Jack Panitch

Fri, Jul 2, 2010 : 2:48 a.m.

aataxpayer: Teachers didn't set unilateral terms for a new contract: someone had to negotiate with them. I'm pretty sure that same someone (or team of someones) had something to do with the deals reached or not reached with the custodians and the bus drivers. I saw your comment underneath the article about Dr. Roberts' review. I also saw your comment about the timing of the release of the terms of the TA. Those are two more points we completely agree upon.

JackieL

Thu, Jul 1, 2010 : 2:47 p.m.

I'm confused. What exactly do people mean when they talk about Ann Arbor's excellent schools? Test scores? Extracurriculars? Safety? do people think that the schools are better or the students are better or a combination of both? Given that what is good for one may not be good for another, it would be helpful to qualify adjectives like excellent so we know what is being described.

Jack Panitch

Thu, Jul 1, 2010 : 12:38 a.m.

If I were an Ann Arbor Public School teacher, I would be sitting back and shaking my head at the ignorance; but understanding the politics, I would also understand that what I did in ratifying the tentative agreement, I did for my pink-slipped, hurting and frightened colleagues, I did for the students and I did because it was the right thing to do, not because I wanted or expected or hoped to change anyones mind about me. This fifteen-page agreement is an incredibly creative solution to the problem at hand. Teachers didnt have to agree to this. No one put a gun to their heads. Teachers are financing their part of the cuts on a hope. Anyone see any guarantees, either in terms of time or in terms of being made whole? This isnt voodoo. It is real, and it is predictably Brit Satchwell channeling Al Shanker, but in a way that brought the local votes home. To the folks out there wringing their hands about the incremental change where they perceive that bold restructuring is necessary: what did you expect? What do you expect? What makes this town great? What makes it one of Michigans best hopes for ever coming out of the economic tail spin? Rhetorical question: everybody knows the answer. Lots of things make this town great. But only one institution in town stands tall among a few others others around the state as a beacon of future hope. Just anyone try to bring darkness here. But there are shadowy scenarios. What would happen if excellence in the public schools took a savage hit? What would happen if Ann Arbor Public Schools were no longer so attractive? So why the incremental change, instead of the whipple? Come on, folks, we have talked about this before. Anybody have a better view to explain what just happened? Anybody really think the union just hoodwinked the District? If I were the District negotiator, and the Union came to me with this proposal, I wouldnt let it leave the room until I made sure the union negotiator was oriented times three, and even then, I might not believe it. So please join me in meeting responsible behavior with a round of applause. For those of you who respectfully disagree with my views about the Union, I strongly recommend reading pages 13, 14 and 15 of the contract.

toomuchtodo

Tue, Jun 29, 2010 : 10:45 p.m.

Wow. It is unfortunate that the discussion can go south so quickly! Thank you to Mr. Norton for his non-emotionally charged responses. I still disagree, but certainly appreciate his lack of name-calling and other nonsense. While I am still trying to figure things out, and would love to be of the mindset that simply revising the tax structure would solve the funding problem our schools face, I don't think it is a realistic solution due to the exorbitant rate that health/pension costs are increasing, combined with Michigan's poor economic outlook.

Speechless

Tue, Jun 29, 2010 : 9:26 p.m.

To elise: Thanks for catching and correcting my sloppy phrasing a while ago. Up above, I should have written something more like "union-protected, non-managerial jobs" to better distinguish teachers from school administrators. ----------- Also, that earlier comment was meant as a semi-satiric, semi-sarcastic take on the single-minded, obsessive hurling of blame at unionized teachers for the district's budget woes — to the exclusion of all other factors. In it, I swapped "administrators" in place of "teachers" as the customary target of frustration. Reading it again, the intended tongue-in-cheek hews too closely in tone to some earlier anti-teacher rants, comes too close to the "real thing." Of course, nearly every school department and job category across the board (and including the board, for that matter) needs to make some reduction in order for the budget to work in the near future. The bus drivers, meanwhile, have already been forced to sacrifice far too much. Yet the main budget culprits don't actually include anyone working for the local school system at any level. One of the culprits, clearly, is the chronically bad regional economy. The other, less discussed, is a Michigan tax structure badly needing major overhaul and fast becoming incapable of funding or assisting the state's most basic needs, including public education.

dk

Tue, Jun 29, 2010 : 9:23 p.m.

Edward, although from my perspective the contradictory statements you made are no more clear to me, I do appreciate the thoughtfulness you put into your replies. There probably are some "teacher bashers" here. I hope I'm not one of them. Since having children start in the school system, I have seen first hand what a difficult job teaching can be. It's a job that I do not think I could do. However, I fully expect that those same teachers could not do my job either. I really don't think people here just want teachers randomly fired. I believe people (at least myself) don't want to support teachers and their unions who can have it both ways. I'm sure you'll disagree, but on a normalized basis ($/day, $/hr) teachers make an extraordinary amount of money in AA. At $75k/yr, 181 working days per year, 8 hours per day, you are talking $52/hr. For the average joe (13 holidays per year, 15 days vacation per year) to make the same hourly rate, their salary would have to be $96k/yr. Add on top of that, that teachers have MUCH better benefits and pensions and it's crystal clear that teachers make a heck of a good living. That's fine with me. They are allowed to make a good living. However, when I say they "have it both ways", they make this living and then have almost no job risk. The average joe pulling in $96k/yr in the private sector has a heck of a lot of pressure to produce, if they don't they get fired or demoted. That doesn't happen to teachers, it simply doesn't. That's called having it both ways. Private sector folks who don't have it both ways have a hard time paying the salaries for those who do. You can believe me or not believe me. My wife spent 10 years in the private sector busting her hump only to be laid-off 1.5 years ago. She's now going back to school to become a teacher. That's the truth.

AlphaAlpha

Tue, Jun 29, 2010 : 9:16 p.m.

You claim data to be "bogus"? Do you have any real data? Where? Links? References? Saying "It's a fact" does not make it so. Accusing others of distortion, without presenting verifiable facts to support your case, as many others here with a range of opinions do, is laughable. You claim "bashing" of teachers? Wrong. Teacher pay too high? Of course it is, in the opinion of many. Non bogus BLS, BEA, and Census numbers support that contention. But that is not teacher bashing. That is concern about teacher pay. Big difference. Very big. Shame, Edward. Use facts instead of feelings in debates. Inflammatory accusations...make for a poor reflection.

dk

Tue, Jun 29, 2010 : 8:35 p.m.

6/29/10 Edward Ghost - "@dk: No one here said anything about teachers in AAPS being fired. Read MORE carefully." 6/28/10 Edward Ghost - "@dk: the old red herring--teachers can't be fired. But they can, and more often than you (obviously) can imagine." Edward, I'll admit that I'm not going through each post and reading it "carefully" but I really don't understand the last two post you directed at me (posted above).

AlphaAlpha

Tue, Jun 29, 2010 : 8 p.m.

"education is more effective if there are fewer students in the classroom" Eddy...well said. Something most would agree with. 'sembling the truth. All the more reason to reduce pay per teacher to, say, national average pay. With AAPS teacher compensation averaging $102,000 per year, and average private compensation at $57,000 per year, paying teachers $57,000 per year would allow a staffing increase of 78%. Can you imagine? Class sizes 78% smaller? Reduced teacher workload? All good.

Jimmy Olsen

Tue, Jun 29, 2010 : 5:21 p.m.

@Ghost, So you previously stated "or as long as I've been in A2, almost 20 years." Which doesn't necessarily mean you've lived in Ann Arbor for 20 years nor live in the AAPS district. So where, pray tell, did these tenured teachers get fired?

AlphaAlpha

Tue, Jun 29, 2010 : 5:14 p.m.

Uh, what is proper school funding?

dk

Tue, Jun 29, 2010 : 4:19 p.m.

Has annarbor.com done any research on tenured teachers in the AAPS getting fired? If so, could you please provide a link to the data? Thank you.

elise

Tue, Jun 29, 2010 : 2:03 p.m.

AAAA is negotiating. I wondered the same thing Speechless, and mentioned it earlier, why no anger toward this union? Ann Arbor administrators are part of a union and still in the midst of negotiating any cuts they might take. Yet still, all the anger and hostility is focused on the teacher's union. Interesting.

Speechless

Tue, Jun 29, 2010 : 12:36 p.m.

The school board, administration, and the teachers' union have had their new agreement for about a week now, and events have moved along. Meanwhile, over the course of 130 total comments thus far, teacher critics have expressed anguish over the completed deal using various twists of logic, more lately through creative uses of math and line item interpretation. Although this anguish is supposed to be focused on saving more money for the 'taxpayer,' there has been sheer silence about the administration's end of that equation. This, despite earlier mention of school board discussions likely taking place regarding administrator costs for next year. Now should be a fine time to shift teacher-related anger in management's direction. And remember that last fall, as the WISD millage vote approached, every aspect of the public school system received savage critical treatment from "Vote No" partisans. Or, do the teacher critics have an unspoken "rule" in this discussion requiring that we only bash people who hold union-protected jobs? That school administrators, no matter how overpaid or underworked some might be, must at all costs remain "off limits" as a fruitful target for financial cuts? Why not get vocal and also approach the management side of the ledger with the same budget machete still firmly in hand? In recent years, to give one example, there have been tales from some parents about encounters in large local schools with multiple assistant principals, not all of whom seemed to hold discernible, practical job duties. To what extent do these tales reflect a reality that students and parents face during the school year? Or are they mainly exaggerated urban legends fueled by complex job descriptions? Enquiring minds want to know.

Steve Norton, MIPFS

Tue, Jun 29, 2010 : 11:29 a.m.

toomuchtodo, I've posted my previous attempt to answer your question (re Mackinac Center arguments) in a "community wall" post here: http://www.annarbor.com/community/news/education/have_schools_been_in_the_money_not_exactly/ AAPS does not have a technology bond. But what your district has must essentially be a capital bond which was dedicated to technology. It might have been used for construction, but may not by law be used for any of the things the law defines as "operations." The uses of a sinking fund are defined explicitly in state law: it includes construction and renovation of buildings and land purchases. Sinking funds cannot be used to purchase technology or school buses, though both of these things can be purchased with capital bond issues. (The definition of "technology" is a bit odd; the sinking fund can be used to purchase technology "infrastructure" such as wiring and so on, but not computers or software.) The difference, of course, is that a bond issue involves borrowing money and paying interest (in order to get the full amount up front) while a sinking fund allows a district to avoid borrowing and paying interest for ongoing major renovation expenses (like mechanical systems). The point is that you can spend operating dollars on whatever you want, but the state controls how many operating dollars you have and they have not been keeping up with inflation. It would be a violation of a school board's fiduciary duty to spend operating dollars on capital projects without even asking the voters if they would be willing to support a bond issue or a sinking fund. But if you inquire closely into what AAPS has done with the 2004 bond and the sinking fund in the last few years, you can see that much of is was catching up on major renovation which had been put off for years because the funds were not available. The argument often presented in comments on this site is that the capital bonds and special ed funds should have made it "easy" for districts to do quite nicely with what they had left. My argument is that sinking funds and special ed millages have been desperate attempts by districts to save as many unrestricted dollars as possible for general education, when the money was not keeping up. Would things have been worse without the sinking fund and special ed millages? Absolutely. But that does not mean that things are "fine" as they are - just not as awful as they might have been. But once you have a sinking fund and a special ed millage, that's it. There are no more options to lessen the blow from inadequate state funding.

DonBee

Tue, Jun 29, 2010 : 11:18 a.m.

The Tentative Agreement has been posted. http://www.a2schools.org/hrs.home/files/june_14_aaea_ta.pdf On quick read - there is one interesting item on page 7. While it was reported that the AAPS contribution to health care is capped, it is subject to the revenue sharing provision, so the cap will rise, if the school revenue rises. On page 2, 2 of the 4 days that are not being paid (1.1 percent pay reduction) can be claimed at a later date (starting in 2015 or if you depart the district for any reason, then on departure). Again this is on a quick read, since to really read it, it needs to be merged with the master contract to see all the items in context.

elise

Tue, Jun 29, 2010 : 11:12 a.m.

I can second that teachers (tenured or not) DO get fired in the AAPS school system. It is up to the administrator to document though in order for it to happen, so if they don't do anything, the teacher keeps teaching. Gene: You are wrong about only young teachers taking the negotiated cut. It is for ALL teachers. Don't know where you got this info. but it is incorrect.

DonBee

Tue, Jun 29, 2010 : 11:05 a.m.

Mr. Norton - I respectfully disagree. There is a limit after which schools are uncomfortable and unsafe. There are minimum standards for IEPs and Special Education. While some less might have been done, it is not true than little or none would. If you take the $18 million in local Special Ed millage out, I suspect that at least $9 would have had to have come from the General Fund. If I take the $15 million in Sinking fund out, I suspect at least $7-8 would have had to have been spent. Since I don't have a list of the sinking fund expenditures, I can only guess. If you know where it is, I am sure someone who is a specialist in commercial building could comment. Even if we only admit that 1/2 is useful to the district in freeing up money, it is local money that the local voters provided. It is important money. As to the section 8 voucher analogy, I stand by it. I think it is an accurate layperson analogy of what the restricted funds do. If a person did not have a voucher, they too would probably choose to spend less on housing.

toomuchtodo

Tue, Jun 29, 2010 : 10:39 a.m.

My experience is that it is a rare thing for a tenured teacher to be "fired". We have had only one such incident in the past 6 years, and was the result of a teacher being criminally charged with raping a student. Regarding using bond/millage revenue as part of the calculation of total school "revenue"... it seems that there is more and more crossover of these funding mechanisms into the general revenue stream. Our school district has a technology bond (used for computers, software, buses, etc.). Five years ago, this bond didn't exist, and expenses such as these would have been funded thru directly from the general fund (ie., daily operating expenses). The sinking fund has also had a lot more leeway as to what it is allowed to fund, specifically to help ease the load off the general fund. So, I don't think it's entirely accurate to say that bonds/millages don't free up some money to help offset operating costs (THEY DO!), although pure building construction bonds probably should be kept out of the caluculation.

grye

Tue, Jun 29, 2010 : 8:11 a.m.

Interesting that the salary cuts only apply to those teachers in the Step Program. These are the most recently hired teachers and are the lowest paid. It's a shame that if salary cuts were necessary, that they would have been applied across the full spectrum of teachers and administrative staff..

grye

Tue, Jun 29, 2010 : 7:44 a.m.

to Don Bee: The primary issue with Pittsfield is not the teachers but the number of non-english speaking families living within the school district. My wife taught at Pittsfield for 2 years. A large number of the student body come from families that have moved here from Central and South America. Without English as the primary language at home and little to no English learned during the early formative years, the obvious results are lower test scores.

Jimmy Olsen

Tue, Jun 29, 2010 : 7:36 a.m.

@Ghost These 4 teachers - they had already attained tenure and were fired? Or, were they new teachers who were not granted tenure, in essence - "fired"?

Steve Pepple

Tue, Jun 29, 2010 : 7:26 a.m.

An exchange in which two commenters took digs at each other has been removed.

dk

Tue, Jun 29, 2010 : 6:17 a.m.

"the old red herring--teachers can't be fired. But they can, and more often than you (obviously) can imagine." Edward Ghost - Please enlighten the group and let us know all of the teachers in AA who were fired due to poor performance.

Andrew Thomas

Tue, Jun 29, 2010 : 12:29 a.m.

DonBee and Steve: Stay with me, guys, this is going to be a long post... I am puzzled as to why Pittsfield should be ranked so low (27.9 percentile), given the overall high performance of Ann Arbors elementary schools, and especially compared to Mitchell Elementary, the next-lowest-ranking AAPS school (60.5 percentile). Following are 2009 MEAP scores for Pittsfield, Mitchell, the Ann Arbor District, and the State (based on percent proficient or above): Third Grade Math () Pittsfield: 83.7 Mitchell 83.7 District 96.6 State 95.0 Fourth Grade Math Pittsfield 88.2 Mitchell 85.3 District 96.7 State 92.0 Fifth Grade Math Pittsfield 83.9 Mitchell 75.6 District 92.4 State 79.0 Third Grade Reading Pittsfield 88.4 Mitchell 74.4 District 93.9 State 90.0 Fourth Grade Reading Pittsfield 82.4 Mitchell 73.6 District 91.4 State 85.0 Fifth Grade Reading Pittsfield 87.1 Mitchell 81.6 District 93.2 State 85.0 The MEAP data shows that Pittsfield is higher than Mitchell in every category (except third grade math, where they are tied), and is higher than the State average for both fifth grade math and reading. Based on this, I would have expected Pittsfield to rank above Mitchell, and certainly not 32 percentiles lower. (It should be noted that both Pittsfield and Mitchell are among the most economically disadvantaged schools in the District). I did find the web site for the figures cited by DonBee, and he presented them accurately. The only clue as to why Pittsfield ranks so low is that the formula considers both actual scores and year-to-year improvement. Pittsfield improved on 3 out of 6 categories, so this would seem to be a wash; however, perhaps other schools made more significant gains and that pulled them down. I am inclined to agree with Steve that an error was made, but I think someone has to look at the actual calculation. As to why nobody from the District has raised this question before, the answer is that this ranking was just made public yesterday, so nobody has had time to look at it. Stay tuned.

Steve Norton, MIPFS

Mon, Jun 28, 2010 : 11:39 p.m.

DonBee, Can you say where this ranking of schools came from, and what it indicates? I haven't been able to find anything like it on the Michigan Dept. of Education web site, and the report cards for Pittsfield Elementary are not very far out of line with the rest of the district. I suspect it is a typo, but it would be nice to find the original.

Steve Norton, MIPFS

Mon, Jun 28, 2010 : 11:02 p.m.

Well, we're going rather far afield. DonBee, I believe my description of the source of those "revenues" and how they must be spent addresses the concerns you raise. Your metaphor of the housing voucher is a poor one, because it leads us to assume that everything provided by those restricted funds would otherwise be paid for out of operating dollars. Just thinking back a few years to the deferred maintenance in AAPS, and the fact that one goal of the bond projects was to make sure every "building envelope" was secure (no roof leaks), shows the reality of the situation. And surely no one can think that we could have built a new high school, or done most of the other projects, with operating funds. Simply not enough money would have been available in any one year to make it possible. Moreover, we as local voters can choose to increase our taxes for capital projects. We do not have this choice with operating dollars. The bond millage does not come up for renewal; it will decrease as the bonds are paid off. We may, or may not, choose to approve another bond millage in the future to pay for capital projects at that time. Usually, these things come 15 to 20 years apart. The special education millage (and earmarked state and federal funding) legally pays only for special ed services. In fact, the county special ed millage only reimburses a percent of actually provided services; it does not provide the money in advance. The services the district is legally required to provide have also increased during the period you analyze. The primary purpose of the sinking fund, which is also legally restricted to capital projects, is to make sure there are funds available for ongoing renovation and major expenditures (boilers, say) rather than waiting for the next bond issue. But without the sinking fund, I assure you that only the minimum necessary would be spent from operating funds. These funds "count," but they are not available for general operating spending. They were not available to pay teachers, to buy regular textbooks, to pay the electric and gas bills, to purchase software, to pay custodians or bus drivers, etc. It's simply misleading to discuss them as if they freed up money for those things.

dk

Mon, Jun 28, 2010 : 9:53 p.m.

"Teachers, apparently, are valued little more than are babysitters. So let's pay them what babysitters get paid." Edward Ghost, babysitters are HELD ACCOUNTABLE for the well being of the children they watch. If they screw up, just once, they most likely don't get hired back. Are teachers accountable for the education of their children? Reading about the "step system" I think they are not. They get raises either way. Unbelievable that after all of these messages you can't see that.

DonBee

Mon, Jun 28, 2010 : 9:09 p.m.

A new ranking was posted by the State Department of Education, I found the spreadsheet today. I wonder if anyone can explain how a great school system can have a school that is so far out of line with the rest. (Percentile is the percentage of schools this school ranks above): School...............................................Percentile Ranking Wines Elementary School...................98.5 Martin Luther King Elem. School.......97.7 Logan Elementary School..................97.1 Angell School....................................97.1 Community High School...................97.0 Thurston Elementary School.............96.5 Clague Middle School.......................96.4 Huron High School...........................95.7 Slauson Middle School.....................95.4 Burns Park Elementary School..........95.3 Bach Elementary School...................93.9 Eberwhite School..............................93.7 Uriah H. Lawton School....................93.7 Ann Arbor Open at Mack School......93.1 Tappan Middle School......................90.9 Pioneer High School.........................89.8 John Allen School.............................87.8 Lakewood Elementary School...........84.6 Forsythe Middle School....................84.3 Abbot School...................................83.5 Northside Elementary School...........81.9 Haisley Elementary School...............79.3 Dicken Elementary School................79.0 Scarlett Middle School.....................71.7 Carpenter School.............................70.8 Pattengill School..............................70.0 Clifford E. Bryant Comm. School......62.7 Mary D. Mitchell School...................60.5 Pittsfield School...............................27.9 Roberto Clemente Center............- Stone High School.......................- If Pittsfield is not a typo, then why are we not hearing things about fixing it? If it is a typo, why has the district not said anything about it?

AlphaAlpha

Mon, Jun 28, 2010 : 9:06 p.m.

The fine financial details, while important, can hide the fundamentals. The simple, big picture, is this: Private sector wages, asset values, and willingness to pay higher taxes, has decreased significantly. AAPS funding has increased significantly, approximately forever. AAPS employees earn much more than most teachers earn. The taxpayers will likely encourage a reversion to the mean for teacher pay.

DonBee

Mon, Jun 28, 2010 : 9:02 p.m.

You get a section 8 voucher for housing. You cannot spend it for anything other than housing. So you cannot buy beer with it. But, because you have the voucher, you can use other money to buy beer and know you have a roof over your head. Restricted funds are just like the voucher, they can only be spent on specific items, but they release other money to spend as you see fit. Without the sinking fund a lot of improvements and maintenance would have to come from the operating budget. The same for the debt fund and the special education millage. If people keep saying that the sinking fund, the bond fund and the special education millage don't count - in the next millage renewal, the voters may decide since they don't count that there is no need to renew them. I think they are critical to the district, I am sorry you don't. This is local money that the local voters have made available to keep the schools afloat. If you "diss" your local voters, you will not have that money in the future.

Jimmy Olsen

Mon, Jun 28, 2010 : 6 p.m.

Watch out for the Ghost is trotting out his opinions and "facts". But his pontifications are always the truth. Talk about "dissembling"!

DonBee

Mon, Jun 28, 2010 : 4:57 p.m.

I apologize in advance for the column alignment - it is difficult to do on this website Revenue Line.............2002...........2009 (source AAPS Website) in Millions State Grant........... $150........... $156 (AKA Proposal A, Basic Grant) UofM married..............0.3...............0 Tuition........................0.06.............0.06 Investment income.....0.79.............0.70 Rentals.......................0.16.............0.38 Universal fund............0.17.............0 Game Parking.............0.25............1.0 Special Ed...................3.7............11.8 State Other.................1.0..............1.3 Medicare....................0.4..............0 County SpEd..............8.0............18.0 County Other.............0.2..............0.3 Malpractice settle......3.3..............0 Athletic Rev...............0.2.............0.3 Sinking fund..............8.5...........15.6 Debt Service............12.1...........16.0 Food Service..............3.6............3.6 Rec&Ed......................5.0............7.8 Grants..........................0............8.4 Misc items.................-7............1.8 Total.....................190.7........243.1 The 2002 Misc is shown as "allocation for millage and capital" I apologize in advance for the column alignment - it is difficult to do on this website

Steve Norton, MIPFS

Mon, Jun 28, 2010 : 4:13 p.m.

Sadly, I submitted a longish post in answer to "toomuchtodo," which apparently was not approved. I'll see if I can recreate it. DonBee, I welcome your "trotting out" your data. It will show that much of the increase you point to is revenue attributable to the 2004 bond millage. That money was already spent (when the bonds were issued, and the proceeds used for the construction projects). Virtually none, and I do mean none, of those projects would have been funded out of operating dollars. The bond millage dollars are earmarked toward fulfilling our legal obligation to pay back the bonds. The money from the bonds was used for capital projects (Skyline, the construction at every other building) and may not legally be used for any kind of operations. Moreover, the revenues from the bond millage will fall as the bonds are paid off and the millage rate falls. So it is just convenient, for your point of view, that the time period you analyze includes the very first years of a major bond issue. As we have also discussed before, the only segment of operating funds that has increased faster than inflation are funds earmarked for special education services. Much of this was in response to new legal requirements that were put in place during this very same period. Otherwise, general education spending in the time period you mention has actually grown slower than inflation. The sinking fund, renewed in 2008, may only be used for capital projects and has replaced only half of the $7 million which the board of education customarily set aside for "capital needs." The rest, which the board has been unable to contribute for the last year or two, is simply unavailable. To talk about a "27% increase" in funds, and to allow people to infer that it was used to pay higher wages, is simply not being honest.

stunhsif

Mon, Jun 28, 2010 : 3:24 p.m.

@DonBee, appreciate the facts. You said the budget increased 27%, it actually increased 27.89%. So their is a decline of 1% in the student population but the budget increases 27.89%. Inflation increased right around 18% during that time so the AAPS increases the budget 50% more than what would match inflation and that is on top of a decrease in the number of students. Why pray tell? AHHH, not too hard to figure out is it? Pension/healthcare/step increases and cost of living raises. But this is to keep the teachers happy so they can keep the children well educated. Yeah right!

DonBee

Mon, Jun 28, 2010 : 2:26 p.m.

Mr. Norton - We have had this discussion, in AAPS, the total growth in money available to the school system has exceeded inflation over the last decade. In 2002 AAPS had a total budget of $190 million and in 2009 $243 million, while the number of students declined from 16,644 to 16,439. This is a 27 percent increase in funds and a 1 percent decrease in students. Yes, the state base grant has not kept up, but local tax payers have provided funds, that have allowed AAPS to focus more of the base grant on the classroom. Please stop with the decreasing funds FUD. I will be happy to trot out all the numbers again if I need to. As to quality schools, roughly 1 in 5 students in the district are NOT in AAPS, they are in other schools. While the absolute numbers have only slighly decreased, as far as I can tell, the percentage of possible students in AAPS has decreased. Please if you have better numbers, feel free to post them.

HaeJee

Mon, Jun 28, 2010 : 11:32 a.m.

This is wonderful news for the 191 teachers! Heardoc, you can't compare private schools with public in terms of cost. Private school educators in Michigan are paid very low compared to what any educator deserves. You can minimize what a teacher deserves to make, but bottom-line, I want qualified teachers. If you go to other states like TN, you will find that private school teachers make a lot more money than public. Teaching is a profession that should be more respected and well compensated. I have seen three different types of educators: ones that are very passionate about it, ones that have no interest and chose it because that was the only career field they felt comfortable with, and the teachers that are burnt out. Private schools are not required to hire teachers that are certified or considered highly qualified in the subject area. Private schools unintentionally often times promote segregation of the children based off race due to socioeconomic status, religion, etc. This does not help our youth learn diversity. I have not always been happy with AAPS, but cutting teachers and funds will not help the system. I am very impressed that these two groups could work together and stay focused that the students are the priority. Cutting their resources will not help improve their education that we should all support.

toomuchtodo

Mon, Jun 28, 2010 : 10:02 a.m.

Steve Norton writes: "But revenues for schools are not down because demand has fallen for a quality education. Quite the opposite. And beyond the current recession, revenues for schools have been squeezed for the last decade and more because our tax system did not cover the parts of the economy where the action is." ------- Are revenues for schools actually decreasing? Or, rather, are the costs going up (health, retirement, salary, etc.) at a rate that is much greater than that of the revenue? In general, I am NOT a fan of the Mackinac center)... but, do you have evidence to refute the claims that they make: http://www.mackinac.org/12610

Speechless

Mon, Jun 28, 2010 : 7:56 a.m.

As for taxes and education funding, Alma Wheeler Smith and others in the Michigan legislature have called for a state constitutional amendment to allow a graduated income tax. Under her plan, most people would pay a little less than under today's flat rate state tax, while the well-off would pay more. Supplemented by the closing of tax loopholes, the resulting growth in state revenue would even allow for an end to the business tax surcharge. A more properly funded state government will have more money to share with school districts. The long-term health of local schools throughout the state is tied to fixing Michigan's tax structure — not to annual rounds of slashing school programs and tearing down teachers' living standards. If we don't want a graduated tax structure, then we choose to accept and embrace an endless spiral of increasingly debilitating state budget crises. On the federal level, the key to better education funding through taxation comes not just from once again taxing millionaires at 90% as they were under Eisenhower, but also from returning to our 1950s tax rates for those earning $350,000 to $999,999. This would help a great deal, as many more well-to-do incomes fall into the mid-to-upper six figures category. The resulting growth in federal revenue could go toward a number of things, including greater sums returned to the states for support of public education.

Steve Norton, MIPFS

Sun, Jun 27, 2010 : 11:25 p.m.

Well, clearly some feel that the best thing to do during a time of economic difficulty is to cut back on public expenditures, especially schools. Teachers, they say, should be willing to work for less. But revenues for schools are not down because demand has fallen for a quality education. Quite the opposite. And beyond the current recession, revenues for schools have been squeezed for the last decade and more because our tax system did not cover the parts of the economy where the action is. Income inequality has been growing in Michigan, yet we still have a flat-rate income tax. The service sector has been the fastest growing and is now by far the largest contributor to Michigan's GDP, yet our sales tax focuses only on retail trade. And so on. So, revenues for schools are not down because they have lost out in the "marketplace," and demand for a quality education is higher than ever. Why? Because most people see that as a way out of economic hard times, for their children and their communities. I agree. Now is not the time to start removing planks from our lifeboat, even if we are short on lumber for other things. Schools, and the people who make them work, need to be a priority for Michigan.

AlphaAlpha

Sun, Jun 27, 2010 : 9:54 p.m.

Indeed. The civil servants have attained the income status of civil masters. In fairness, it did take two sides to negotiate those excellent agreements. This trend will likely change dramatically during the new age of austerity.

JackieL

Sun, Jun 27, 2010 : 9:44 p.m.

If you want to see people with a sweet deal, take a look at the benefits and retirement at the city of AA. People are "retiring" at age 50, getting a substantial pension, and going to work full time for someone else. It is hugely expensive and not what retirement pensions were designed for.

stunhsif

Sun, Jun 27, 2010 : 8:09 p.m.

This joke of a contract kicks the can a little further down the dirt road but at some point the can is going to have to get picked up. We are all going to be back here next year doing what we are doing right now, arguing our points. The bottom line is we cannot continue to just patch holes in the ship with duct tape. At least one Governor in this country is doing something about the abuses of unions in state government. God Bless Mr. Christie!!

DonBee

Sun, Jun 27, 2010 : 7:11 p.m.

Mr. Vazquez - I would read: http://www.ustreas.gov/education/fact-sheets/taxes/ustax.shtml For a history of the income tax. Note that the rate during the Eisenhower Era was because of WWII. In 1916 the top rate (Making $1.5 million a year was 15 percent). The rates have gone up and down over time. According to the IRS (http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/09databk.pdf page 26) - 0.22 percent of the US population has an income of 1 to 1.5 million a year and roughly 0.03 percent have an income higher than 1.5 million. There were 144 million individual tax returns filled in 2008 (last year data is available for). Please tell me what the value of a 90 percent tax rate would be? Please consider that for some of these people it is a 1 time deal (selling a farm or business). For others at the low end of the $1 million range it is a married couple. Do you allow tax deductions as they exist today, or do you change those as well? How many high income people would choose to return to the UK, Canada or other countries with higher tax rates than the US has today, but would be lower than the US with a 90 percent rate? I look forward to your analysis. Thank you in advance.

Jimmy Olsen

Sun, Jun 27, 2010 : 7:10 p.m.

I'm always amused at thoughtful and lucid responses.

DonBee

Sun, Jun 27, 2010 : 6:46 p.m.

What free market? (NOTE: I am pointing out, not advocating what is written below) A person is not allowed to walk into the schools with their credentials and negotiate their own deal. They have to take the union contract. I suspect there are a lot of people who have the right certifications and motivation who would be happy to take less then union scale to get a start in AAPS. I have seen several posts from people who want jobs in teaching, but there are no positions available. The school district has to go through a long and complex process to remove a teacher from the system for non-performance. Neither of these issues exist in a true free market.

Jimmy Olsen

Sun, Jun 27, 2010 : 3:04 p.m.

@Ghost "Then ask yourself who, in their right mind, would pay for four years' college education, incur tens of thousands of dollars of debt, to go to work at an entry-level teacher's salary, knowing that to keep your job you had to undertake continuing education at you own expense in a very short period of time?" What you're telling us is that anybody who is pursuing a teaching degree never checked to see what the starting salaries are? I guess I wouldn't want them teaching my children if they aren't smart enough to do that. Yet, thousands still enter the profession. Why? Maybe because it is the right fit for them and they are passionate about teaching - might not be about the money. I choose my profession (technology) because it fascinates me and I like working with technology and didn't want to work retail (it put me through college) the rest of my life. I've made an up and down living over the years (down right now, but looking brighter). Think about how technology has changed over the last 10, 15...30 years since I've been in it...I paid for most of my continuing education...had to, to keep my job, to keep me motivated to learn new things. Teachers aren't the only profession that incurs these costs.

Jimmy Olsen

Sun, Jun 27, 2010 : 2:50 p.m.

@Ghost "-if you want talented people, you have to pay for it. No one willingly hires the lawyer who charges $25/hour. No one willingly puts their car in the hands of a mechanic who charges minimum wage for his services." If the lawyer has a good track record or does competent work and is willing to accept $25 an hour, hell yes I'd hire him. Same with the mechanic. I'm sure there are many people out there that still abide by the old adage "an honest day's pay for an honest day's work". Paying more money just "because" without any "performance" indicators shouldn't be the norm. I'd gladly pay teachers more money, but tell me, does the master's degree make them a better teacher? Does going up a step each year make them a better teacher? Does continuing education make them a better teacher? There needs to be some equitable evaluation system put into place. Were the people who ran Enron "talented". They certainly got paid a lot.

AlphaAlpha

Sun, Jun 27, 2010 : 1:30 p.m.

"That alone would fund our school systems across the country, and pay for health care for all of our citizens." Nice thought. Have you any links to support that notion? Unlikely...

E. Manuel Goldstein

Sun, Jun 27, 2010 : 12:55 p.m.

Unions are good for our society, so are teachers. As a taxpayer in the City of Ann Arbor, I am willing to pay more for quality education, and voted for the school millage that was recently (sadly) turned down by out-county voters. My opinion is that teachers are not paid enough, and that tax rates should revert to those that existed during the Republican Eisenhower administration - 90% - on incomes over $1 million per year. That alone would fund our school systems across the country, and pay for health care for all of our citizens.

bornblu

Sun, Jun 27, 2010 : 11:05 a.m.

ERMG: I must agree, you have gotten it right! "What professions get paid relative to each other changes over time." My spouse is a retired elementary teacher (30+ years), so I am well aware of the time invested in obtaining necessary education,and involved in the actual hour to hour, day to day teaching process. Although your comment eliminates the need for any comparisons, my experience in the private employment sector would indicate earnings for comprable education level positions (MSW, RN, LLP, PT, OT, TR, etc.) that also require continuing educational credits, is at best comprable to that of teachers. The most significant factor (not focusing on benefits/retirement) is that in the private sector, if the company or organization does not increase its income, salary either remains the same or drops. I would not want to cap any of the above occupations relative to salary (teachers included), and feel they all provide a service that at many times are both underpaid and underappreciated. With any public service position though, my question regarding salary is if the money is not there, how do you continue to pay for increases, or if a drop in revenue, how do you justify the loss of many individuals jobs for the continued (or minimally reduced) salary of those already at the top of the pay structure. We definitely need to find a new way to fund public education that prioritizes value for each and every service rendered (custodian, teacher, bus driver, etc.), but until that is accomplished, the questioning of all who are employed in the educational sector is necessary. By raising these questions, I do not feel that is is "teacher bashing", but an attempt to continue with, and maintain, a quality educational program under real time circumstances. I firmly believe that there needs to be greater personal (behind the scenes) conversations by individuals such as Jack, Don Bee, Lisa (all whose views deserve respect), and others with differing ideas, to reach some form/position of consensus to move forward beginning at a local level.

toomuchtodo

Sat, Jun 26, 2010 : 11:24 p.m.

ERMGhost writes: "The market be damned--you don't want to pay for talented teachers." I would be happy to pay (more) for talented teachers, but right now, talent has little to do with how we pay our teachers! We pay our teachers simply based on # years on the job, and what "degree by mail" is bought. There's no accountability, and no monetary reward for a job well done. But perhaps that's a discussion for another day.

stunhsif

Sat, Jun 26, 2010 : 9:58 p.m.

It ain't the pay Casper ( even though teachers now make much more than college graduates in the private sector), it is the bloated benefits and healthcare till ya die that no one in the private sector enjoys anymore. Tell me since you know everything, how many millions of dollars is the teachers pension fund underfunded in this state? How are you going to cover that moving forward without bancrupting this state. We are talking about all state employees, not just teachers folks. This insanity, must and will come to an end. God bless Mr. Christie in NJ. The day of reckoning is not yet here in Michigan but it is coming and we all know it. The sooner the better I say.

AlphaAlpha

Sat, Jun 26, 2010 : 9:41 p.m.

Thankfully, we can have it all: lower taxes and a quality educational system. Look around. Momentum is growing.

AlphaAlpha

Sat, Jun 26, 2010 : 8:29 p.m.

DonBee- Thanks for the outstanding link to historical teacher wages. Comprehensive, succinct, well documented and referenced. All- Everyone concerned should be familiar with the study linked above. Here is a key portion: "There is no doubt that public school teachers salaries have risen dramatically since the mid-1950s (Figure 1), or that they now greatly exceed the market-determined teacher salaries of the pri- vate sector. According to the latest Schools and Staffing Survey published by the National Center for Education Statistics, private school teachers received an average base salary of $38,200 in 200708, while the comparable figure for teachers in traditional public schools was $52,100 (Coopersmith 2009: Table 7). This understates the difference in compensation between the sectors, however, due to the superior retirement benefits enjoyed by pub- lic sector teachers." Wow.

toomuchtodo

Sat, Jun 26, 2010 : 7:57 p.m.

My interest in this issue is because I have kids in Michigan public schools. I had hoped that AAPS would have been more aggressive in changing the status quo regarding teacher benefits/compensation (primarily, ceasing automatic step wage increases, and increasing contributions to health care costs) so as to set a benchmark and lead the way for other schools. All Michigan schools are in the same boat, and the boat is taking on water and sinking FAST. Our district is considering for NEXT year cutting busing service completely, eliminating athletics, cutting counselors... basically, there are cutbacks to everything! Parents will be paying tremendous pay-to-play fees (assuming that arts and athletic programs aren't cut mid-year)... Meanwhile, the teachers are not willing to discuss any concessions with the district. Apparently, they'd rather see the kids/parents pay the price. The AA contract (if I understand it correctly)does not seem to do anything but postpone inevitable cuts to a future year. It does not seem to address the long-term structural problem of reigning in increasing benefits and wage costs as necessary for the predicted flat and/or reduced funding from the state.

Jay Thomas

Sat, Jun 26, 2010 : 6:12 p.m.

@ Dr. I. Emsayin: Sounds like you believe in taxation without representation. "If you don't have kids there just pay your taxes and shut up." In a free society everyone can speak their mind whether whiny censoring liberals like it or not.

elise

Sat, Jun 26, 2010 : 4:46 p.m.

Taxpayer: Can you please point me in the right direction to get copies of the contracts from the groups you mentioned? It sounds like you have read them. AA.com has published the changes in the teacher contract in the same manner they did for the other groups you mentioned. Do you not trust what is printed is true this time? And seriously, how would knowing the facts before the TA was adopted by the board have changed anything? Do you really think you or I could have changed a thing? For whatever reason you have a sour taste for teachers, did your children have a terrible experience in the AAPS? I have two children in the system and I couldn't be happier. They are getting a quality education from wonderful teachers!

Jimmy Olsen

Sat, Jun 26, 2010 : 3:40 p.m.

The contract is there alright - all 232 pages of it. 232 pages!! That tells you something right there. New structure and streamlined contract is what we need. This is just a delay of money (except the healthcare) and a continuation of the status quo. Enough IS Enough!!

Dr. I. Emsayin

Sat, Jun 26, 2010 : 2:03 p.m.

All of the teacher bashers should identify the public school where their children attend. If they are not involved in the public schools, they should stop making so much noise. I'd also like to know the salary they earn for the job they do; they certainly have time during the day to make disparaging remarks about other professions!

toomuchtodo

Sat, Jun 26, 2010 : 12:54 p.m.

This agreement seems overly obfuscated, to the point that it seems to intentionally confuse. For example, the FOUR unpaid days that supporters say is equivalent to a 2.2% wage cut... Really? At what point does the fact that TWO of the days will be returned (presumably paid at a potentially higher rate of pay)enter the equation? Teachers will be able to hold onto two of those days as personal business days. After five years pass, they can either use them or cash them in at their pay rate at that time. Why not just cut 2 days, and call it what it is?

elise

Sat, Jun 26, 2010 : 12:44 p.m.

taxpayer: Since you didn't answer my questions I'll assume you don't feel the need to know about other government job negotiations, just teaching contracts? Interesting.... I don't believe the AAPS website has ever posted an employee contract, probably not what the website is for. If you know a teacher they might share the info. with you, I know my teacher friends didn't try to hide anything from me.

elise

Sat, Jun 26, 2010 : 5:45 a.m.

taxpayer: Do you demand to be part of the negotiating process of all government jobs or is it just the teachers/school districts that you feel you have a "right" to know what is happening every step of the way? If you aren't satified with waiting, one solution might be to get a degree to be a teacher. Then you can be part of the process and live the "high life" that you claim teachers are living. Also, I hear that administrators are negotiating right now, interesting your anger only focuses on the teachers.

Steve Norton, MIPFS

Sat, Jun 26, 2010 : 1:51 a.m.

aataxpayer: The four unpaid days by themselves were a 2.2% cut. In addition to that, the district will absorb none of the approximately 8% increase in the cost of health insurance, leaving it all on teachers. Step increases, for the 50% who get them, are being delayed until three quarters of the year is over for the next two years. Finally, teachers will receive absolutely no COLA or other bump besides steps unless the district's financial situation improves. This formula does not expire until either AAPS is able to get fund equity up to 15% again or the teachers have recouped $4.5 million. Should the district's funding drop again by more than 0.5%, the district can pull the plug and negotiate a new agreement. This agreement allows (actually, requires) the district to recall all the teachers who were pink-slipped in April. It's true that not all retirees will be replaced, but one of the largest savings from the retirement incentives was not to cut staff so much as to have senior staff replaced with newer staff with lower pay rates. I'm not in a position to figure out what the net concession is for the average teacher without knowing how much health care costs will go up, or how much delaying the step increases will take away. But I'm willing to bet that the total of these and other provisions meets the district's 4% target. Then remember to add on the 3% increase in mandatory employee contributions to MIPSERS to fund current retiree health care benefits. Calling this an overall 2.2% cut is simply not accurate, and many of the objections voiced on this thread clearly underestimate the size of the concessions made by the teachers.

Rose

Fri, Jun 25, 2010 : 10:31 p.m.

aataxpayer The cut to the teachers was 5.2%.

DonBee

Fri, Jun 25, 2010 : 9:07 p.m.

AlphaAlpha - I find this to be biased and from a biased organization. But here is one answer to your question. http://www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj30n1/cj30n1-8.pdf

AlphaAlpha

Fri, Jun 25, 2010 : 7:07 p.m.

Mr. Norton - Allow a rephrase: Many contend that AAPS compensation has, in recent years, been dramatically higher than it has been on an historic basis. It is the perceived jump from the customary middle class wage to the recent upper class wage scale that has many folks questioning reality. Perhaps the popular notion of teachers historically being awarded middle class pay is incorrect. That would bode well for your case. You seem to have lots of info at the ready; might you have any links to historic teacher compensation rates? 50-100 years or so. It could prove very enlightening.

AlphaAlpha

Fri, Jun 25, 2010 : 4:13 p.m.

Agreed, Mr. Olsen, referencing facts enhances the discussion. More facts, links, and references; less rhetoric; all will benefit. Janet - As a special interest group, the NEA figures cannot be trusted much; too many asterisks. The BEA, BLS, Census, and other reasonably unbiased sources are much better-more credible. Mr. Norton, you are correct, many believe comparative statistics suggest AAPS compensation levels are too high, and this issue is much larger than the recently negotiated contract. Your two separate questions are appropriate, and accurate; their answers define which side of the proverbial fence one is on. It's to be expected that recipients of tax revenue would want more, and would expect more is appropriate, and believe that they are correct. Recipients will wax eloquent as to the veracity of their needs. It's also to be expected that payers of tax revenue would tend to want less, and would expect that less is appropriate, and would believe that they are correct, especially as they become cognizant of the compensation statistics, particularly when their own incomes are comparatively smaller and falling. You and your peers deserve every dollar you can get, and so do the tax payers. It takes two to negotiate. It seems likely this issue will remain stable for a time, if the economy slowly worsens as predicted, it will be more difficult to negotiate an agreement equally as unagreeable to all next time.

Jimmy Olsen

Fri, Jun 25, 2010 : 11:50 a.m.

@KidsRtheFuture, Steve, Ghost, Maybe you should stop arguing with the bloggers that do it just to raise your ire and obviously have no clue. Sarcastic comments to them don't continue the conversation in a postive way - maybe they make you feel better. Continue discussion with others who actually have a differing or simliar opinion and ask them to reference their facts. Maybe you'll find some better conversation.

Speechless

Fri, Jun 25, 2010 : 11:46 a.m.

"... the agreement perpetuates an arrangement which is fundamentally at odds with economic realities..." Non-union realities, that is. Historically, the average person has struggled, often in vain, to find a stable job providing tolerable work conditions and sufficient earnings to cover fundamental family needs. Just a pipe dream for so many, their desire to meet basic requirements essentially conflicted with economic realities. That's why unions were organized in the first place. That's why there has also been a long history of dedicated reform movements seeking to interfere with inhuman dynamics in the marketplace. Pre-Civil War abolitionists placed themselves squarely at odds with economic realities in the South. As a matter of compassion and consideration for human well being, the current 'realities' may need to be confronted, assertively challenged, and changed. The bargaining strength of the Ann Arbor teachers' union offers a good standard. Their new agreement doesn't pose an economic problem needing to be curtailed. Rather, it highlights the much less fortunate financial circumstances of many non-union school teachers, and of most non-union workers in general. The goal shouldn't be to pull down the living standards of unionized local teachers as part of a steady, long-term race to the bottom. Instead, social policy ought to combine widespread establishment of living wage standards with increased national union membership and greater overall democracy inside the workplace. "... average teacher pay of $58,482 is the fourth-highest among U.S. states..." Although Steve indicates that Michigan now places eleventh, this still shows that teacher unions in others states have meaningful room for improvement. Those union reps elsewhere had better step up to the plate and get to work. As for Michigan's average teacher pay, numerous local, tree-town professionals of other skilled backgrounds would recoil in horror if their earnings fell below $60,000 annually — the onset of austere hard times!

KidsRtheFuture

Fri, Jun 25, 2010 : 11:23 a.m.

PS...you think Charter schools are cheaper...check out the article in todays NEW YORK TIMES. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/25/education/25school.html?th&emc=th The cost of good schools is not cheap. On the other hand, if you don't mind gangs, daily beatings, rapes, and a 20% graduation rate, let's just keep cutting the budget.

KidsRtheFuture

Fri, Jun 25, 2010 : 10:57 a.m.

Steve, Murrow's Ghost, and other supporters...give it up. Even if we abolished the union, cut wages by 50%, made the working day 10 hours for 260 days a year, the nay sayers would still find reason to complain. There will always be the small percent of vocal people who have nothing good to say. Don't waste your time trying to change their mind. It won't happen. Take solace in the fact that the millage passed in Ann Arbor last fall by a majority (even if the county voted it down). Most Ann Arbor residents are themselves educated and understand the true value of education and the hard and important job that teachers do for society. It is unfortuante that they are often the underappreciated cornerstones of our society. Ask yourself this...what would happen if every teacher walked away from their job? In less than 10-20 years our society would collapse. I for one think teachers should all make 6 figures and as the CFO of a company, I most certainly understand the implications of that. Teachers need to know they are supported by a majority of the taxpaying public! Thank you for a great job.

Steve Norton, MIPFS

Fri, Jun 25, 2010 : 10:17 a.m.

AlphaAlpha, Let's be clear: you think Ann Arbor teachers make too much, regardless of what this contract says. You justify this by citing average pay statistics. However, people in many professions make a great deal more than the average wage. (It is, after all, an average.) There are two separate questions: Is this contract an appropriate response to the financial conditions that face our school district? I would say yes, especially with the ongoing formula provision. On the other hand, you ask if teachers are being paid too much in general given the nature of their work. I don't think I'm at all alone in saying no, it is important that we continue to compensate our teachers well and make teaching in Ann Arbor a viable long-term career. That way we can continue to attract and retain the most talented and committed professionals. Janet, Times and facts change. According to the latest versions of those very same NEA rankings, Michigan teachers' average salaries ranked eleventh in the nation for both 2007-08 and 2008-09. We are only 5.5% above the national average. Moreover, Michigan ranks 49th in the percent change in average salaries over the decade from 1998-99 to 2008-09. On average, Michigan teachers had their salaries increase 2% per year over that decade, while the US average shows an average 3.4% increase per year for all teachers. (This is without accounting for inflation.)

barses

Fri, Jun 25, 2010 : 9:22 a.m.

Until someone teaches or has a teacher in the family. Some people will never understand...Again, I love my job but most people need some added incentives to stay in this profession or to convince their spouses that it is worth keeping their job financially. Which jobs have as huge of an effect on our children and our future.How do we put a price tag on that? During my lunch hour I don not have time to bash others. I am usually happy I have a chance to go to the bathroom, try to make some phone calls, or visit colleagues (social worker, speech pathologist, principal, etc) to talk about the needs of my students.If I do have time to make it to lunch in the lounge, we usually talk shop, becuse we are not granted time to speak with other staff during the day.Most other professions have daily staff meetings. Our 50 min prep time is not nearly enough time and some times you may have a child you need to take care of during your prep (IEP, sick, had an accident-injured or didn't make it to the bathroom in time, behavior issue, etc.) Any public servant job: Police, Fire dept, many of these professions are taken for granted.

janet

Fri, Jun 25, 2010 : 7:43 a.m.

facts from 2006. read the link below and see more FACTS. "Michigan's average teacher pay of $58,482 is the fourth-highest among U.S. states, according to statistics gathered by the National Education Association." In 2006 15 teachers from washtenaw county made between 95k and 120k. 11 of those 15 were from ann arbor schools. 3 from saline and 1 from hartland. include raises every year since then and imagine where they are now. http://blog.mlive.com/ann_arbor_news_extra/2007/08/how_much_pay_for_teachers.html again the facts speak the best

AlphaAlpha

Fri, Jun 25, 2010 : 5:42 a.m.

"I don't see what is so awful about an agreement which ensures that costs will not go up unless available revenue goes up as well." Perhaps the simplest explanation is that the agreement perpetuates an arrangement which is fundamentally at odds with economic realities: Local public employee compensation has become elevated way above historic norms, and way above compensation levels of the average taxpayer, even above compensation levels of the national average government employee.

Steve Norton, MIPFS

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 11:57 p.m.

I think people are missing some of the important points. The four unpaid days works out to a direct 2.2% cut. The freeze on health care contributions puts the entire increase in health care cost on the teachers, whatever that turns out to be. Those who do get step increases (which was less than half as of this year) will see the increased delayed until three quarters through the year for the next two years. But the most important provision is the formula, by which teachers will get cost of living or other raises ONLY if the overall operating revenue increases (not including gifts, and subtracting any increases in the required retirement contributions). This formula will remain in effect until such time as the teachers have recouped $4.5 million of their $5.4 million in concessions, no matter how long this takes. In other words, if school operating revenue does not increase for five years, there will be no pay adjustments for those five years. This excludes step increases, but even after the retirements I believe a majority of AAPS teachers are already at the top or next to the top of the scale because of years of service. So most AAPS teachers are not getting step raises anyway. If the school does see an increase in operating revenue, one quarter of that will be set aside for fund equity or other purposes decided by the district. The other three quarters will be made available for employee compensation, and the teachers would be able to get their proportional share of that (currently 70%). I don't see what is so awful about an agreement which ensures that costs will not go up unless available revenue goes up as well. And teachers as a group will only have a claim to their percentage share of the increase, after the district gets to set some aside in advance.

Jimmy Olsen

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 9:14 p.m.

Yes, DonBee, Yes! Look around the county and see who is truly sacrificing - support staff, etc. This is just a delay tactic to push costs into future years, except for the health care issue, but no one knows what ObamaCare will bring. I think the taxpayers are catching on....Enough is Enough!!

AlphaAlpha

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 8:48 p.m.

DonBee makes excellent points. An additional concern is that much evidence suggests that housing prices have begun to drop again, along with prices of most assets, and economic growth. This trend makes it likely that tax collections will be reduced as well, which will very likely encourage substantial public employee pay and benefit reductions. Most workers, not just public, will likely see a mild acceleration in the recent trend toward (mostly private worker) pay and benefit reductions. Unfortunately for public employees and programs, the diminished social mood attendant with deflated assets and income will make any tax revenue enhancements remarkably problematic. Odds of significant tax increases, for several years, approach zero. We need to do the best we can with what we have.

DonBee

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 7:23 p.m.

I will not argue the teacher pay issue. What I will say is this does little to fix the long term issues for the district. The bus drivers and custodians took large permanent pay cuts - the custodians through a new contract and the bus drivers by being basically outsourced to the WISD. This contract, the largest single expense that the district has is mostly temporary fixes. The only real long term fix (and it could be huge) is to cap the medical premiums that the district pays. This is one of the fastest growing benefits that any business has deal with. All the other changes are basically - we can not pay you more now, so we will pay you more in the future. This is the same problem that the state is facing with pensions now. While this is not pensions, I believe we may be right back to this same position next year at this time. We need real structural fixes if we are going to have good to great education going forward. Some of that will have to come from fixing costs - including how many districts we have in the county. Some of that will have to come from being smarter about how the district spends money on books, energy and other non-wage items. Some will have to come from reducing the top heavy administration of the district. Once those things have been fixed, then the taxpayers are going to have to find a way to provide more money. I worry that if the taxpayers see to much in the way of "smoke and mirrors" that the next millage request will go down in flames. I now understand why the contract was top secret. Shame on Dr Roberts and Ms Mexicote for keeping the taxpayers in the dark.

jcj

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 6:26 p.m.

All you "underpaid teachers" should stick to peddling your propaganda in the classroom to your captive audience cause we ain't buying it! Not so easy to "teach" those of us in the real world!

Heardoc

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 5:13 p.m.

I think it is clear from these posts that the argument that teachers are underpaid is an invalid argument. Several people have initially posted that salaries listed were overblown and not the reality -- well that has been proven false via the author of the article and citations revealing that teachers are well paid. I posted earlier that we need to pay teachers on a scale on par with the private sector -- Let us look at the pay scale from a different perspective: What id pay was greater in the private sector than in the public schools? Would the teachers in public school want to be raised to the level of private schools? The answer is yes. The private sector is in the free market whereas public schools are not -- teachers are overpaid because they had a monopoly on both the labor as well as no choice in where you could go to school. This has broken down a bit lately with Charter schools and other schooling opportunities. The days of salaries in the public sector outpacing salaries in the private sector are really coming to a halt.

AlphaAlpha

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 4:35 p.m.

"$75,000 (at the time the average household income in Washtenaw County)" Just to be clear, average household income is substantially higher than average income, because average househols income includes income earned by all wage earners in a household. The number of wage earners per household is typically about 1.5, so, if average household income = $75K, then average income is only ~ $50K. A very significant difference to be aware of...

JackieL

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 3:28 p.m.

I believe that most of those high salaries that Janet posted were earned by teachers that took on a lot of extra work. I remember the middle school gym teacher had a high salary like that and he did a ton of extra coaching and the organizing for the end of the year trip. It wasn't just teaching.

Jimmy Olsen

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 2:32 p.m.

@Speechless, Maybe because when doctors, lawyers, engineers, architects, realtors, company CEOs, and so on who work for private companies have NO more money in the budget they are subject to the whim's of their employers. Lets just cut everyone's salary by 10% and we'll be in the black. Let's not give 401K matching anymore. Lets charge $200 more per employee for health care contributions by the employees. Public employees and their contract doesn't work so simple, yet the budgets have the same problems in this Michigan economy. If you look beyond the obvious bashers who have no clue, you'd see there are many who value educators, but believe the antiquated contracts and funding by the state need an over-haul. What most object to is the sense of entitlement by the MEA/AAEA/SEA, any EA, that drives these contracts on and on. Yes, most of you have master degree's - does that make you a better teacher? Does that make a person a better engineer? But year and year (until you reach the top) you get automatic raises via the steps. We need structural changes to the system, so that all share in the good times and bad times, just like private employees do. The verbiage in the attached document with a lot of words like "delay" will not hurt so much at the end. Only time will tell. Many of agree with the MEA - Enough is Enough!!

David Jesse

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 1:48 p.m.

@A2reality: the numbers that Janet pulled out here, and others have pulled out in previous posts, come from a series I did while at the Ann Arbor News several years ago. In that series we sent Freedom of Information Act requests to every district asking for the names, titles and wages paid for any school district employee that made more than $75,000 (at the time the average household income in Washtenaw County) as reported to the IRS for the full year. The articles that ran explained a wide variety of issues surrounding teacher pay, including supplemental pay, which is where the increases come from. Here's the link to that series: http://blog.mlive.com/ann_arbor_news_extra/teacher_pay/index.html

A2Realilty

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 12:39 p.m.

David (and for the benefit of janet): How certain are you of the accuracy of all of the wages that were just published by janet? How certain are the titles that each person has by their name, in other words, is a "teacher" a "teacher?" Or is a "teacher" an "assistant principal?" This information was VERY inaccurate at the high end of the wage scale that was posted by AA.com earlier this year. Additionally, if wages are posted again, then I'd like to see a list of the other activities that each teacher supports to achieve their wage (are they coaching volleyball? soccer? etc.). Posters like janet take the information and run with it. It's disappointing that the information, which creates a tremendous bias on their part is inaccurate and only partially complete.

Speechless

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 12:24 p.m.

Another day, another lunch hour, and it's teacher time once again: Bash! Bash! Bash! Now that we're listing above what represents some very high-end teacher salaries, might we also include comparable lists that show top-earning local doctors, lawyers, engineers, architects, realtors, company CEOs, and so on? Why not? The question that screams out is why it's entirely fine for other professionals to earn some very healthy incomes into six figures, but so, so wrong for teachers to earn even a percentage of that. The answer, of course, is that teachers have successfully availed themselves of unions in order to achieve better pay and working conditions. And unions, as we know, must be stopped at all costs since — in the much larger economic scheme of things — they help force corporate elites to share wealth with their employees and not simply keep it all for themselves. More than anything else, it is unions who brought us the middle class. The bashers may insist they're just 'taxpayers' concerned about the costs of public sector teaching. That claim doesn't hold any water, as private-sector union workers in the auto industry and elsewhere regularly find themselves subject to the same kind of bashing. Meanwhile, any number of bashers will routinely defend corporate welfare through big taxpayer-financed subsidies. Today, 'janet' and other bashers feel terribly disappointed that an agreement has been reached with compromises from both sides. It hurts them when the union again completes bargaining without becoming neutered or destroyed. Instead, for now they'll have to make do with bus consolidation and the apparent loss of unionized bus drivers.

Art Vandelay

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 12:07 p.m.

@hardworkingteacher. A fair wage would be one that is somewhere in the vicinity of what other teachers make. Teachers that can't find a job in the public schools often settle for a private school job where the pay and benefit package may be half what public schools currently pay. I haven't checked recently but I did a few years ago and private school pay then, when you factor in benefits, was roughly half. Also Michigan teachers are among the best paid in the country, especially when you factor in the cost of living. I'm not suggesting teachers take a 50% pay cut but for over a decade virtually all of the budget cuts have come in the 25% or so of the budget that doesn't go to salaries and there simply isn't anything else to cut. When teacher pay falls close enough to a market rate that we start having trouble finding good teachers then I'll be first in line to argue for a raise. But we're a long way from there. Teachers did not share anywhere near their share of the $20 million in savings the district needs.

janet

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 11:48 a.m.

thats correct, w4 only, add the benefit package and the number skyrockets even higher

David Jesse

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 10:52 a.m.

@janet: those numbers represent the wages only paid to an employee as reported to the IRS on their W-4.

janet

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 10:15 a.m.

show the salarys and benefits. they can speak for themselfs.

janet

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 10:09 a.m.

for the teachers arguing to keep their high payscale below is a 2007 salary blip from saline schools. keep in mind salarys have increased every years since 2007. this is factual and was printed in the annarbor news back then. show the public the facts! District Name Title Compensation Saline Bruce Ross Teacher 120,869.78 Saline Nancy Brenton Deputy Superintendent 120,280.56 Saline D. Jean Durst High School Principal 114,802.58 Saline David Jodway Teacher 109,854.96 Saline Scot Graden Community & Athletic Director 109,809.15 Saline Timothy Timoszyk Teacher 108,812.23 Saline Ned Cooper Middle School Principal 106,378.27 Saline Betty Rosen-Leacher Assistant Superintendent 105,738.03 Saline David Raft Elementary Principal 104,563.76 Saline Jesse Stevenson Elementary Principal 104,309.10 Saline Timothy Heim Teacher 102,782.12 Saline Sheila Light Elementary Principal 102,412.05 Saline Michael Price Teacher 100,283.60 Saline Stephen Laatsch Elementary Principal 100,002.26 Saline Scott Theisen Teacher 97,551.19 Saline Mike Glennie Teacher 97,546.31 Saline Sean Enright High school assistant principal 97,034.15 Saline William White High school assistant principal 96,859.14 Saline Eric Diroff High school assistant principal 96,675.38 Saline Kevin Musson Teacher 94,592.10 Saline Jason Riggs Middle school asst. principal 94,165.06 Saline John Mason Teacher 93,998.82 Saline Jody Gielinski SWWC Director/Principal 93,124.44 Saline Scott Stull Teacher 92,816.01 Saline James Wholehan Teacher 92,662.06 Saline Jere Hassberger Teacher 92,257.68 Saline Carol Melcher Teacher 90,898.76 Saline Allan Leslie Teacher 90,667.28 Saline Joyce Jonik Teacher 90,178.81

Dr. I. Emsayin

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 9:47 a.m.

Some para-educators have college degrees, but apply for and get jobs as para-educators. Most teachers have Master's degrees and are required, at their own expense, to continue to earn advanced degrees, for which they receive about 2K for every 30 credits in most districts. Teachers often get new courses to teach every year and need to prepare to teach those courses over the summer and to keep up in the evenings as well as tutoring students during their 30 minute lunch and after school. Teachers understand this is their job to be available in this way. If teachers actually only worked 6 hours a day, students would not have the rich education they get. Many people have jobs where they work at home as part of what they are paid for; most people do for their entire work day what teachers do on their own time: prepare reports, grade papers, do research, make phone calls, do computer work such as entering grades and attendance and fill out computer based reports, etc. Please stop the teacher bashing which some comment makers call union bashing. It's too bad that the people who have time to comment are probably bitter people who need an outlet. As it is, band directors, coaches, counselors, newspaper and yearbook teachers are all taking a pay cut. If Ann Arbor wants to continue earning Grammy Awards, winning state championships and getting students into top colleges, then they should support these supplemental positions.

A2Realilty

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 9:35 a.m.

@janet - Your "facts" are absurd. You have clearly not spent any time recently in a classroom and have no real knowledge of what a teacher actually does. I'd like to hear you explain how a teacher gets "an aide." (What criteria must be met, etc.) There are specific rules and approvals that must be obtained. I'd also love to hear how lesson plans are created, how papers are graded, how parent-teacher conferences are handled, how parent communication is done... While there are undoubtably bad teachers among the population, the broad strokes with which you paint your "facts" are completely ridiculous and wholeheartedly based on fiction and not fact.

hardworkingteacher

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 9:28 a.m.

Just curious-what do people consider to be a "fair" salary for teachers? $10,000 a year without health insurance? No teacher in this district or any other district makes $120,000 a year. I can teach for 30 years and that will never be my yearly salary.

David Jesse

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 9:18 a.m.

I've updated the story with a PDF of the presentation given by district administrators last night on the TA. Look under the more info box at the end of the story.

barses

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 9:12 a.m.

Any spouse of a teacher will understand how much time and money teachers really spend. When expenses are cut who buys things for class? Who prepares the lessons, cuts out copies, laminates,grades papers, phone calls after hours, meetings...The state is requiring more and more professional development.Teachers need to pay for it and the recertification. The past summers have been spent taking classes, organizing my materials, moving rooms. I LOVE my job and all my hard work is for the kids. I have enjoyed my professional development, learning how to best help children.I do not want to complain but it seems teachers need to prove that their jobs are important or that teachers work hard. Many teachers quit after the 1st 5 years.In other countries teachers and education are valued and respected much differently.

Forever27

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 8:59 a.m.

So the teacher's union made concessions and people are still complaining that teachers are over paid. Guess you can never please your critics.

jns131

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 8:59 a.m.

Jesse? I'd like a link to that story when you get a chance. Sounds like teachers won and everyone else lost. Sad state of affairs.

sh1

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 8:46 a.m.

The four days without pay is really not quite accurate. Two of those days are reserved for snow-days. Even if we have no snow days, pay is deducted while teachers still work.

Jeremy

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 8:42 a.m.

Well, it seems like we have a decision to do what private industry does, and raise capital so that we can recruit top tier staff - retain current top tier staff at a pay rate that is sustainable, or alternatively begin a precipitous race to the bottom slashing teacher salaries and de-incentivizing those who educate our youth. I want great public schools, as do all of us in town. The problem is with the disconnect that many have with staff recruitment and incentives. There is no way our schools can maintain excellence while racing to scrape scraps from the bottom of the barrel.

sh1

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 8:40 a.m.

@Jsnet: Really? Comparing teachers to Enron execs? Fact: the great majority of teachers do not have help from para-educators. When they do, it's because they either have extremely high numbers or students with severe disabilities. Fact: a six-hour day is what is spent with students. Prep time adds an additional two-three hours for most teachers.

janet

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 8:02 a.m.

the "ignorance" as the rest of the world sees it is the lack of knowledge. the salarys are factual info. and the hours worked are factual. being at home all summer and during every holiday and winter break, spring break, vacation days,sick days,etc, are all factual. paraeducators are doing the work while teachers sit at the head table with the paycheck. its common anymore, the working class people make pennies and the execs, with are the teachers, are raking in the money. this reminds me of Enron on a lower scale. fool the people making the decisions and take off when it goes under. the ulterior motives to continue ones own position is conflicting the process. its too bad that our taxes fund it. it wouldnt matter if it was a private business because its private money. this is all of our money being used.

A2Realilty

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 7:52 a.m.

The venom with which many posters speak is only equalled by their ignorance. Teachers do not work 6 hour days. Teachers do not work half time. This comments are false, have been repeatedly rehashed in the articles on this topic and should stop. There are many other requirements for teachers beyond the simple class time... grading, planning, etc. Additionally, if the salaries are posted once again by A2.com, the information must be checked carefully. I did so myself and found several of the high wage earners who were labeled as "teachers" were actually administrators. If A2.com publishes salaries, it should take some responsbility to make sure that the information is precisely correct. Overall, the plan sounds somewhat complicated to me, but perhaps it is more simple than it appears. I'm pleased that the board and teachers could work together to continue to make the educational system in Ann Arbor strong.

David Jesse

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 7:32 a.m.

@Chai: It passed. I'll get a story up shortly.

L'chaim

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 7:14 a.m.

What about school bus consolidation?

Art Vandelay

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 6:35 a.m.

So teacher and administrator salaries make up somewhere near 75% of the budget and they will contribute about 25% of the $20 million shortfall. That doesn't sound like doing your part, Brit. Your $102,000 per year total compensation figure seems right, AlphaAlpha, but you didn't point out that the teacher contract requires them to work 6 hour days times 181 days or 1,086 hours per year. A full time job is considered to be 2,000 hours. It's time we got a school board that puts the kids first, not the teachers union.

Jimmy Olsen

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 6:35 a.m.

Sounds like a bunch of hocus pocus that will in the end, not solve any of the district's problems. How about we eliminate the steps all together? The only good I see is the capping of the health care. These contracts are were born in the sixties and seventies - we need 21st century contracts that are flexible and contain structural changes necessary for the evolution in education that is on the horizon (on-line learning, teacher evaluations, etc.) More of the same from the AAEA, MEA - maintain the status quo....Enough is Enough

jns131

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 6:21 a.m.

Sounds like the board caved in. Sounds like a plan but they should have kept the lay offs. Now to see what happens with transportation. I think the money should have been left in the coffers and not paid back to them. Doesn't sound like a savings to me. More like the teachers union getting what they want when they want it. Guess that is more bad news for transportation and the custodians.

Heardoc

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 5:40 a.m.

Teacher pay should be on par with the private sector pay for teachers. A comparison would be good to see and the savings would be significant. We are continually held hostage to the unions. I believe there was an article written several days ago regarding a state legislator proposing to do just that for all state employees. The savings were in the range of 500 million dollars. Unions are costing the state money and we need to reign in the unions -- no need to overpay for services.

AlphaAlpha

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 5:21 a.m.

Total compensation of ~$0.102 million per year per teacher keeps the average teacher compensation higher than 94% of the US population, numbers per US BEA, BLS, and Census.

Steve Norton, MIPFS

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 12:49 a.m.

A technical correction: according to the presentation, 75% of the increase in general fund revenue would be available for employees; the remaining 25% would be kept in fund equity. Teachers would get a share of that 75% proportional to their total share of district employment costs. Currently, that's around 70%. So, teachers (AAEA members) would have a right to 75% x 70% = 52.5% of any increases in general fund revenues, as long as fund equity was above 10% of operating expenditures. This formula would stay in place (and replace any regular cost of living or other increases) until such time as teachers had as a group recouped $4.5 million of their concessions. The terms can be renegotiated should fund equity reach the district's target of 15% of expenditures, or if revenue fell half of one percent or some similar financial emergency intervened.