-year teachers' contract. "Our increases are minuscule compared to the money gong to support the programs that will be cut next year due to the state budget crisis," Addae said. The district estimates that $23 million will be used toward restoring programs and services over the next few years. About $6 million will go toward new text books and classroom materials.
But the Committee for Responsible Education Spending, which is campaigning against the levy, argues that the bulk of the money will not see the light of a classroom. "Less than half the levy will go toward offsetting costs," said Dorothy Neville, a committee member. "We need to change the district's culture of spending and wanting everything gold-plated. The administration needs to seriously face the cuts."
2
The disconnect between the cost of college and the cost of primary schools continues to amaze me. We seem to accept that college costs triple what it did 20 years ago, but refuse to accept that primary school costs have risen too.
The "why" for both is the same: insurance rates. Liability & health care for staff being at the top of the list. Continue to ignore those problems, and an education will indeed be a luxury item.
The "why" for both is the same: insurance rates. Liability & health care for staff being at the top of the list. Continue to ignore those problems, and an education will indeed be a luxury item.
3
I would like for the Committee for Responsible Education to please offer one example of a gold-plated item purchased by the school district with public funds.
5
Never forget that the Seattle school levy is a Property Tax, and thereby does NOT fall heavily on the poor, as opposed to the King County Prop 1 which is a SALES tax increase that will fall most heavily on the poor.
@3 I hear they bought textbooks. Have you ever bought those? I mean, just an Accounting 202 textbook is $120 retail or about $64 on half dot com.
@3 I hear they bought textbooks. Have you ever bought those? I mean, just an Accounting 202 textbook is $120 retail or about $64 on half dot com.
6
I'm sick of paying so much taxes for schools especially when kids turn out stupid and snotty. Why does it cost sooooo much to teach the basics?
9
Besides the superintendent -- who makes more than the governor yet had three dings in the audit, two violations of credit card use and an ethics violation for not disclosing she's on the board of directors of the company that produces the MAP software she got the district to purchase (ongoing cost of software and peripherals $5 million plus for 6 years). Yet she still got her contract renewed.
There's the John Stanford Center for Educational Excellence which cost a fortune. And the one hundred million dollar remodel of Garfield (which reduced capacity, something the principal warned against -- see what's happening there?) which included top of the line lights and fixtures. Original budget for the remodel was $48M. And the Denny rebuild which undid millions of dollars of Sealth remodel they had just finished.
There's the expensive NTN software for their new Cleveland STEM program. Yet NTN schools have terrible test scores, terrible graduation rates. And the district told Board and citizens that the majority of the NTN schools were STEM, yet the truth is only 6 out of 41 are. So another expense that won't deliver as promised.
There's the uber expensive unnecessary Payroll software they got in 2007, yet people are routinely paid wrong. Many have been overpaid, tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars. June 2008 district asserted they fixed the problems and all was well. Yet the latest audit shows repeated problems. So they sent the staff to Chicago for training! Headquarters is supposed to have a moratorium on travel.
Also, relating to the 20 audit findings, the CFO reports that he just got back from a trip to Houston to learn how that school district runs. What about the travel moratorium? What about phone conferencing? What about the Western Washington districts that run well and do not get audit findings?
And those are just the first things that came to me. Give me some time and the list would go on and on.
More...
There's the John Stanford Center for Educational Excellence which cost a fortune. And the one hundred million dollar remodel of Garfield (which reduced capacity, something the principal warned against -- see what's happening there?) which included top of the line lights and fixtures. Original budget for the remodel was $48M. And the Denny rebuild which undid millions of dollars of Sealth remodel they had just finished.
There's the expensive NTN software for their new Cleveland STEM program. Yet NTN schools have terrible test scores, terrible graduation rates. And the district told Board and citizens that the majority of the NTN schools were STEM, yet the truth is only 6 out of 41 are. So another expense that won't deliver as promised.
There's the uber expensive unnecessary Payroll software they got in 2007, yet people are routinely paid wrong. Many have been overpaid, tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars. June 2008 district asserted they fixed the problems and all was well. Yet the latest audit shows repeated problems. So they sent the staff to Chicago for training! Headquarters is supposed to have a moratorium on travel.
Also, relating to the 20 audit findings, the CFO reports that he just got back from a trip to Houston to learn how that school district runs. What about the travel moratorium? What about phone conferencing? What about the Western Washington districts that run well and do not get audit findings?
And those are just the first things that came to me. Give me some time and the list would go on and on.
10
The salary increases are, as Olga says, miniscule compared to the whole levy. However, the entire package of funding obligations related to the Teachers Contract is $19M. All of this is new spending. Maybe some of it is good new spending, but it is new spending, restricting the amount available to offset any cuts programs have already faced.
Additionally, while the district claims there is still $23 M available to offset cuts, the information at the SEA meeting was different. The breakdown of levy at the meeting included $8.85M of the levy reserved to fund the obligations of the teachers contract for year four. Unless the teachers give up the raises and other items in this contract, the annual obligation by year four will cost $10M.
So actually, there would be only $14M available, if the levy passes, to offset any cuts. That's less than a third of the whole levy. Why did the district promise new spending -- which includes future expense obligations -- using a one-time emergency source of funding?
Additionally, while the district claims there is still $23 M available to offset cuts, the information at the SEA meeting was different. The breakdown of levy at the meeting included $8.85M of the levy reserved to fund the obligations of the teachers contract for year four. Unless the teachers give up the raises and other items in this contract, the annual obligation by year four will cost $10M.
So actually, there would be only $14M available, if the levy passes, to offset any cuts. That's less than a third of the whole levy. Why did the district promise new spending -- which includes future expense obligations -- using a one-time emergency source of funding?
11
Done, Proteus. The Superintendent spent $7,000 on a retirement party for 70 people complete with a carving station, live music and $100 gift certificates. The State Auditor asked the Attorney General's office their opinion and the AG's office said without district policies on such spending, it would be considered "gifting of public funds."
I ran an after-school chess club when my sons were little and that kind of money would have funded about 3 of them.
Another gold-plated special? Look no further than the rebuilt of Garfield whose original budget was $60M and soared to about $120M. But hey, wait for the State Auditor's report on that one and read about it for yourself.
The Superintendent makes $350,000, more than the LA superintendent and NYC superintendent.
The district, when it did its math adoption (and is now doing a science curriculum alignment) spent $750,000 for a consultant to do it. So that $6M for textbooks likely includes consulting fees.
Over 100 people in the district make over $100,000. Nice work if you can get it.
The headquarters, where they consolidated all the administration workers because it was going to save money, is an albatross around our necks and we are paying millions in service debt to pay it off.
The bottom line is that this levy is NOT going into the classroom. It will not restore school budgets that were cut nor will not lower class size (and for some kindergartens, that size is running about 28-30 but hey, they're little, right?).
It's like Mom and apple pie, these school levies. The problem is that this district is NOT being transparent and accountable with the money. Even the Times, in a editorial column in August, said they should. The State Audit report on the district?
"The District's Board and Management have placed public resources at risk."
So you give money to people who are not managing it well and throw themselves expensive parties? It's ridiculous. Voting no on this levy will get their attention and get that money better track and back into the schools where it BELONGS.
More...
I ran an after-school chess club when my sons were little and that kind of money would have funded about 3 of them.
Another gold-plated special? Look no further than the rebuilt of Garfield whose original budget was $60M and soared to about $120M. But hey, wait for the State Auditor's report on that one and read about it for yourself.
The Superintendent makes $350,000, more than the LA superintendent and NYC superintendent.
The district, when it did its math adoption (and is now doing a science curriculum alignment) spent $750,000 for a consultant to do it. So that $6M for textbooks likely includes consulting fees.
Over 100 people in the district make over $100,000. Nice work if you can get it.
The headquarters, where they consolidated all the administration workers because it was going to save money, is an albatross around our necks and we are paying millions in service debt to pay it off.
The bottom line is that this levy is NOT going into the classroom. It will not restore school budgets that were cut nor will not lower class size (and for some kindergartens, that size is running about 28-30 but hey, they're little, right?).
It's like Mom and apple pie, these school levies. The problem is that this district is NOT being transparent and accountable with the money. Even the Times, in a editorial column in August, said they should. The State Audit report on the district?
"The District's Board and Management have placed public resources at risk."
So you give money to people who are not managing it well and throw themselves expensive parties? It's ridiculous. Voting no on this levy will get their attention and get that money better track and back into the schools where it BELONGS.
12
http://www.kuow.org/program.php?id=20066
"school districts don't want the lottery to advertise that fact because they worry voters will stop supporting levies. So now, under a new law, lottery proceeds will instead go to higher education in Washington."
After hearing this I promised myself I will never again vote for a school levy. If they need money they ought to be accepting any money they can get.
"school districts don't want the lottery to advertise that fact because they worry voters will stop supporting levies. So now, under a new law, lottery proceeds will instead go to higher education in Washington."
After hearing this I promised myself I will never again vote for a school levy. If they need money they ought to be accepting any money they can get.
13
I guess one part I have trouble with is saying that the state has failed to do its paramount duty, which is funding education, but concluding that the solution to that transgression is asking citizens to pony up more money to make up for that. Isn't that sort of like rewarding the state for failing to fulfill its paramount duty?
14
@5 "They bought textbooks"
Nope. There is NO budget line item for textbooks.
And my daughter is in 5th grade, and the only textbooks I've seen her with in all this time are the one the PTA buys.
HOWEVER, this seems to be a matter of the district's bizarre pedagogy choices, rather than a finacial matter... but either way, whatever they are spending money on, it ain't textbooks.
PS--The levy includes an item to buy high school science textbooks. The district is starting the process of selecting uniform science curricula for high school. Here's hoping they hold off on that purchase--I can just see them buying textbooks, then deciding they are going to use another curriculum and need to buy more. Or, just as likely, they will buy textbooks and the entire selection process will be channeled to "we just bought these textbooks, so no matter what the selection committee or anyone else thinks, this had better be the decision."
Sigh. When did Catholic school become so expensive?
Nope. There is NO budget line item for textbooks.
And my daughter is in 5th grade, and the only textbooks I've seen her with in all this time are the one the PTA buys.
HOWEVER, this seems to be a matter of the district's bizarre pedagogy choices, rather than a finacial matter... but either way, whatever they are spending money on, it ain't textbooks.
PS--The levy includes an item to buy high school science textbooks. The district is starting the process of selecting uniform science curricula for high school. Here's hoping they hold off on that purchase--I can just see them buying textbooks, then deciding they are going to use another curriculum and need to buy more. Or, just as likely, they will buy textbooks and the entire selection process will be channeled to "we just bought these textbooks, so no matter what the selection committee or anyone else thinks, this had better be the decision."
Sigh. When did Catholic school become so expensive?
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
NYC Man Ticketed for Not Riding in the Bike Lane by Jonathan Golob
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (14) RSS