Should CSD Raise the Millage Rate Instead of Furlough Teachers?
Decatur Metro | March 18, 2010An AJC article from late yesterday – recaping the Decatur School Board budget meeting on Tuesday – quotes one Decatur resident upset that the Board isn’t considering raising the millage rate (read: raising taxes) instead of furloughing teachers for three days in the coming school year. In a comment last night, Karass agreed.
I’d like to get an unofficial read on this again, because when I asked at the end of 2008, 70% of those responding to a DM poll had some concern about tax levels in the city. And things weren’t looking all that bad budget-wise at that point.
Furloughing teachers shouldn’t even be on the menu. Not here. Not anywhere in Georgia. This state is already dead last in education. Children deserve better. If you think increased taxes are a burden, try living with a reduced teacher’s salary.
Raising taxes is not the answer! How can we raise taxes when families are already struggling to make ends meet? Maybe, just maybe, we can get some elected officials that can manage our tax money better. What about the teachers living in the City of Decatur? Either way, they lose! Raise taxes or furlough days, either way their families lose income. And by the way, I will be living with a reduced teacher’s salary next year and hopefully we will make ends meet or have to move out of the City of Decatur!
Raising millage on a depreciating home value is neutral. The amount written on the check should be about the same, not an increased burden.
Ironically, education performance is one of the principal factors for raising your home value. Cutting education investment is the sign of a failing society (or at least one that is trying to fail).
My home value is not depreciating, it is just not currently appreciating at the rate that it was for a few years (or at all, probably). I have cheerfully supported our school system and will continue to do so. But there is no more blood to be gotten from this stone.
I guess I am one of the lucky ones because my home has not depreciated. I think that many homes in Decatur have not depreciated.
Raising millage on a depreciating home value is neutral. The amount written on the check should be about the same, not an increased burden.
_____________________
If you are paying the same tax on a house that is worth less, that’s not neutral. It is a tax increase. You’re paying a higher percentage of your home value in taxes than you were before. If a house that was once worth $400,000 drops to $5,000, and your property taxes stay the same, how is that neutral? As a percentage of home value, it is a massive effective increase.
“Ironically, education performance is one of the principal factors for raising your home value.”
In normal times, this may well be true. But we happen to be in the midst of a housing crisis that has nothing to do with education. Housing prices have fallen everywhere, not just in cities with lousy schools.
“Cutting education investment is the sign of a failing society (or at least one that is trying to fail).”
Or one that is simply running out of money.
Perhaps the question should be: what services in particular should we cut? How specifically could officials manage our tax money better? I am not asking these questions sarcastically – really, I know very little about the local budget – where is the waste?
Writer and DN both make excellent points.
Tax question: Is it possible in these type of situation if some sort of tax, fee, or hidden taxes are implemented in case of emergencies or whatever really,
would it be possible to write it into law or charter that there is a hard and firm expiration date, and that source of funding is not renewable or shiftable?
A mandate written into law or whatever document that authorized the increase making it basically illegal to continue to collect said “tax” after x date?
We’ll give you this money for 3 years which would temporarily solve the problem, in the meantime fix the problem and project future needs for the problem. And you can’t keep getting money from this particular place for this particular thing because it would violate law to do so?
The temporary increases that are usually in effect are really never temporary it seems.
Maybe people wouldn’t be so opposed if they knew whatever increase wasn’t permanent (for real this time), and the crisis is still averted.
I realize how i have worded this was extremely over simplistic.
According to the article the furlough will save $345,000 out of a revenue drop of $1.7 million, mostly from state cuts, so there will be more belt-tightening. State revenue is hurting bad, and something has to give.
When I look at the fact that Decatur school taxes are about the same as DeK’s school taxes, and I see the sort of brutal cuts DeK Schools are having to make, I’m inclined to think that CSD is doing relatively well in tough times. And since our teachers do so much on modest pay, I’d be inclined to opt for the tax. Or, hey: maybe we could hold a referendum on reallocating the cemetery renovation bond money. Tombstones or teachers?
This seems like a pretty paltry sum to save by furloughing teachers. I know I’m going to sound like a broken record, but during the budget cut discussions last year, the one item that nearly everyone could live without was transportation! CSD currently spends in the neighborhood of $600K on transportation. That is down from $800K! How ’bout we cut that in half (or more) and don’t furlough teachers? My guess is there is a lot more belt tightening that can happen over at Westchester. I appreciate all these folks do for our kids, but I more appreciate what teachers and paraprofessionals and cafeteria workers & janitors do for our kids. That is where I want my tax money to go. $150 won’t break my bank, but before I would agree to that, I’d need to see A LOT fewer people at Central Office.
*BINGO*
I agree! I know I’ve spoken to the board on this issue. I would love for more people to do so as well. The board could make the “no bus service” radius around each school larger, say 2 miles instead of the one mile? currently used and eliminate a large portion of the busing. Many of us use the bus simply because it rolls by our homes anyway. It’s certainly not a necessity. We can coordinate with our neighbors, WALK AND ROLL. We now have this great program and spend much more on transportation than we had in the past. ( Correct me if I’m wrong here.) CSD could also provide service for families within the the chosen “no bus service” radius and charge a user fee. This is done in many municipalities. Of course, anyone not meeting a predetermined income level could also be given free bus service. Just a thought.
Hmmm. I never thought of charging a reasonable fee for bus service with no charge for families below a certain income. Bus service is a tremendous help for two-career families and families with kids in multiple CSD schools so I’d hate to lose it altogether. But charging a reasonable fee might be a good way to keep it.
That actually sounds worth exploring
That’s a great idea! Depending on how many kids ride the bus, it costs between $300 and $500 per child per year at our current rates. Does that seem like a reasonable rate? $50/month or so?
Did you know that different buses serve the middle school and the high school? Essentially, two buses are running the exact same route at the exact same time each day because the school system believes that middle and high school kids can’t ride the same bus. I wonder what that means for my family when my oldest is in high school. Will one of them have to move out? Do I get to choose who moves out? Please!
Really, though, couldn’t they just put an extra adult on the bus as a monitor and have assigned seats with the students separated by age? I feel certain that paying a bus monitor for an hour a day would be way cheaper than running a whole other bus.
Maybe what you want is to pay a bus non-mother–one of us curmudgeonly but lovable old childless taxpayers who generally like young people and put up with no crap!
From the article: “The board would have to raise Decatur’s property taxes by .4 mills to eliminate the teacher furloughs, which would mean about an extra $150 a year for [citizen who addressed the board]‘s family.”
Hell yes I would pay another $150 in taxes per year to save our teachers from furloughs.
The problem is that $150 is a lot to some people and people on fixed budgets might not be able to afford this. Also, when does raising taxes stop. We are already taxed on almost everything we do on a daily basis. Taxes can’t keep going up if saleries are declining or staying the same.
If you look at the budget proposal the FIVE new positions created cost about the same amount of money being “saved” by furloughing, salary decreases, etc, of employees…many of who live in the city.
I hate having to pay the school taxes. Alas, that’s because I don’t nor ever will have kids.
Thank you, thank you, thank you for paying school taxes. I have a single friend with no children or plans for them who has lived here for years paying school taxes and I thank her all the time. In return, we’ll keep our well-educated kids out of trouble that would bother you!
One thing all of us should realize is that there are many benefits public schools offer even to folks who do not have offspring in schools. In the same way, even if you do not own a car, you benefit from living in a society that has roads (since the prices of goods fall if transportation is more efficient, etc). Presumably you like living in a society populated by folks who know how to read and write, can do basic math and have at least basic reasoning capabilities, because having a well-educated populace raises not only our economic productivity, but many non-economic aspects of our communal life as well.
Now, how do we best strike the balance between a well-educated populace and a balanced budget – that is another topic. But if we start from the assumption that good schools make all of us better off, we might approach the funding question with a different attitude.
As a happily child-free person, I completely agree, BB. It’s the reason I don’t mind paying the taxes.
“But if we start from the assumption that good schools make all of us better off, we might approach the funding question with a different attitude.”
With all due respect, BB, your post strikes me as patronizing. As a single taxpayer who has no children and never will, I have actively supported CSD–attending school board meetings, corresponding with school board members, and supporting PTAs–and have never groused about paying high taxes to support good schools…for all the reasons that you mention. In general, I believe that when it comes to municipal services you get what you pay for. But many of us simply cannot afford for the millage rate to go up. As TeeRuss pointed out, it’s early in the game, and this is not a short-term crisis. What do we do next year, when state revenues fall even shorter?
Sorry it sounded patronizing, but I was responding to a person who wished not to pay taxes for schools, and I was merely trying to re-frame the issue. Thanks for being so interested in the school system even when you are not a direct beneficiary. And I wasn’t taking a position on the millage increase – I was merely trying to say that the debate will proceed very differently if one appreciates the benefits of public schools, which you certainly do. I now leave the debate to more able debaters.
BB, I am so interested in the public schools precisely because I AM a direct beneficiary. You seem to be assuming that people who wouldn’t support a millage rate increase don’t “appreciate the benefits of public schools.” Believe me, this debate is going to proceed with many people on both sides of the tax issue who deeply appreciate our school system and actively support it.
smalltowngal, I am not arguing with you. I was responding, like I said, to someone who said they didn’t want to pay taxes for schools because they don’t have kids. I believe that there are excellent points to be made about the millage hike on both sides, and that there are people on both sides who care about having good schools. I am merely trying to say that this debate should take for granted that schools are goods for society as a whole (which you agree with, but the commenter to whom I was responding does not).
I know exactly what you mean Joe.
I hate to pay federal taxes Alas, that’s because I don’t nor ever will get to steer an aircraft carrier. Why should I help pay for it?
Joe, I hope that when you retire, my kid’s tax dollars aren’t used to support any senior services you receive. Quid pro quo
If a city or county or state is having trouble with their budget, that’s a problem that should be shared by all its citizens, as the government’s role is to serve all the citizens. When a city or county or state employee is furloughed for many days, that individual is giving up hundreds of dollars in pay, which is like an unfair tax riding on the backs of the employees.
Well the government isn’t paying me for not working. Does that mean I am paying a back-door “tax” too?
This sounds kind of mean-spirited, DEM. We’re talking about real people who earn low wages because they want to help children develop into responsible adults. They aren’t “not working.” They are, in general, working longer hours than they should, and are paid far below their skill level. And we’re talking about paying them even less. So it is a hardship for them, and it would be good of us to remember that and treat them respectfully even when they aren’t listening.
the AJC article did not mention the five new positions being creating alongside the furlougs. It’s dissapointing to me that people in this community seem to forget that we all have varying incomes in this city, and 150 may just be 150 to some people, but for others it is a stretch
We would pay the tax gladly for all the reasons mentioned above. But also agree with those who are concerned about folks with limited incomes—wonder if a tax could not only be term-limited but also only apply to folks over the median level of household income prorated for number of family members. Also agree that we need to see major belt-tightening in Central Office vs at the front-lines of education (teachers and paraprofessionals). In this crisis period, the focus needs to be on where staff are most needed not on succession planning or what would make life easiest for Central Office.
We are in the first or second inning of a new era of austerity in government. There are going to be a lot of difficult and unpopular choices made by state and local governments in the near and medium term. The massive economic debt bubble that is unwinding will leave a lot of governments in or near bankruptcy, as their revenues have imploded.
I say this because people need to understand the larger, indeed global context of what is happening here in Decatur. We might cut a couple of para pros or furlough teachers by 3 days or kill a website redesign plan, and people will complain. But then look at DeKalb County. Or California. In relation to a lot of other states or municipalities we’ve got it good.
So we need to make the right cuts and accept certain tradeoffs, while also understanding that doing so does not impact our competitiveness vs. many/most other localities.
The trick is in the right cuts–they need to be the cuts with the least negative impact on students and the most fair to all staff in CSD so morale is kept as high as possible given the economic realities. DeKalb County Schools blew it with a raise at the top at the same time as furloughs and cuts on the front-line. Anyone who has been a manager or director knows how wonderful it is to have great staff assisting you and so we all understand the motivation to fill Central Office positions with great folks. But the front-line where the students are must be the highest priority.
The real trick is making cuts that EVERYONE thinks are the “right” ones.
Hmmm. Does this call for a poll?
Speaking of the poll…
So far it seems like a majority of commenters want to raise taxes, but the silent majority – represented by the poll – is 2 to 1 in favor of cutting services.
Only 1.64 to 1 but who is counting! I’ve got a deal–how about the folks who vote yes to increase taxes get to decide exactly where the service cuts will be. That way we all win!
Ooooh. The ratio is down to 1.58 to 1. I think the willing-to-pay-more-tax-if-schools-need-it crowd was so aborbed in commenting that they overlooked the poll! Your comment has resulted in a shift in voting! And who says poll results don’t affect whether and how people vote?!
“who says poll results don’t affect whether and how people vote?!”
Of course they do! As soon as I read your post, I went and voted again! (sorry, I couldn’t resist)
Hmm…you shouldn’t be able to do that without a bit of effort.
No more effort the second time than the first time. I clicked on my choice and then clicked ‘vote’. Sorry I sabotaged the poll, but I wanted to make the point.
Just occurred to me why it might have been so easy. I did re-boot my system after lunch (thank you, PowerPoint 2007). I voted the first time this morning.
The point that the poll could be sabotaged?
It’s true that you can revote after rebooting because I did it too.
Yes, the point that the poll could be manipulated. I was also, I admit, taking a potshot at Karass for appearing to take it so seriously when it’s subject to so many kinds of skewing as to be virtually meaningless. Sorry, these free online “polls” are a personal pet peeve of mine.
Who me, dead serious? By the way, the ratio is now at 1.53 to 1. If plotted, a linear trend exists that in 3.3 person-hours ought to lead to a clear landslide for increasing taxes, moving the 4/5 Academy to the centrally-located Atlanta Bread Company site, and building a new gym for College Heights.
If only I actually started asserting that they accurately reflected the views of Decatur…then I bet you’d really be peeved.
Crappy polls are just another way to gauge reader sentiment, nothing more. Oh and they serve to offset all us loudmouths a bit.
Ratio is now 1.43 to 1 and I promise I only revoted once to test the system.
Why does it come to more tax or lower wages? Wake up Decatur, our system just FLAT OUT SPENDS TO MUCH! Remember just a month or so ago they bought IPod touches for the classrooms? Were still planning the ‘state of the art’ building? Remember the smart boards? The teachers deserve every penny they get and us, as tax payers, deserve smarter spending. Our school system gets plenty of money to run and pay for good teachers, but for some reason new gyms and gadgets get the money? I know that this is totally not Decatur PC, but I smell corruption and contracts that should not happen.
The ipod touches were purchased with a grant from the DOE. Most if not all smart boards are purchased with independent fundraising from PTAs and PTOs.
So there is extra grant money for gadgets but not the teachers? Almost every kid in Decatur has a Ipod touch and a computer at home. Technology is fine, but happy teacher is WAY better.
Looney, Your post made go back to reread some articles about that CSD Apple deal. I think introducing technology into learning can be a powerful agent for education.
but… according to DM, CSD bought 124 apple computers at $10,000 each! Oh I’m mistaken, CSD RENTED 124 computers at $10,000 each! I buy computers in the private sector and I have to really spec out a monster to get to $10,000 and that comes with a three year warranty and my company actually owns it and amortizes it. Where are all these awsome computers that CSD rented? Teach the kids to develop and maintain the city’s website with these server-class beasts.
Dang, I shouldn’t post when I’m tired.
Make that a fairly reasonable $1,000 per computer.
If only I had a better education….
Georgia is near the bottom of tax burden on its residents. Decatur is perhaps higher in tax burden than many areas of Georgia but in the national ratings, probably still way lower. Look, taxes support the functioning of organizations that benefit all of us. Good public schools create better informed citizens than poor public schools. It is absolutely within bounds to say that many of these tax supported organizations are less efficient than we would like, but it seems like a poor rationale to suggest that until some always higher level of efficiency is reached, that we should not increase funding. Unfortunately suggesting that government does useful things and greater government funding is a net benefit somehow labels one a socialist. So be it. Money is occasionally wasted. It happens. It is not general purpose go-to excuse to underfund necessary government functions. Act to reduce waste but also know that you cannot eliminate it. Also keep in mind that there is ample waste in the private sector (but I’ll leave that aside).
Now, I also believe that it is very important that we as a community ensure that at the same time we increase taxes, that we commit to an economically diverse community where many of our civil servants and other workers can afford to enjoy the benefits of our well funded and functioning public schools and other government functions. I am not sure of the best way to do this but obviously this means some way of making the net tax assessments more progressive.
**BINGO**
You wanna hit the VFW for some bingo later gibs?
**BIG NO**
Thanks though.
Hmmmm… I think that there are ways to cut costs without impacting teachers or raising taxes. For instance, I like MAP testing, but I like fully paid teachers more. I like administrators, but I like fully paid teachers more. I like all these educational frameworks, but I like fully paid teachers more. I like computers at school, but I like fully paid teachers more.
Frankly, I’d even rather see the school year (for everyone – kids and teachers) cut by a day than teachers cut by three days. Start school on Tuesday August 3rd instead of Monday the 2nd. My guess is that nothing meaningful would be lost that week if just one of the days were missed.
Exactly!
Decatur can’t afford to pay its teachers because it is spending $400,000 on construction instead of waiting for the next SPLOST to pass.
I actually like the design of Fifth Avenue very much, but I don’t think it should be built until the school system can afford it.
RachelF,
Your so right! I went to a nice little private school and we used trailers for some classes and never thought anything of it.
How come no one has mentioned that at the same time we need to consider a tax increase for CSD, the City (government) is asking if we’d like a tax increase to re-do the Rec. etc. in a ‘real’ poll on the City’s web site? I’m sorry, at my house we’re already enjoying mandated furlough days and increased insurance premiums and co-pays, and I’m feeling a little besieged. I’m not sure some people are experiencing the same ‘reality’ as others.
Oddly, no one ever does.
I appreciate all the support for teachers I’ve read here. I feel thankful to work for CSD, especially compared to friends in nearby systems. As for fluff at the top- the school administration is already very lean. The central office staff is extremely competent and helps make my teaching job much easier. Are there specific admin/central office jobs that you think are unnecessary or is everyone just repeating a typical complaint that may not apply?
And yes, I think the burden should be shared by the whole community, not put on the backs of teachers and staff. I’m grateful to have a job but my husband lost his. Now this? We are already feeling the hurt- just like everyone else. Can we share the pain?
Moving a fantastic principal from Renfroe to a communications position in Central Offic is the question on my mind. Glad for the promotion form him personally but not happy that this is means that a prinicipal level salary has been added to Central Office. Realize that the communications position was vacant but we need teachers, paraprofessionals, and principals more.
Making room for the possibility that it might not have been the BEST move to make, knowing what we know NOW…..would Karass or anyone else be willing to stipulate that redeploying the Renfroe principal to communications gig was done in response to a long-term, relentless barrage of criticism and demands for better communication from CSD? It seems like ever since that was announced, we’ve heard a relentless barrage of criticism for it. I’m genuinely puzzled.
Speaking only for myself, what I wanted to see in the “more communication” arena was simply more stuff coming out of Dr. Edwards’ and the school board members’ mouths. At all school board meetings, they literally sit there and stare at you while you talk at the podium and there is no response to what you’ve said. My “more communication” cohorts and I were pleased with the new forum-style meeting before the meeting. I’m not sure putting a nice face between us and Dr. Edwards is the answer we were looking for.
Let me remind you: I speak only for myself. The Bruce Roaden thing was unexpected and IMHO, unnecessary.
The way to respond to a barrage of questions and concerns to the Board and Superintendent is to respond to them thoughtfully and thoroughly, not hire someone else to do it for you. If there’s a barrage and several districts that overwhelmingly voted against incumbents, it’s not just a few folks with concerns.
Am reconsidering my above post as too snippy plus obvious. I like my response on the New 4/5 Plans thread better: “No question that a communications position in Central Office would be useful; it’s just a question of whether it should be prioritized over teacher salary reductions (furloughs), number of instructional days, and any staff or program cuts. If a tax increase, or bus transportation cuts, or some other mechanism was available to prevent furloughs, length of school year cuts, and staff or program cuts, filling high salary positions in Central Office would be more defensible.”
In an ideal world, CSD would be able to fill all the positions necessary to do its job well. The ideal world is gone and may not be back for another 10-30 years based on the last serious U.S. recession/depression. I am willing to trade trailers, frustrating communication with CSD Central Office, less bus transportation, and higher taxes for good teachers, adequate class sizes, and adequate paraprofessional support.
As you well know, I have no dogs in this CSD back-and-forth and often feel the wrath from both sides…but I have to admit that the argument that the CSD admin is too top heavy is beginning to wear a bit on me when repeated time and again without specifics.
So a couple questions of clarification for the anti-Westchesters: What positions would you eliminate and why? And how can you be so confident in your positions when you don’t work there day in and day out?
Can’t speak for others but I haven’t ever claimed that CSD is top-heavy. I’m actually a tax-and-spend liberal that would give the schools as much as they really need. I just prioritize cuts at the top vs cuts at the frontline.
First, let me say, ‘thank you, Teach.’ CSD has exceptional teachers and I’m constantly impressed by what you guys do every day.
On to specific positions. CSD has something like a $20-30M budget, right? We have four finance positions, Director of Finance, Sr. Accountant, Payroll Specialist & AP Specialist. I worked in different accounting departments for quite a few years and this seems excessive. Unlike when I started working, most daily accounting functions are done with a few clicks of the mouse. Maybe I’m wrong and they are all just swamped all day, but it seems a bit much to me.
I’d second Karass’s comment as well.
Those couple of positions should well cover the proposed furlough days/tax increase.
Mr. FixIt is right on, too. The MAP testing, which I’m sure is a wonderful tool for teachers in some cases, costs $500K per year.
Let’s see, in a couple of days, we’ve managed to slash over $1M from the budget. Why can’t our finance director & superintendent do the same?
Hope you all with great ideas can show up at the next board meeting.
BTW, to echo what Glock said, my friends in Nutley, NJ, a “small town” near a big city that reminds me so much of Decatur, own a microscopic house and pay five-digit taxes. I would definitely pay more taxes to get better schools.
Homeowners, who carry most of the school tax burden, already didn’t get the homeowners tax relief last year. Some of us are struggling already to pay for the luxury of living in Decatur. I think the school is a great public school and our teachers need to feel rewarded by being paid a fair pay, but there is waste and that is where the money should come from.
You want diversity or just upper class and subsidized housing? That is where we are heading.
IMHO, they just hold those to make us feel like we have a say. They do that they want.
May not be valid comparison unless NJ school taxes are the same percentage of total local taxes as here in Decatur.
May be that much of that high tax bill goes for services other than schools. Up North, costs related to snow removal and road maintenance are a large component of local taxes.
Truth is, if we push to raise the local millage to bail out the system, we are contributing to the legislature’s efforts to push more and more financial responsibility for schools to the local level, as has been happening for several years now. Better to lobby for changes in our statewide revenue stream, because that is where the real problem is. We more than pay our fair share locally.
Speaking as one who has already had 19 furlough days, I can’t afford more property taxes…
Why Decatur Metro,me thinks you may be feeling a little “just cranky” today. ( Nothing to do with you Just Cranky, I just love your name and wanted to use it !)
I’m surprised your referred to some of us as anti-Westchester. It’s very unlike you. I actually love Westchester. I think it’s a great school! Seriously, if you’re referring to those of us who may not drink the CSD Koolaid frequently enough, I’d just like to say that I am not anti- anything. Like almost everyone else I know who may come across as anti you know who, we work very hard on their behalf as well.
I have very little day in day out knowledge of the staffing of the CSD central office positions, top heavy or otherwise. (I really didn’t think that was a requirement for commenting on most subjects posted here.) As far as Bruce’s new position goes, I know I was never hoping for a new position to “handle” folks seeking to be heard or more importantly to “handle” our SLT’s…. I want the board and Dr. Edwards to actually listen and respond to the community when substantial concerns are raised and let our SLT’s represent the school’s parents, staff and children’s needs to CSD, I think of the SLT’s as our advocates, not the other way around. Maybe I’m wrong. I’d cut the busing costs.
As I said on another post, I’m so pleased that many people were heard by CSD during this Fifth Avenue process. And if you want to know who I think made a big difference, it’s you! IMHO, by keeping the conversation going on your blog you “encouraged” CSD to respond to issues brought forth by community members. In the past, comments that did not follow the party were easily ignored. Thanks!
I agree with Nola that the Decatur blogs are keeping topics on the table that need to be there. We may all disagree on which topics those are, but overall it’s a positive thing. IMHO, Decatur Metro is a bit biased towards letting CSD Central Office off the hook but I’m sure there’s plenty of others who think it’s biased just the opposite way. Thank you Decatur Metro, In Decatur, and Decatur News Online, and any other relevant blog that I haven’t found yet and better not or the laundry will never get done.
What have I let them off the hook for?
Thanks nola. But I don’t consider you part of anything “anti-Westchester”. I was referencing the hard-to-ignore contingent who scoff at any and every decision that the CSD administration makes.
There’s an element of the personal that’s infused in the ongoing school debate that you just don’t see on the city side. CSD administrators are quite consistently labeled/seen as self-interested, overpaid and out of touch. In return, CSD administrators often come across as annoyed and defensive. None of this helps towards bridging the communication gap.
Having been thrust into the position of middle-man, I’ve simply attempted to be courteous and objective as possible.
If what people actually care most about is the children – and not their own personal feuds – then it’s in everyone’s best interest to be vigilant, learned, critical and opinionated about all things CSD, but also courteous and polite.
Personal feuds? Really? As in specific CSD administrators or Board members in a feud with specific parents? That’s not something I’ve noticed. There are strong opinions shared by some community members about decisions, policies, communication styles, management styles, politics, and other aspects of CSD and the Board. There’s also strong loyalties among other community members to CSD. Elected officials and local government should know and expect that. And CSD administrators and Board members have their strong opinions which carry a lot of weight since they are in charge. But I haven’t noticed specific feuds. Certainly nothing like one hears about some county school systems.
As I’ve mentioned before, it’s always impressed me how, after the dust settles around an election or major CSD decision, how a majority of the parents immediately get right back into the schools, volunteering, raising money, attending events, supporting the teachers, staff, and principals. Sometimes I think there’s a kind of oneupsmanship that helps the schools–“We’ll show everyone how much we REALLY care even if they are all wrong-headed about Decision X”. The only dent in fundraising lately has been from the economy. A few things like Sally Foster fundraising are definitely taking a hit. Given how many things like Active Boards, computer carts, art equipment like kilns, library books, Math Academy, etc. are bought through this fundraising, a dip in fundraising is worrisome. Hopefully, we don’t have personal feuds that will affect parent and citizen support for the students in our schools.
I haven’t seen Mr. Roaden anywhere since he got his promotion. I hear he’s still at Renfroe half the day… but what, exactly, is he doing the rest of the day? Seems that if he’s the communications guy, he needs to be out there communicating a bit. I know a couple of SLT members who both say that they have yet to see him at meetings or anywhere else. If he’s making the big bucks as the “SLT liaison” (By the way, I thought the SLTs were actually liaisons in and of themselves, but I digress) shouldn’t he actually go to the SLT meetings? Is he just taking phone calls from all the angry parents? Maybe he’s been to some meetings I don’t know about b/c I don’t know SLTs at all the schools???
I’m just sayin’.
What does Maria Lewis do? She is listed under CSD Public Information Office.