AMOC

Thu, Jan 7, 2010 : 6:05 p.m.

@Mallory - You said "I may be wrong but I think the idea was to huse the CHS students in a separate building." I'm afraid you mis-interpreted my suggestion. According to AAPS, the new Skyline HS was designed to accommodate at least 4 "schools-within-schools" in addition to their complement of students for whom Skyline is their "home" comprehensive high school. Those schools-within-schools were planned to be operated as magnet high school programs, originally featuring magnet programs for health care, forensic science, and a couple other options (I forget them now. I was distinctly not impressed with the other choices.) The last time the magnet programs were mentioned, implementation was postponed until all four classes (9-12) were present at Skyline. Instead of opening the magnet programs now or in the future, I suggest that AAPS move Community and Stone into 2 of the 4 designated "magnet school" spaces at Skyline and close the buildings now used by those small high school programs. This will preserve two unique and popular programs, and save money on operating and transportation costs. It also gives those small high school students access to the sports, music and foreign language programs at Skyline, which is served (as is now true of Community, Stone and Huron) by AATA buses, so students with work-study or CR can get to their other activities easily. It's win-win-win, from everything I can see.

Dan Rubenstein

Thu, Jan 7, 2010 : 8:48 a.m.

1blt - First, I never said don't touch benefits. Second, a $40K/yr. difference in salary is significant. I honestly don't understand your point.

Dan Rubenstein

Tue, Jan 5, 2010 : 11:02 p.m.

Regarding early retirement packages, some worry about losing experienced teachers. Yet others here worry about burnt-out, clock-punching long-timers. The truth is probably somewhere in between. Retirement of some teachers would lower average teacher quality, retirement of others would raise it. And there are many gifted young teachers (note also experience gained elsewhere does not mean not starting above step one in AAPS). The point is, retirement incentives are a proven cost reduction mechanism in business, and just as applicable to current economic and demographic conditions in public education. They avoid lowering salaries overall, maintaining morale, and keep recent grads in Michigan while infusing teacher ranks with new energy. They would be a win-win (I won't reply to anecdotal 'evidence' of how bad all relatively inexperienced teachers are -- it just isn't true; you have to hire the right ones and uphold the tenure process). I would like to see Roberts, et al muster the business courage to offer robust packages, not paltry ones as AAPS has done in the past.

David Jesse

Tue, Jan 5, 2010 : 10:53 p.m.

@Roy: The Ann Arbor school board will discuss Race to the Top at its meeting at 7 p.m. Weds. I'm attending and will file a story.

Roy

Tue, Jan 5, 2010 : 10:10 p.m.

Is the school district going to meet the filing deadline for the Race to the Top funding program? Now that the state has done its part. It requires local commitment and accountability from the teachers, board, and superintendent. It must be done by Thursday.

M.

Tue, Jan 5, 2010 : 2:34 p.m.

aaparent - I'm not sure what limmy meant in their comment, but I meant they would need another building. I have absolutely no preference on which high school would share the campus, but just saying it WOULD serve to eliminate the transportation costs mentioned. I don't know how many students attend CHS but I don't think the existing buildings at any A2 high school could accommodate a whole other school. Aaand I feel I'm getting a bit off topic now. =)

DagnyJ

Tue, Jan 5, 2010 : 2:09 p.m.

It will be at least two years before Skyline is full, and it may never be full given the demographics of the city. It would also be easy to redistrict a few kids back into Huron, especially in the neighborhoods that didn't want to go to Skyline anyway. We are talking, maybe, 400 kids tops at CHS.

aaparent

Tue, Jan 5, 2010 : 1:35 p.m.

Malorie- I don't think Skyline has two buildings. Or did you mean have CHS be part of one of the other high schools? I believe Pioneer and Huron are bigger buildings than Skyline but maybe that is not the case.

M.

Tue, Jan 5, 2010 : 1:15 p.m.

aaparent - I may be wrong but I think the idea was to house the CHS students in a seperate building. It's not unheard of to have 2 different schools on the same property. I went to Pinckney schools when the middle school was right next to the high school. While in middle school, I took a band class at the high school. I was able to walk next door to the high school for my class. No transportation costs!

aaparent

Tue, Jan 5, 2010 : 12:03 p.m.

Limmy- I asked that question to a school administrator who said that Skyline is not large enough to house CHS students and students slated to go to Skyline. When Skyline has kids grades 9-12, it will be full. I don't know if that is the case at Pioneer and Huron or the middle schools.

DagnyJ

Tue, Jan 5, 2010 : 10:23 a.m.

The Community Resource job could be moved to any of the high schools. That's one person, one job. I'd like to see the stats on how many kids are taking online courses, and CRs, and also a census for how many kids take the buses to and from Community. The cost of piggybacking on other high school sports should be factored into the costs of CHS. For each kid in each sport, a prorated cost should be charged back to CHS so we can see the real cost of the HS. Also, did anyone find the operating costs for various buildings? I'm curious how much each school costs to heat, light, etc. per pupil?

josber

Tue, Jan 5, 2010 : 9:28 a.m.

The myth that special ed is safe in these times is just that. The number of autistic children is high, and gets higher every year, and the district has a difficult time managing these children. They are of course, very vulnerable in these budget strains, and the idea that they and the costs associated with them are untouchable is laughable. Look how they refuse to post the number of special education staff on this very PDF! In every school! They are hiding their cuts, probably from very irate parents. The special ed budget was to be held steady at 7 percent a year, well given that the rate of autism diagnosis is climbing 17% a year, the kids are absolutely getting shortchanged. It's one out of 110 now diagnosed with autism or if you believe more dire reports 1 out of 91 but there is talk the real number is closer to 1 in 67.

limmy

Tue, Jan 5, 2010 : 8:47 a.m.

I like the idea of moving CHS to Skyline -- keep it intact but just physically move it. Then sell the building they are in now. Kids could go back and forth between Skyline classes and sports and CHS classes. There would be no transportation costs. If they want to go elsewhere, they can ride AATA. If they need portables, there are some available at Pioneer!

AMOC

Tue, Jan 5, 2010 : 8:37 a.m.

@DagnyJ - You said " Also, CHS students do band and athletics at the other schools, which are costs that should be tacked on to the CHS per pupil cost. I think Community spends far more than the kids are worth.... The programs parasitically uses district resources yet it is not accountable for that use." Here's another perspective. CHS covers the salary of the coordinators and provides the test proctoring for all AAPS students taking on-line classes. From *all* the high school programs. So every student at Huron, Stone, Clemente or Pioneer, who takes an on-line class to meet the new state of Michigan requirement, to resolve a scheduling conflict, to recover credits due to a course failure or severe illness, or to be able to fit band, foreign language and athletics into their school schedule, is being supported by the staff at CHS. As is every adult-ed student who is now looking to earn a diploma through the Michigan Virtual High School rather than a GED. Community High School also administers the Community Resource (CR) program for the entire AAPS district. Students at all AA high schools can participate in artistic, commercial, research and business activities with community mentors or organizations and earn credit towards graduation by using this program. This is a very important way for students to personalize their education. These two programs at least partially balance any costs that CHS students incur for the district when they participate in classes regularly scheduled at other buildings. As for athletics, those are "extra-curricular" activities which take place outside school hours. The cost of one or two more students on a team bus which is already scheduled is negligible. We should charge all the athletic-specific transportation back to the athletic departments. And we should (and from my family's recent experience, AAPS does) allow *all* students access the various classes which require specialized facilities. I'm thinking of auto shop and astronomy at Pioneer; graphic arts and jewelry at Huron; swimming / Life Guard training at both Pioneer and Huron and so forth. You have to ask, the student will often have to sacrifice something (taking an on-line class to replace the transportation time is common), but AAPS does make an effort to provide access to all programs to all qualified students. All those buses you seem to be worried about as such a waste of money? At least some of them fit their CHS-to-other-HS runs in and around transporting 8th graders taking algebra and/or Latin from and to the middle schools, and transporting kindergartners who attend school half-day only. Of course, there's no way to tell that, or the cost of transportation for athletes and musicians to participate in competitions from the pooled budget numbers released by the district. There is a study on how to run the pupil transportation system at AAPS more efficiently, which has not yet been implemented. Let's hope this is among the issues covered at one of the Community Budget forums.

DagnyJ

Tue, Jan 5, 2010 : 7:21 a.m.

Julie, I disagree that CHS is a moneymaker. The accounting of its operation ignores some costs to run the school, like the constant busing and the fact that students take courses at the other schools while CHS is not held accountable for the instruction in its per pupil costs. Also, CHS students do band and athletics at the other schools, which are costs that should be tacked on to the CHS per pupil cost. I think Community spends far more than the kids are worth. It is not an alternative school, it is a downtown building full of kids and a few teachers. The programs parasitically uses district resources yet it is not accountable for that use.

plsexcuseme

Mon, Jan 4, 2010 : 10:51 p.m.

Please excuse me for bursting in midway into this conversation. I am not a teacher; married to a teacher; nor in any way related to a teacher, other than the fact that I am in total awe of the high level of dedication and intelligence of the people to whom I have entrusted my children's education over the past 17 years. I am astonished at the level of criticism that some people in this forum are heaping upon the salaries of some teachers. I believe that many of the teachers who have taught my kids put in as much work as U-M professors (and I do know some very dedicated U-M teachers). And even if they did get $100,000 (which it sounds like they don't)--I believe most of them are worth every penny. Do you people realize how much the average crummy CEO of a corporation gets paid in this country--while also padding his pockets with stock options and polluting the environment without a care? I say: pay the CEOs what a typical teacher in A2 makes, and pay the teachers what the typical CEO makes, and then you start to have a more equitable society--not to mention a great learning experience for the CEOs about what it means to REALLY work hard, instead of running around playing golf every other afternoon, after lunch at the country club. It used to be teachers were given the respect in this society that they deserved. The fact that people have become so cynical and begrudge them a living wage only indicates to me how mean-spirited this society has become. And no--I don't make a ton of money either. In fact I'm unemployed and looking for work. And I don't begrudge teachers in this city one cent of what they earn, because, for the most part, they truly care about the kids--which means they truly care about the future. Do you?

Steve Norton, MIPFS

Mon, Jan 4, 2010 : 9:45 p.m.

I have to agree with Julie: we need to attract families to AAPS, not drive them away. @1bit: Clearly, something about the pension system has to change. Switching to a defined contribution plan from a defined benefit plan will be very costly, since current retirees must still be covered while new hires pay into their own accounts. The only legislative analysis of this, by the Senate Fiscal Agency, only looks at the "pension" portion and explicitly ignores the health care portion. But that's where the action is: the reason why DB pensions have collapsed across the economy is the unreal increase in health care costs, and thus the unending increase in costs to the pension plan. The same dynamic is hurting all current workers, and will hurt retirees as Medicare is forced to cut back. As long as this continues, the standard of living will decline for all of us regardless of what changes we make. Any economic "recovery" is not going to make this problem go away.

Julie

Mon, Jan 4, 2010 : 9:25 p.m.

DagnyJ, You see, I'm talking about the financial hit to the AAPS if we close the creative / alternative programs that are keeping families in the district. I'm not going to argue about whether parents "should" fork out private school tuition for programs that are high-quality -- that's not the point. The point is, those schools are money-makers for the district. Close them or weaken them substantially, and people leave and take their money with them. We need to think about GENERATING revenue in ADDITION to cuts. We generate revenue by getting MORE creative, and attracting people back into the public school system.

Lynn Lumbard

Mon, Jan 4, 2010 : 8:51 p.m.

outta the box, some GOOD ideas. I agree with AAparent that we may need both high school pools, but the middle school pools seem unnecessary.

aaparent

Mon, Jan 4, 2010 : 8:34 p.m.

outta the box: creative ideas. One comment: The pool idea wouldn't work because in the fall you have girls swim team practices and boys polo practices at all the high schools. No one pool at the high schools would hold all the participants. During the day, or in the evening could any of the high school or middle school pools be rented to outside groups? The Ann Arbor Synchro swimmers rent Mack pool. Swim clubs or diving clubs in Dexter, Saline, Ann Arbor might need more pool space.

outta the box

Mon, Jan 4, 2010 : 6:22 p.m.

Here are some real cuts. Are we able to put self-interest aside and consider some of these? 1.Close Angell, Burns Park and Slauson, they are old buildings that require high maintenance. They also sit on prime property that could be used for Condos, the University and senior housing. 2.Close all but one pool, stagger practices; you will save a bundle on heating. Except for team sports the pools are rarely used. 3.Close Skyline, move those students back to HHS and PHS. Change Skyline into an alternative school, send Clemente, Community and Stone students there, and get rid of the 3rd athletic program. Close those 3 buildings. 4.After you close Slauson redistrict the middle schools and increase the enrollment at Scarlett. 5. How about a four-day school week? Increase the number of minutes in each day to meet the state requirement for attendance. This would save 20% on heating, 20% on bussing, 20% electricity and not cost one minute of instruction. 6.Many districts have gone to alternating full day kindergarten to save on buses Can we do that? 7.Lets staff at contract levels i.e. are counselors, social workers, speech therapists, all auxiliary staff hired at the levels suggests in the contract. I believe they have gone beyond contract levels in many cases. (Ex why do all middle school have 3 counselors when there is a wide difference in population) Lets assign by clusters so they can follow students through. 8.There are always rumors floating around at social events in AA about administrators shuffled to higher positions because they cant be fired. What about teachers that are on administrative leave? Are these cuts that could be considered.

DagnyJ

Mon, Jan 4, 2010 : 5:17 p.m.

Julie, if parents find comprehensive high schools unacceptable, then they should leave the district. And probably the U.S. where such high schools are the norm. Or be prepared to pony up $15K per kid per year at private school.

Julie

Mon, Jan 4, 2010 : 5:09 p.m.

DagnyJ -- or they leave the district.

Rork Kuick

Mon, Jan 4, 2010 : 4:21 p.m.

About credentials: Steve Norton may have anecdotes about lousy teachers with PhD's but I have anecdotes about lousy teachers with masters in education degrees. Neither is data. Even data would only show what happens on average. Right now we can't even consider hiring the Nobel prize winner. My point was that the credentials requirements and compensation mechanisms (that ignore your performance, or non-teaching experience) hinder us from obtaining some great people. The status quo benefits credentialed teachers, so there's no surprise that they are often hostile to any changes.

Beth

Mon, Jan 4, 2010 : 1:50 p.m.

Thanks for the explanation, Steve - I hadn't realized how it all worked. Another area I'd like to see scrutinized is instructional materials. I can only speak as a lower-el teacher here, but I know that materials are often ordered to go with a current trend in education, and then gotten rid of down the road when another trend takes over. Elementary literacy instruction is a huge case in point here. I taught for AAPS until becoming a stay-home mom 7 years ago, and at that time the district was investing heavily in "balanced literacy" - teacher training, book rooms in schools, classroom materials, etc. Now that my oldest is a district student, I see that not all teachers are following that model. Some have moved away from Centers back toward a more traditional approach. What happened to all the non-consumable supplies that were purchased? Are new teachers still receiving Balanced Literacy training? Will new books and materials be required in another few years when another model for instruction gains popularity? I'm sure there are other similar examples at other grade levels. Yes, sometimes new methods and materials are necessary, but maybe this area is one where AAPS could rein in the spending a bit?

Steve Norton, MIPFS

Mon, Jan 4, 2010 : 12:57 p.m.

@Beth, They've been doing that in AAPS, by capping the district contribution to health care and, more recently, changing the prescription drug program. But one of the realities we need to understand is that the costs to the district are different: a dollar in benefits costs the district a dollar; a dollar in salary costs the district something like $1.25 because of the mandatory contributions to the state pension program (nearly 18% of payroll) plus FICA and so on. For better or worse, decreasing salaries (payroll) saves more than cutting benefits. (Conversely, increasing benefits is also cheaper than increasing salary.) It's worth a reminder here that local districts do not control the pension plans at all. The state teacher pension system, MPSERS, is administered by the state government and is regulated by the legislature. The percent of payroll that districts are required to pay in is determined by accounting rules that govern what the system needs to have in assets to cover pension costs now and in the future. It's also determined by the cost of health care: the retirement health care portion is pay-as-you-go and that portion of the contribution (about half, and rising fast) goes straight out the other door to pay for current benefits to retirees. In sum, teachers currently working are not getting any of this set aside into personal accounts, and with things as they are there is no assurance that the system will be solvent by the time they retire. But any changes we want to make must be enacted by the state legislature.

Beth

Mon, Jan 4, 2010 : 12:29 p.m.

Instead of focusing on teacher salaries, can we look at teacher benefits? I am a teacher and I know how nice the health insurance package is - maybe not compared to some other places, like the UM, but still good. My grandmother, a retired teacher, paid a 50-cent co-pay on all prescriptions until she passed away 8 years ago, thanks to her teaching career. Can negotioations be opened with the unions to ask teachers to accept a small reduction in health benefits rather than a reduced paycheck?

DagnyJ

Mon, Jan 4, 2010 : 12:05 p.m.

So Julie, the per-pupil costs at Community do not at all reflect that actual cost to educate students there. For example, if you attend CHS and want to take four years of a language, you cannot unless you do so as an independent study. Or you must take the language elsewhere. So then you need to take a bus to one of the other high schools. Likewise with all AP courses. And with all music except jazz band. So the cost per pupil at CHS should include all these other costs, including a portion of the music, phys ed, and AP offered at the other high schools, plus the transportation cost. Something tells me that when all this gets factored in, CHS costs a lot more per pupil than the other high schools. If all this is so attractive to parents, they should send their kids to one of the other high schools. Otherwise they should learn to live with CHS's offerings.

Julie

Mon, Jan 4, 2010 : 11:16 a.m.

DagnyJ - I have no idea. But I think it's probably complicated, and not an easy equation, as that bussing and programming is probably some of what makes the High Schools attractive to prospective families.

Steve Norton, MIPFS

Mon, Jan 4, 2010 : 10:59 a.m.

A word about credentials: I came to Ann Arbor some large number of years ago to get a PhD in the social sciences. At the time, working as a teaching assistant (running discussion sections and grading in undergraduate courses) was the primary form of financial aid in my department. I very quickly learned that there is nothing about getting a PhD that actually prepares you to teach - except actually teaching as a TA. Even our union (GEO) had to fight to get paid teaching training included in the contract, and that was for just a few days of training. I know a lot of PhDs who are brilliant in their fields (no Nobel winners, though) but who can barely teach a graduate class or make their concepts understood to any but the most advanced of their colleagues. Let alone excite the minds of a bunch of hormone-addled 14-year-olds. Teaching is a profession, and for good reason. I can't imagine dealing with all the issues an elementary school teacher has to deal with (different learning styles, vastly different abilities, different developmental stages), much less dealing with the adolescent years. Our K-12 teachers are dedicated to bringing out the best in each student; they can't just write-off the poor students as some of my college professors did. I think it's time that we all got a real good understanding of what teachers do and why, as well as the legal requirements and restraints on their work. Then maybe we can have an intelligent discussion of how we want to spend our education dollars.

Rork Kuick

Mon, Jan 4, 2010 : 10:38 a.m.

1) Jobs that can be changed over to a performance based compensation plan should be so changed. Tests in science, math and English can help assess performance of some teachers, but the data has to be looked at carefully (using models), since good students will test well despite horrible teachers. Leaving it largely up to principals, and carefully scrutinizing their performance based on results for their school seems reasonable, and may be what we do the least. Perhaps teachers will teach to the tests overly much, but I see no way around that, since we need goals, and ways of measuring progress. My gripe: I was taught geometry by a mature teacher who was unable to follow the material themselves - clearly incompetent - in a public high school rated in the top 10 in the U.S. at the time. (This was before faith-based mathematics, and there may have been a real shortage of math teachers then.) We need ways of making that be nearly impossible. 2) Fairness of pay is not computed the way anyone I have seen here is computing it. It's about supply and demand. If Chelsea is trying to get a new high school Math teacher, how many good applicants do they obtain? I think it is many, despite a bit of a closed shop with regards to credentials required (that is, having a Nobel prize in Physics would not suffice to be considered). I will agree that there is a danger of abusing teachers, which is probably why they have a union. Again, ideally principals would be the accountable ones, but they likely lack enough power to effect change except if measured over many years.

DagnyJ

Mon, Jan 4, 2010 : 10:29 a.m.

Julie, how about we leave CHS alone, but stop busing kids to and from the other schools for music, sports, AP classes? How much money would that save?

Julie

Mon, Jan 4, 2010 : 10:21 a.m.

@Basic Bob and others.... You have it backwards. AAPS should open MORE programs like Ann Arbor Open @ Mack and CHS. YES, we lose students that don't get into these programs to charters and private schools! I spoke with Todd Roberts about this issue, and he did have numbers (I apologize I don't remember them precisely), but I do know that it was a surprisingly small number of students that would have to leave the district that would make the closing of these schools a financial benefit. The truth is, if AAPS had more of these programs, say another Open School on the east side, we could attract MORE students and revenue back to the district. The demand far outweighs the supply. Cutting popular, revenue-generating programs is just backwards.

DagnyJ

Mon, Jan 4, 2010 : 8:44 a.m.

Don Bee: Thank you for your hard work on the budget. I know that you have said the Community is less per pupil than Huron, and about the same as Skyline. Can you factor in the cost of busing to and from CHS to the other HS all day long? And the associated costs of CHS student taking classes, music, etc at the other schools? Also, what about the cost to maintain the building? My concern about CHS is that it is not a standalone HS but a school that relies on resources at the other high schools and then uses buses and other resources to get those resources. The additional transportation and operating costs get masked elsewhere, giving CHS the illusion of being less expensive to operate. Am I right?

Andrew Smith

Mon, Jan 4, 2010 : 7:14 a.m.

Concerning the "user-friendly" version of the budget, it would be very helpful to see simply a list of every check cut on an AAPS account over the last year or two, every transfer of funds into or out of those accounts, and any other form of disbursement or revenue. A line-by-line analysis of those numbers could yield possible areas for spending cuts.

Andrew Smith

Mon, Jan 4, 2010 : 7:11 a.m.

Scanning the bewildering spectrum of comments posted here, two main concepts emerge: [1] That employee's salary is very different than an employee's cost to the employer: a McDonald's burger-flipper may be paid $7.00 per hour, but cost his employer $12.00 per hour. Likewise an salaried employee in an engineering firm, who may take home $150,000 per year, but cost his employer $225,000 per year. And finally, a teacher in Ann Arbor, who may cost over $100,000 to the district, but only take home $45,000 per year. [2] That the majority of a teacher's work is done in the hours outside of class: early mornings, afternoons, evenings, weekends, and holiday breaks. That is when the numerous emails and phone calls with parents occur, when papers are graded, when new assignments are planned, when classroom materials are inventoried and organized, etc. So if you multiply the number of hours a teacher is actually standing in a classroom with students by some number greater than two, you'll get the number of hours a teacher actually works.

Steve Norton, MIPFS

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 11:43 p.m.

DonBee, While I can't be sure without you quoting page numbers and so on, I am willing to bet that the $7 million you describe as "bond payments" in the FY2003 budget was in fact transfers to the "capital needs fund." This is not to pay bonds, but to make capital expenditures without having to issue a bond. Bonds normally won't sell unless there is a dedicated tax to pay them off, so no one uses operational dollars to pay regular bonds. However, the bond cycle is long (10 to 20 years), and lots of repair and renovation issues come up in between. With the passage of the larger sinking fund in more recent years, the BoE has been able to reduce their contributions to the capital needs fund, which amount to $1.5 million in the FY2010 budget. One purpose of this is that there are some "capital" expenditures that cannot be paid for with sinking fund revenues by state law: school buses, and technology hardware. You can pay for those with a bond, or with operating funds, but not sinking fund dollars. In any case, the capital needs fund still has a role, though the financial commitment to it has shrunk. On another matter, the reason you do not find payments from the U of M in the 2010 budget is that they have stopped. Since UM is increasingly using the North Campus housing for undergraduates, they stopped making "payments in lieu of taxes" (PILT) a couple of years ago. But the list of potential questions is endless. I hope we can set aside our magnifying glasses soon and deal with the larger picture.

Steve Norton, MIPFS

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 11:16 p.m.

Thought I ought to chime in. Do other districts operate with less money? Yes. Is the cost of living the same in all those districts as those with higher spending? No. Is the nature and breadth of the programs offered the same? Probably not. AAPS residents had for years before 1994 (Proposal A) been willing to support more school spending than most other communities - in part because we could afford it, and in part because we wanted it. Thus, we had schools that paid employees better and offered a wider range of programming than many other schools. If we have to give something up, what will it be? That's what these community meetings are for. Also, to put it in perspective: I am told (haven't checked) that Chelsea schools have one media specialist (librarian) who does the rounds of five buildings, one each day of the week. AAPS still has full-time librarians in (nearly) every building. So far. Libraries and media specialists at the elementary level are not required by the state. It doesn't sound like the folks in Chelsea are happy with the arrangement, but they had little choice. AAPS had more money, and thus had more of a cushion. Time has run out. But please don't think that other districts are doing "just fine" on less money. Some, like Saline and Dexter, have had huge increases in student populations since 1992 (about 80% higher), swelling their budgets. (Just as a district's costs don't fall as fast as they revenue they lose for one less student, costs to educate one additional student are smaller than the added revenue. Shrinking districts are doubly hurt, while growing districts experience considerable benefits.) Those times are now past, and they are facing the same pressures the rest of the districts have been facing. There's a reason every single school board in the WISD region voted to put the countywide millage on the ballot, often at considerable risk to themselves. NO ONE thought that things were "just fine." As to the "we have what we have" argument: we have what we CHOOSE to have. Overall taxes as a percentage of total state income are at the lowest point since the 1960s. State spending on education, as a percent of total state income, has been falling since 2002. Overall spending on K-12 education has been shrinking as a percent of income since 2004. That is: yes, we have less today, but we've been putting a declining share of whatever we DO have into education for the last five to ten years. An analysis of state school aid showed that if we were today receiving the same PERCENT of total state income for education as we did in 2002, every district in the state would have more than $1,000 extra per pupil. That's despite the recession. So, we will have to cut, and we will go through that painful process. But if we want the cuts to end someday, and to actually recover what we have lost, we DO need to talk about changes in the state funding (and tax) system, and talk about a county wide millage. The days of sticking our heads in the sand and saying "OK, let's make painful cuts now and hope that someday things will improve" must end.

treetowncartel

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 10:13 p.m.

Maybe the legislature could spend some part time as teacher aids, since they only work about 100 days a year.

Steven Harper Piziks

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 8:09 p.m.

I pulled those numbers out of thin air to make a point, not create a true-to-life example. And while IEPs can be enforced this year, there's no guarantee of anything next year, when all the IEPs are rewritten. There are already grumblings and rumors about laying off classroom aids for next year, when even more budget cuts will come down the line. We need more revenue.

limmy

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 7:58 p.m.

I agree with the guy who does not want to get rid of the experienced teachers. My kids went to a charter school that hired lots of teachers right out of college (this was often because they had very high teacher turnover). They did not know how to control the classroom. It was either chaotic or many of them used punishment of everyone in an effort to get control. They also did not know how to work with the large variety of learning styles that are common in schools. I felt like my kids were training the teachers instead of the other way around. Teachers are not automatically bad if past age 50 or automatically good if under 40. There is a lot of variance.

DonBee

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 7:41 p.m.

Steven Harper Piziks - Money for special education has tripled in AAPS since 2002 (check the budgets). If someone is telling services are going to be cut they are scaring you. None of the special ed support money was cut and none can be. The county voters outside Proposal A are providing AAPS with more than $18 million in special education money (again check the budget document) and the state is providing more than $10 million (source again the budget). None of this is impacted by the Governor's actions or Proposal A. I understand your worry about your children, I have my own. But, please check the facts and understand the funding. You may want to join APAC to get better information. They have a meeting tomorrow evening. It is on the AAPS website. APAC is for parents with special needs children. They are pretty good and very involved. As to your post about $3000 to $500 per student. The real numbers are more like $14,000 (based on total revenue for the district) to $13,500 next year. Again none of the special education IEP requirements can be cut. I am sorry to violate the request to let others in, but I wanted you to have the facts, so you can hopefully sleep tonight. Good luck with your special needs children. And, yes I have 2 children with IEPs - so I do to some extent understand.

sbbuilder

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 7:38 p.m.

Tony I could not, respectfully, disagree more with your suggestion to limit posts. The exchange between the three posters has been very enlightening, in part because they kept the conversation civil and not too polemical. This is the very kind of back-and-forth posting that exposes more deeply what people are thinking.

Steven Harper Piziks

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 7:17 p.m.

And, incidentally, are you autistic? Did you require ELL services? Did you need a teacher aid whose hours are being cut because of threatened budget reductions? No? Well MY KIDS ARE AND MY KIDS DO. You have no basis for comparison. Don't talk to me about how schools can survive on less money when the help my son needs is being CUT because of budgetary slashes from the state. My kids' education is suffering. More money, in the form of more revenue, solves the problem. End of story.

Steven Harper Piziks

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 7:08 p.m.

What would =you= use? You seem to have an answer in mind already. Let's hear it.

Steven Harper Piziks

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 6:10 p.m.

And, just to add to that, where would you rather send your kids: to a district that spends $3,000 per student per year, or one that spends $500 per student? Which one do you think would have the better chance of giving the kids a better education? An extreme example, but I think it makes the point.

Steven Harper Piziks

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 5:55 p.m.

>More spending on education does not necessarily correlate with higher quality education for our children. It has a rather better chance than cutting education spending, don't you think? If you want good, skilled people in the classroom, you pay them what they're worth and give them the materials they need. Otherwise they'll leave you. You don't cut their salary and tell them to do a better job while they're at it. That's simple, common sense.

sbbuilder

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 5:45 p.m.

Lisa Your defense of the public schools is commendable. Sort of. I'm just wondering if you can come up with any criticism? Is the system so perfect that there is no room for improvement? Are you satisfied with the status quo? Your comments would have more weight if you admit, even slightly, areas that need improvement.. DonBee Thank you ever so much for your posts. Keep up the good work. My take is that you are first trying to understand what is going on before offering solutions. A fascinating video well worth the time: http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity.html It addresses directly the issue of higher education with teachers and their performance, among other things.

Steven Harper Piziks

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 3:52 p.m.

Funny how everyone wants their kids to have a great education but no one wants to pay for it. If we cut education funding (no matter the reason), the quality of our kids' education will suffer. It's already happening. I'm seeing the class sizes in my own kids' schools increase. The teachers are having trouble keeping discipline in classes of 30 and 35 students. Older, experienced teachers who know what they're doing and who are good at reaching difficult kids are being encouraged to retire because they're too expensive to retain, and younger, inexperienced (read, "cheaper") teachers who've barely spent two semesters in the classroom are taking their places. Me, I =want= a highly-trained, heavily experienced, well-paid professional educating my kids. I =want= someone in that classroom who knows what he's doing, who enjoys the job, and has all the materials he needs at hand. I =want= teacher aids available for my middle son, who is autistic, and for my oldest son, who is ELL. I do =not= want my kids' teacher to be worried that she can't make her house payment, that she can't pay her doctor bills, that she has to come to work sick because she doesn't have enough sick leave, that she can't afford a decent car to get her to work every day. I want her to concentrate on her teaching instead. I =want= to pay taxes to support this. Michigan is enjoying the lowest tax rate it's had in decades, and now we're paying for it in other ways. Some people on the this board are saying that teachers need to take a pay cut because the business world has had to endure one. Know what? I don't care. BECAUSE MY KIDS ARE ON THE LINE. I don't care about you and your salary. I CARE ABOUT MY KIDS. I want them to get a good education. Cutting taxes and then cutting education is NOT the way to do it. There are many places for you to complain about your salary cuts. This isn't one of them. Several proposals to increase revenue have shown up in Lansing, but the Republican senate has stalled them or otherwise refused to vote on them. I WANT MORE MONEY FOR OUR KIDS. Lansing needs to get it for us by increasing revenue and stabilizing the tax structure.

SMOOTHIE

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 3:44 p.m.

Hello Citrus, So to be clear, let me get rid of the word "vanilla"...i have also dealt with the expense of private tuition while paying Ann Arbor taxes (my children are raised)...my choice and I'm not complaining. You are suggesting that the students with "high ability" can not be found at any of our other elementary schools (other than Mack?) or at Pioneer, Huron or Skyline??...but only at Community??? Let's talk about "Special-Ed"...I believe that we have decided as a community, that because of our "compassion" they will be cared for. Once again, if you would like something "different"...pay for it out of your own pocket. Hello DonBee, To be clear, I'm not talking about moving the program to another building, I'm talking about giving everyone an "equal" and/or similar education. Look at the surrounding communities, who are also giving there students outstanding educations (Saline, Dexter, Chelsea...) they have many children who go to..."Gabriel Richard", "Greenhills", "Rudolph Steiner"...but the majority of the students in those communities go to the "Public School" and if that is not sufficient...they pay for it out there own pocket. Hello Lisa, I'm not suggesting moving the programs and the teachers. These children should be absorbed into the current classrooms in the "normal"..."vanilla"..."same"...schools. So you have (23) twenty-three children in your classroom today, well you have (27) children in your classroom tomorrow. Our responsibility is not to create jobs for teachers...our responsibility is to give an equal education to our children. And if, as a parent, you don't like that, then send them to a "Private School" and pay for it out of your own pocket!

A2Realilty

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 2:23 p.m.

@1BlockRadius - Let me be clear. I'm not going to offer a Pay for Performance model in response to yours. I don't believe that it would be effective and find the current step model acceptable for the reasons I stated in my last post. For every example that you provided for a poor teacher getting an equal raise, I can cite an example of a poor performer in industry getting an equal or superior raise to a strong performer. I can give examples from companies at which I've worked, and in some situations, for employees that worked for me (my views were overruled by HR or upper management in these situations). Pay for Performance models have an equal number of issues that a step program does. They are just different problems. Additionally, in your scenario, the fairness and effectiveness of the "boss" (principal) is terrifically idealized. The reality is that there are just as many bad "bosses" as good "bosses" in industry and in the school system. This is a TREMENDOUS flaw with the Pay for Performance model in industry; it is a flaw that would perpetuate in the school systems. And really, at the end of the day, are you motivated to get that extra 1% raise that your coworker didn't? Are you that excited to get a 4% raise rather than a 3% raise? (Keep in mind that for a $40k salary, that's $400 per year, spread out over roughly 25 paychecks... yielding a whopping $16 before tax delta between a strong performer and a weak performer. Salary incentives are never motivating factors (although they can be demotivating). Trying to overhaul the pay method would create additional administration and result in no difference in the effectiveness of awarding raises. The short version is that you either believe that the amount that teachers are paid is fair or you don't. Many posters on this board simply sound bitter and want teachers to experience the same hardships that they've found in their current employment. They are the same people who won't be found when they are getting bonuses when times are good again for them. Also, as an aside... in one of your two examples, you state that a teacher's "kids cannot read and write properly and her kids are ~2yrs behind." How is this possible that the teacher's students are 2 years behind when she is simply teaching them for one year? Is this a problem that she's inherited from someone else? This doesn't make sense.

Sean Eldon

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 2:13 p.m.

@1BlockRadius The reason why teachers (and many other educators, administrators, and economists) are skeptical of teacher merit pay is simple: it would involve a massive structural change in the school district without being able to guarantee educational benefits. The reason why? Many models for merit-based pay have ended up promoting spoils systems in the schools. That's not in anyone's interests, certainly not the students. And it's educational benefits, benefits to the kids in the classroom, that any education reform must address first. Although it seems many posters here see teacher merit pay as merely a money saving opportunity. The truth is AAPS cannot cut it's way out of this problem or it will destroy the outstanding programs and opportunities that are already in place in our schools. That's why I'm dismayed by commentators who propose shutting down Community High and/or MACK Open. These are two district-wide programs that are effective, creative, and widely envied. There are waiting lists at both MACK and Community. In short, programs like these draw students into the district. And growing our student population in intelligent, far-sighted ways is exactly what AAPS should be shooting for. The alternative is to cut here and there until the district bleeds to death.

MsWebster

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 2:12 p.m.

Now we're getting somewhere, Thanks Basic Bob: "Perhaps it was a 'mistake' to build Skyline, reopen Lakewood, or whatever, but we must move on.... Closing Community, Ann Arbor Open, and perhaps one or two elementary schools will save millions of dollars in non-instructional costs. The administration should be able to project the cost savings. I am dismayed that this 'alternative' has not been investigated by the school board. Am I way off base here, or is there a lack of political will to entertain school closings and stand up to the 'alternative school' community?" It's not just standing up to the alternative school community, it's also standing up to the loudest voices and the squeakiest wheels who want "their" kids to have a neighborhood school with the "right" kids. Think back to the brouhaha when the boundaries for Skyline were announced and you can see that the administration and the board are stuck in a place where the haves get their way and everyone pays for it. The schools need to be filled to capacity, they need to run efficiently and the entire budget needs to be scrutinized for waste while maintaining the concept of doing what is best educationally for ALL students in the A2PS.

Basic Bob

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 1:47 p.m.

The published 'cost per student' is misleading, since some of the costs are fixed regardless of the number of students. It is common sense that the cost to put the first student into a school is the highest. Each additional student costs less than the previous one. The leased portable classrooms at Huron and Pioneer were less expensive than operating Skyline, but the school board chose to put classrooms into a permanent building and increase capacity for future increases in population. This seems like a reasonable decision. Now, however, we are faced with a level or decreasing population for the foreseeable future, and an urgent need to control costs. Whining about Proposal A and the state government is not going to address these issues. The administration must control the costs they can, one of which is the number of buildings that are being operated. Perhaps it was a 'mistake' to build Skyline, reopen Lakewood, or whatever, but we must move on.... Closing Community, Ann Arbor Open, and perhaps one or two elementary schools will save millions of dollars in non-instructional costs. The administration should be able to project the cost savings. I am dismayed that this 'alternative' has not been investigated by the school board. Am I way off base here, or is there a lack of political will to entertain school closings and stand up to the 'alternative school' community?

flintcitylimit

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 1:13 p.m.

I went into public school teaching relatively late in life, after having university and private sector jobs. When I moved back to Michigan I was astounded that I could give myself a raise by racking up weekend and online credits at some dicey institution. I chose to get my "plus 30" at a real university, but not many do. Teacher compensation in Michigan will change, because Michigan has changed. Old highly compensated teachers will retire, new hires will be brought in at a much lower rate, with less health insurance coverage and life will go on. The question is will lower compensated teachers continue to support the MEA at its present level. My local union president makes $100,000 a year and teaches no classes. Irene Salter, MEA President, I believe makes more than the president of the UAW. So we will see how far change takes us.

Commoncents

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 12:50 p.m.

dexchic: The reason the subject has gone off topic is Lisa Starrfield has been ignoring my questions in other articles for the last several months. I'll quickly explain why I think it relates partially to this article.. Many people have an opinion that teachers don't care or work hard and collect raises whether they do a good job or not. Those same people also think teachers have the ability to be lazy, unlike any other profession in the real world. Those arguments could be void if teachers agreed to a performance based pay system. The fact some teachers (and the teacher's union) don't want to be paid based on performance is suspect. If you're a teacher and you get mad at people who think that, why not change the system? What is there to hide?. This topic comes up in many of these articles and I have yet to see or hear a good answer. Why is that? That's my point.

snapshot

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 12:36 p.m.

The discussion between Donbee and Lisa is amazing. Lisa skews, qualifies, and eliminates various numbers to present her argument while Don is just presenting the numbers which Lisa and her co workers refuse to accept. To Lisa and her co workers I say ALL the money comes from taxpayers, regardless of source. All the money gets spent and 85 percent of that money goes to teachers in salary and benefits from what Ive read. In the banking industry with their inflated bonuses, only 50 percent of total revenue goes to employee salary and benefits and citizens are up in arms about it, and government is legislating salary caps. Lisa and her co workers enjoy 35 percent more of the total pot of money available than the banking and financial industries, and she is still complaining and thinks it's justified. Talk about being insulated from economic reality. Many of these teachers would be making 10.00 per hour in the private sector and all their degrees would not entitle them to any additional monies because private wages are determined by market value and profit margins, not union dues. Look what the unions have done for GM and Chrysler and taxpayers are now subsidizing the still inflated salaries and benefits. Lisa and her co workers are not doing much to gain sympathy from with their holier than thou attitude and their insulting children remarks. This child knows how to add and subtract and the school budgets dont add up to me. I say numbers don't lie, but they can be skewed, hidden, eliminated and interpreted to suit one's own needs. Let's just have that spreadsheet the Annarbor.com is putting together give us the total number of dollars going to schools and the total number of dollars going to teachers, students, and other categories, and compare them to the salaries of private businesses in Ann Arbor. Lets have the school folks declare under penalty of perjury that their numbers are correct in their written documents and the statements they put out to the public. I want to know how many principals there are and how many custodians there are and what each of them makes, not their combined costs. Thats just blatantly hiding the true costs to prevent true disclosure. Let the manipulation of the numbers end and be presented in the light of day. Now do the Lisas of the AAPS world have a problem with that?

Commoncents

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 12:34 p.m.

Lisa: What you just did was ignore my points and complain for multiple paragraphs. Every complaint you just listed are things that happen in the real world. Each one is also dealt with in the real world by a boss or manager using judgement. Below are your points why teachers should be paid only on number of years in service and not performance, and below each is my reply to each of them:. 1. Lisa Starrfield: how do you decide who deserves good pay and who deserves great pay? Do you go by how many complaints parents make? --> My reply: It should be one of the many factors. The boss (principal) gets the final call though, just like at any job in the real world. If you worked in sales and had a few complaints about doing a bad job from customers, it would be your bosses job to understand if you were at fault or not. The boss could choose to help you correct that mistake or fire you depending how big it was. This is called being held accountable. If that sales employee was good for 5 years and knew he could slack off afterwards (get tenure) lazy people would take advantage. In the real world they know they can't... it keeps things honest. Why shouldn't teachers be held accountable as well for their entire time of employment?. 2. Lisa Starfield: Strict but fair teachers will suffer as will discipline. --> My Reply: If a teacher is being too strict it is the judgement of your boss - the principal. If you are doing things your boss does not agree with, you change or leave the job. It's that easy. Why shouldn't teachers have to be held accountable for doing things the boss doesn't agree with for their entire time of employment? What tool does the boss have to make sure the teacher is doing what they're supposed to if they are tenured? I'm asking - I really don't know. My assumption is not much - my assumption is it is almost impossible to fire a teacher that has tenure. 3. Lisa Starrfield: If only so much money is available, how do you compare a science teacher's work to the music teacher's? --> My reply: What you just described is like any job. The boss should understand how to evaluate each job description he is in charge of. How is that confusing? I'm confused that you're confused. Simple solution.. 4. Lisa Starrfield: What happens to the teacher who teaches in multiple buildings? --> My reply: If you're teaching 3 classes in one building and 4 in the other, the judgement rankings should be pro-rated. Have 2 bosses do the evaluation together. How is that not common sense? What is confusing about that? ' 5. Lisa Starrfield: What happens if your administrator decides to not give you merit pay because you don't attend fun nights as you are at services with your family? --> If your boss is being unfair, you have a discussion w/ him/her. If you feel there is wrong doing, you talk to your bosses boss. This happens in corporate america everyday. How is that confusing?. 6. Lisa Starrfield: What about the teacher whose been assigned a course that she's never taught before? --> My answer: The boss uses judgement. Are all of these complaints really genuine obstacles to you? These all seem very weak. Surely you have better reasons...?. Look, Tenure for teachers addresses ability, not effort for the duration of employment. Once ability is demonstrated, the rest of tenure CAN BE a cake walk if the person is lazy, dishonest or whatever reason. That is one of the many flaws with jobs where people are not held accountable. If someone does a good job for 5 years, then after 10 years they become de-motivated and disgruntled for whatever reason, the teachers union protects them. OR if they realize they simply don't have be held accountable or that other teachers will help them make excuses (kids are just bad, bla bla) SOME people will. I realize teachers have an extremely tough job, but like everyone else they should be held accountable for the entire time that they are employed. If you argue they don't, give some real examples why.

dexchic

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 12:31 p.m.

Since I was a kid going to Ann ARbor Public schools in the 70's and 80's there is and always will be those that attack a teacher's "schedule" when budget issues arise, or when they don't as well..:). It has nothing to do with the budget. The misconceptions are always the same; once the school day is done, you are done working, you are paid for all of your time "off"..ie. summer, spring break, winter break etc.(You can be paid throughout the year by choice..but your bi-weekly paycheck is less if you do, or you can be paid for the 9 months only) If you wanted to be a teacher than become a teacher. Why bitch and complain about what you think they work or don't work, but really you don't know. The job does not end at 3:00 or at the end of the school year. Many teachers work during the summer and have to, in order to be ready for next year. Teachers spend more time with your kids than you do, and as rewarding as it is, it is also very exhausting. I believe that those who complain are those that always will. Teaching is something that not everyone can do or have the patience to do, but i have had some of the most wonderful teachers in Ann Arbor and I appreciate each of them. Thank you for staying late, coming to my house, coaching me after school, and listening to me and my up's and downs. Now....the budget is and should be the topic of discussion.

Rick Zimmer

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 12:02 p.m.

Here are some observations and suggestions on how to address the $20 million dollar deficit: It seems that the budget numbers were released by the district because they know cuts in compensation (salary + benefits) will have to be made and the unions are poised to resist these changes. Releasing this information is probably to gain public support for cutting employee compensation. Contrary to DonBees suggestion that you should dissect the budget report to understand how to address this issue, the matter really boils down to looking at the big picture. Salary and benefits for everyone (teachers, administration, staff, etc.) roughly add up to $160,000,000 (add salaries and employee benefits starting on page 19 of the report to page 25). On page 26 of the report, compensation reportedly takes up 87.50% of the budget. Logically, you cannot cut $20 million from a budget without touching compensation. In fact, compensation realistically is the first place to make cuts since things like text books, utilities, building maintenance, etc., are largely fixed costs. If you cut compensation by 10%, you will save roughly $16 million dollars. This is a huge step in addressing the deficit. This can be done by suspending contributions to pensions, requiring employees to pay higher deductibles for health insurance, and then address reductions in salary according to savings made by benefit reductions. This is reasonable since this is exactly what is happening in the private sector. For example, the industry I am employed in has seen reduced revenues. As a result, I have been required to pay a higher health insurance deductible, my salary was cut 10% at the beginning of 2009, a pay freeze for 2008 and 2009, and a reduced yearly bonus. (FYI, I am a professional with a masters degree.) The same can be analogized to the school district. The school district has seen reduced revenue (tax collected from residents) and therefore must adjust accordingly. Despite the tone from some individuals leaving comments suggesting that county residents pay more in taxes, this is not a viable option. Just like private corporations cannot go to their customers and demand they consume more goods and services or pay higher prices, so the school district cannot go to tax payers and demand they pay more. At least not during these economically difficult times and since the issue has already been addressed at the polls. The remaining deficit of $4 million dollars can be addressed by reducing staff, administrative positions, and requiring parents with children participating in non-core subjects and extra-curricular activities to pay toward defraying those costs (a tuition program could be instituted for those families with income under 150% of the poverty level). Preferably no teacher positions should be cut keeping with the reason why the school district exists to educate our children! Teacher retention wont be an issue. The economy as it is right now does not allow lateral mobility and replacing teachers who do decide to leave wont be an issue since a number of unemployed, experienced and eager professionals are waiting to snap-up job openings. Plus, the compensation offered by the school district even with the 10% reductions mentioned above is extremely attractive and arguably more desirable to the majority of people. There is no reason why teacher compensation should not be reduced. To argue otherwise is contrary to the reality of the situation. Just to be clear, Im not suggesting teachers are over-paid, lazy, or unionistas. However they are also not messiahs and untouchable golden childs like some suggest. The reality is that teachers are one part of the equation in educating children. Structured curriculum, school activities and other factors are also important. But parental guidance and involvement along with a stable home environment is paramount. In sum, it is unnecessary to pour over the minutia of the budget. The obvious place to make cuts is employee compensation. If the unions choose to fight these cuts, I would suspect the court of public opinion will not be very sympathetic, especially since many of us have seen reduced benefits or have lost our jobs.

Lisa Starrfield

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 11:46 a.m.

There are many ways to judge a teacher's performance including the most common, observation. Administrators have a rubric they use to assess teachers. It lists objectives and we are evaluated on a scale which is roughly: mastered, acceptable, developing and unacceptable. Non tenured teachers are observed many times a year. If I recall correctly, by the time you finish your 3rd year, you are expected to have all Mastered or you will not be kept. I haven't been in this district long enough to have seen the tenured teacher assessment. Tenured teachers are evaluated on a rotating basis. My question is this: IF every teacher has demonstrated mastery (there is one group for whom that is not true but that will likely not be repeated), then how do you decide who deserves good pay and who deserves great pay? Do you go by how many complaints parents make? Strict but fair teachers will suffer as will discipline. If only so much money is available, how do you compare a science teacher's work to the music teacher's? What happens to the teacher who teaches in multiple buildings? What happens if your administrator decides to not give you merit pay because you don't attend fun nights as you are at services with your family? What about the teacher whose been assigned a course that she's never taught before? No. We've all demonstrated mastery and while a few may slide, it is the administrator's job to correct that and remove them if necessary. All your plan would do is lower the base pay for all teachers significantly, promise more money for being good and then leave us with the crap pay when the budget gets tighter.

Dan Rubenstein

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 10:42 a.m.

Experienced, highly educated teachers earn their pay. But given the extremely top-heavy distribution of teachers along the step ladder, the district should implement generous early retirement buy-out packages. They would pay for themselves almost immediately and save money for years to come. They would also help keep recent education graduates in Michigan.

Lisa Starrfield

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 10:38 a.m.

dakabk, I have strong opinions about what should be done and I have a pretty strong hunch about what will be done. But I am NOT going to step on my colleagues toes by recommending which programs should be cut. Nor can I speak with confidence about the high school or elementary programs; that is not my area of expertise. I will tell you this. A few years back, the Middle School programs were gutted (see one of my earlier posts) and basically turned into Junior Highs in all but name(yes, there is a difference). I suspect that with the exception of increasing classroom size and cutting sections there is little that can be done there without another restructuring. Let me explain what I mean. Currently, our class size maxes out at 30. If you have 241 students in a grade, you have to have 9 sections for that grade (9 sections of math, language arts, social studies, and science) but if you have 238, you can have 8 sections. I am certain that number will be increased which means that positions can be cut.

Commoncents

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 10:29 a.m.

A2Reality: What is your suggestion? Just to point out that it would be difficult to implement a performance based pay system for teachers? I point this out not to argue, but to agree that ANY change is difficult, especially for the old timers. I agree with you completely that there would be no completely fair way to do it, but life isn't fair. At my work there are underperformers and they get slightly less on average than the over-achievers. Is it fool proof? no. Is it fair compensation? Who could ever judge that? That's what bosses are for. Bosses make judgement calls and the employees live with it or leave. The point is that in the real world employees aren't paid the same no matter what or just based on attendance or time served. If it was, you can bet there would be a LOT more lazy people in the real world than there already are... Here's a quick example: I have a good example of a teacher that is doing a terrible job. All of the teachers in the building know it, including the principal who will admit openly. This teacher has tenure. The teacher's union backs her, yet her kids cannot read and write properly and her kids are ~2yrs behind. She is protected by her co-workers; the teacher's union. This gives all teachers a bad rap to some people.... why not fix it and stop protecting these people? I know of another teacher in AAPS that had so many complaints from parents the principal moved that person to 6 grade levels below the following year to sort of "bury the problem". Did that teacher get the same raise as every great teacher that year? Yes. Who protected her and allowed that? The teachers union. I'd be pissed if I was a good teacher. Why aren't THEY? Look man, taxes pay the schools. When the economy is down, taxes are down. Every company I know of made major changes. My company was making them on a daily basis for almost a year. No lay offs, but lots of changes, including no raises, promotions, no bonuses for a couple of years (they said "forseeable future") That was a 27% pay cut for me and I'm by far one of the low guys on the todem pole. I'm ok with it, but it angers me when I see people on here demanding they can't trim some of the fat! Recessions are necessary in a democracy because it forces companies to operate efficiently. Governments never seem to have to and it's frustrating to me is all....

A2Realilty

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 9:48 a.m.

@1BlockRadius - First of all, let me clarify for you that I am not a teacher. I have high respect for them though and both my wife and I have spent significant time in our children's classrooms assisting (for free). I applaud your post with your suggestions for a Pay for Performance system. I think that you are accurate that there are some lazy or bad teachers and I agree that it is disappointing that these teachers receive a raise that is equivalent to "good" teachers. HOWEVER, the reality is that all professions have this same scenario. I've worked in several industries and I've never worked at an organization where underperformers didn't exist and weren't unfairly rewarded with regard to their coworkers. These organizations all used Pay for Performance as their criteria. The Pay for Performance model will not resolve the issues that you believe that it will; if it would, the same issues would not exist in industries where that model is already employed. With regard to your suggestions, I like the idea of a pool of "bonus" money (although 15% is probably too high). Also, it is clear that the principal would have to administer the system. The biggest struggles with your system, and any Pay for Performance system for teachers, are two-fold. 1) The amount of time that it takes to FAIRLY monitor and evaluate an employee is significant. It is doubtful that the principals would have the time to do this and I think that we can probably agree that adding administrative headcount to accomplish this task is not the direction that we wish to go. 2) In industry, a worker is usually given a specific set of goals to accomplish (projects, etc.). Most, or all, of the variables for these goals are under the control of the worker. In teaching, it is a very different situation. Each year, the group of students that the teacher receives are unique. The parent situation, individual intelligence, previous teacher, and interpersonal relationships for the group of students is dynamic and evolving. Since the collection of students represents the "projects" that the teacher will undertake for the year, it is difficult for the teachers to be fairly evaluated by a principal. Additionally, it is difficult to know all of these factors for the students at the beginning of the year when goals would need to be set; those factors would have to be accounted for as the goals are developed. In the end, the uniqueness of each teacher's situation causes so much subjectivity to be applied in the performance evaluation that it would render the Pay for Performance model completely ineffective and unfair. Although there are additional reasons, this is the core of why a Pay for Performance model is so difficult for the teaching industry to employ.

Commoncents

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 9:41 a.m.

sh1: My opinion is not that the budget problem will be solved completely by cutting teacher salaries. I think a lot of people know how ridiculous the show up and get a raise no matter how good of a job you do system is BS though. I believe that if that system was a performance based system it would take some of the heat off teachers. Why can't teachers be paid based on performance? Every single other job in the country is based on performance, why can't teachers figure out a way? "Lisa Starrfield" has told the board multiple times she is a teacher at a middle school in AA and has taken a stance that if you are against the millage you are against teachers and the kids. I disagree w/ that point and feel if the teachers union would stop protecting the lazy ones that are doing a bad job joe public would have more sympathy for them.... but if no teachers are willing to speak up and fix the system, well then... hard for me to understand..

dakabk

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 9:33 a.m.

Lisa Starrfield - After reading all your comments and rebuttals to DonBee, I find one thing lacking......you've never really shared what your ideas are for solving this financial crisis. The fact is that we have an approximately $20 million deficit in next year's Budget, the district isn't getting any more funding from the State and the voters have already defeated a millage request. You've made it perfectly clear that teacher compensation shouldn't be touched, so perhaps you can enlighten us all as to how you'd proceed to solve this?

proudtobeme

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 9:31 a.m.

Sorry Don Bee I forgot to clarify-I have 29 students this year in my class. I do not have 13 or whatever the AVERAGE is. When I said teachers should get paid like babysitters,I meant for the students in their class that they teach. So I will do the math for everyone. $5 x 29=145. Times that by about 6 hours per day=870 per day. Since teachers work about 180 days with the students that would be 156,600. This does not include benefits or the time that teachers have to report w/o students. Now,some teacher probably have less than 29 students and I'm sure some have more so this is just a rough estimate. And I do wish I knew a babysitter who only charged $5/hour. I pay most of mine $8-10. With the salary that I make,I am paid about $2.5/hour,that's per kid. I'm not talking about averages here,I'm talking about paying teachers like you would pay a babysitter.

sh1

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 9:18 a.m.

With all the talk about teacher salary here, I'm curious how people see that as a solution for budget problems. How much of their salaries and benefits do you want teachers to pay back each year in order to "fix" a problem the state created?

Lisa Starrfield

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 7:13 a.m.

Grumpy, The document seems pretty clear to me. DonBee is correct about one thing; the administrators' costs should have been delineated more clearly. I'm not sure how much more transparency you think you need.

Lehigh

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 1:40 a.m.

Also, for AnnArbor.com -- if you could, please find comparable data for comparable Michigan districts so that they could serve as a point of comparison. Of course, Ann Arbor is unique, most notably because of the university. I suggest everyone download the doc, fill out the survey, and attend one or more of the meetings. And not shout.

Lehigh

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 1:33 a.m.

@Don Bee: I really appreciate the due diligence you have put in by analyzing these documents. It is more effort than I have seen any other commenter put in (and even more than AnnArbor.com). I also see your stance as skeptical but not biased in any way -- that's a good stance to have. With that said, I strongly suggest that you refrain from engaging in any more discussions about teacher compensation. Why? Because it only serves to distract from the main themes you bring up. As I read through the 92 comments in this thread, I was disappointed to see so much shouting and so little information sharing.

bruno_uno

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 12:50 a.m.

lisa- you have answered all my questions, the little i had left about teachers....thanks for the confirmation.

Basic Bob

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 12:28 a.m.

@citrus, Community High School is not open to the most qualified students. It actually takes some the most vanilla kids in the district. More *high-maintenance* and minority students are better served at the traditional high schools and are discouraged by counselors and teachers from entering the lottery. You see, the traditional high schools are MORE flexible than CHS due to their larger student population and specialization of the faculty. Many Community students travel to Huron and Pioneer for classes unavailable at CHS. As far as the concern of losing some students if Community were to be eliminated, has there been a problem with lottery LOSERS fleeing to private schools? The problem, though, is we must make choices on how to spend a finite amount of money. Since the opening of Skyline, we have higher operating costs AND underused space in the main high school buildings. The school board and administration would be wise to consider closing one or two small and inefficient buildings.

I'm Ron Burgandy

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : 12:02 a.m.

Thanks for all the info DonBee. You rock!! Time for the AAPS to do what everyone else has been doing (including Washtenaw County gov and AA Fire), either make concessions, or lose staff. Lisa and others can fight the truth all they want, but this is the reality. You could always hope for for those 48% who wanted the millage to donate there share lol

Commoncents

Sun, Jan 3, 2010 : midnight

A2Reality: What is your idea to make it work since you'd like to be apart of the discussion? Every single other job (non-govt anyway) figures out a way to pay by performance. Some of the most educated people (degreed?) in the country are teachers - why can't you come up with a way of your own? If you don't or can't, then stop complaining about people that say you are paid too much. Many of the opinions that teachers are paid too much are BECAUSE everyone knows at least a couple teachers that are bad and continue to get raises and are protected by the union. It's not a matter of "one or two" bad apples, there are a lot of lazy bad teachers being protected. By far though, the overwhelming majority of teachers are VERY hard working people. Those people should stop protecting the lazy.... That said, since you ask I'll throw these out there... (By the way, still waiting for Starrfield to give her ideas) If I were in charge 1. Immediately remove the pay matrix. Attendance based pay systems don't work (employees lose motivation) and I would make clear to employees just showing up for a certain number of years is not enough to get a raise. Just getting another degree is no guarantee for a raise. Do it if you want and you have a better shot to get a raise, but zero guarantees. (just like the real world) 2. Principals are given all of the raise money for their school for each year. They set goals and objectives at the beginning of each year (principal and each teacher agree on them) Quarterly progress meetings, then one final at the end of the year. The raise is left up to the principal. If you got a degree from Phoenix this year and the principal has a feeling you are slacking off, he holds your raise. It's all his call. 3. Reduce salaries across the board by 15%. The 15% goes in a "bonus" pool/fund. The principals are in charge of dividing up the money as they see fit. If you are a good teacher doing a good job, you get the 15% back. If you are a great teacher doing a great job, maybe you get 18%. If you're a bad teacher maybe you get 12%. This would give teachers incentive to do a good job each year. Nothing that would make or break anyone, just a little extra for those that go above and beyond. 4. Salaries are no longer public. Joe Public can see what all of the 3rd grade teachers in the entire county make, but there'd be no names. People could guess, but wouldn't know. If you discuss your salary with another teacher you sign a paper saying you can be fired. (and the union agrees to this) I don't know that principals are the right position to dole out the money, but if I was a teacher and I saw some of those lazy slobs making the same amount.... I'd recognize a way to make things more fair, that I can guarantee.... I understand my ideas may not work, but it's hard to understand why.... that's the whole reason I was trying to get Guffey to reply from a teacher's perspective.... Just to put this out there again: I love teachers and have some very close to me... very. I just want what is fair.

Sean Eldon

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 11:22 p.m.

@DonBee Important point of clarification: the 14:1 student to room teacher ratio for AAPS is highly misleading. That ratio counts counselors, librarians, social workers, etc. as classroom teachers. While support staff such as these are clearly certified teachers (and clearly integral parts of each school), they do not teach classes. The actual ratio of students to classroom teachers is much higher. Over 20:1 for the elementary schools; over 25:1 for the high schools. This is one of many points that AnnArbor.com should have clarified months ago. The 14:1 ratio is one more canard that has been trotted out to mislead the public. If we're going to debate school funding, we should base it on the reality in the classroom, don't you think? @Lisa Starfield Bravo! Your commitment to this debate is inspiring.

A2Realilty

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 11:14 p.m.

@1BlockRadius - The road of discussing "pay for performance" within the teaching "industry" has been traveled before. Please make a proposal for such system as you envision it. I, for one, would love to see it posted here for us to digest and comment upon. Please don't be the person who sits in the back of the car and wants everyone else to come up with where the group will eat lunch, all the while offering no suggestions for a destination.

Grumpy

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 10:43 p.m.

Lisa. I would like to know if you are satisfied with the level of clarity in the budget document. Do you believe the school district should be more forthright when it comes to explaining where the tax dollars are going? If you and your colleagues demand transparency, I think you would garner many votes in favor of your position including mine. If you don't, I will wonder what you and the district are trying to hide. If the document was crystal clear, you wouldn't have to spend your time explaining it and Don and aa.com wouldn't have to produce their own spreadsheets. Somehow this debate turned into attacking and defending teachers. Don has been unfairly attacked based on statements made by others. And I am shocked that two of your fellow teachers are encouraging you to stop posting. I hope they are not instructing high school debate teams. I would prefer you continue to post because I am paying attention. I hope your next post says you are going to encourage your union to join Don in demanding total transpareny from the district.

citrus

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 10:36 p.m.

Please tell us where these baby sitters are who work for $5.00 an hour!

Commoncents

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 10:32 p.m.

Starrfield / Guffey: So you're admitting the compensation for teachers is flawed? If you'd agree someone getting a Phoenix masters while teaching elementary deserves an automatic pay raise the same as someone who gets one from UofM teaching AP Physics is a bad idea, (which I think you did) then you'd agree w/ me. I've posted before and you've ignored at least 4 times now, but for being some of the most educated (degreed?) group of people in the country, why doesn't the teachers union come up with a way to compensate based on performance like every other non-government job in the entire rest of the world...? Can you give any kind of comment on that?

Augustine

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 10:30 p.m.

A few comments have been made in regard to the number of TA's at certain schools (teacher assistants, teacher aides). My daughter works as a TA, and TA's may be assigned to a school for one of only two reasons, I believe. The more common reason is that a student or students at a given building qualify for the assistance of an aide by virtue of an IEP (Individualized Educational Plan) that delivers special services to students who are shown to qualify for them. This is a legal obligation, once it is written into the educational plan. The other reason TA's may be placed in a given classroom is if the number of students in that class is greater than the number allowed by the district's contract with teachers (and this will usually vary by grade level). The former situation is the same for all schools and districts, the latter is in accord with the contract of each individual school district.

citrus

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 10:28 p.m.

@Smoothie, Education as vanilla ice cream. How bland and homogenous...something that children and minds are not. I sure hope the schools are not in the business of turning out vanilla drones! Why is special ed for those with disabilities an acceptable taxpayer expense, but special-IZED ed for those with high ability or talent is not? To continue the dairy metaphor, kids with vastly differing needs and teachers with vastly differing specialties oughtn't just be spread out like butter to cover a certain size of bread. AP is great, if your kid can survive the frustration of being stifled until 9th grade. Open is the one school in the system If you can get in) that has a way built in for kids to work at a range of grades levels with a variety of learning styles. Community continues that. For the record, I don't have a kid at either place. I'm one of the taxpayers who is stuck paying for public AND private. Some kids don't just "need" strawberry, they need it.

DonBee

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 10:10 p.m.

@ proudtobeme - I was trying not to post it, but since you asked, I will.... 1) 16,439 students - according to the AAPS budget statement 2) 1210 teachers - same source therefore the average teacher has 16,439/1210 = 13.6 students 3) Contract hours - 1098 per the budget document and the teacher contract. So 14,917 student contact hours. 4) Your figure of $5 an hour per student. Total Compensation for a teacher (remember babysitters have no health care, no retirement no fringe benefits) = $74,587 about $25,000 less than the total compensation for the average AAPS teacher. I wish you had not asked again. I did not want to post this. It will fuel another round of teachers are over paid.

Jed I Knight

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 10:03 p.m.

Stop it. If you are a teacher you have a salary for the year. Period. It is independent of how much you are paid periodically. Period. If you elect to have someone discipline your pay and spread it over more checks, or have fewer checks with more pay on them, you are paid the same annually. Yes, you are paid when the schools are closed, in the same way a salaried employee at a private company is paid for the time they take when on vacation. They are paid a salary, as are you. Lets get real about that. Technically or not, an educated person knows a salary is an annually agreed upon rate of compensation.

proudtobeme

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 9:58 p.m.

So obviously DonBee did not get the calculator out to see how much teachers would make if we were paid like babysitters. $5 per hour per kid. Someone tell me how much $ that would be? Remember teachers only work about 180 days per year.

Lisa Starrfield

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 9:28 p.m.

Don Bee, Someone was accusing teachers of being paid for our summers off. We are NOT. We are paid for the hours we are assigned to work during the school year and professional development. My annual salary is what I get paid during the year... but I don't get vast quantities of paid time off like some are alleging as I am NOT paid for that time.

DonBee

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 9:27 p.m.

@The Grinch - I am disappointed in your post. I have NEVER said teachers are overpaid. I was not the one to put together the budget document that makes it impossible to get to the costs of administrators and others, because they have been lumped into one pot. The only costs I can report on are teachers and overall for a building. Talk to the AAPS administration if you don't like being singled out. As to not working, lets see my mother was a teacher, I know how much teachers work. I also know that teachers are paid for a school year. Lisa is the one who brought up that she is not paid for anything other than student contact hours. As to the funding, it is the total funds the school receives that make or break how the school runs, why do you want to deny that you receive this money or that having restricted funds means that more can go to the daily operation of the schools? What is so hard about admitting that? The numbers come from AAPS, not from me. If they wanted to make it easy to understand they could have done it in a number of ways. I analyzed AAPS like a business, which it is. All monies in are valuable to a business, and restricted money used right means unrestricted money can be used elsewhere. What is so hard about that? I guess I should not expect that people in the system can get beyond their own propaganda and look at what the district published. The administration put these numbers together, if you don't like them, complain there. All I did was spend a lot of time trying to understand the document, the best baseline I could find for comparison and analysis was the 2002-3 budget document from AAPS. You and others like you are moving me from the "please explain it to me" column to the "No way no how" column. Any time the someone resorts to attacks rather than facts and explanation I expect they are trying to hide the truth and that they are afraid of the truth getting out. Let us have an honest factual discussion here. Dig in, get out your calculator and tell me where my numbers are wrong. @proudtobeme I would be happy to pay $5 an hour per student. As it stands AAPS gets over $10 an hour per student ($191 million divided by 16,439 student divided by 1098 hours). If we use the total revenue to AAPS ($243 million) the number is more like $13 an hour. All - Follow the link to the budget document and read it. Do your own math and come up with your own questions. Go to the meeting and ask them. I have my ideas (and they do not include cutting teachers salaries or benefits - sorry Spambot1, Lisa Starrfield, and The Grinch - I am not and have never been after teachers). Go back through my posts over the last 4 months if you don't believe me.

Lisa Starrfield

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 9:22 p.m.

1Block, Oh and while we are at it, let's talk about on the job training. The district is required to provide (and we are required to attend) 36+ hours of training each year for staff. In addition, we are trained on new curriculum and incoming teachers receive almost 100 hours of mentoring in their first three years (yes, required by the state). So the district invests a great deal of money in training us making teacher retention very important.

Lisa Starrfield

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 9:19 p.m.

1Block, By educated, I do mean degreed. And I have no respect for a University of Phoenix degree.. it's a waste of money in my opinion. However, no one I know holds one... not even us wretched unionistas.

Lisa Starrfield

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 9:13 p.m.

Don Bee, 1. There are very large differences in the cost to clean, heat and light classrooms. There are very large differences in the buildings. I have had many classroom in Clague and each one has had its own problems. For example, my current classroom has small windows but Southern exposure. Its so miserable in the early fall/late spring that I often keep my classroom lights off with several fans running. On the other hand in the Winter, the area of the room by the window is freezing. Ive had interior classrooms where the temperature was relatively constant. Some of our buildings are required to have central air or partial central air and others have no cooling at all. 2. The average teacher salary, fully loaded is over $100,000 Yes, this is true at least at the middle school level (Im not bothering to check high school or elementary). And? There are a couple of things you are apparently unaware of which arent hiding in the budget reports. You see a few years back, when we had that middle school restructuring, we stopped hiring new teachers. Weve hired very few since then which means that almost 70% of our teachers have 10 years or more with the district. This matches what I see in my building For the most part, steps come to an end at 10 years and teacher salaries max out. Now, given that benefits and other non-salary compensation generally are typically an additional 30% of salary, that suggests that the average teacher SALARY (at least at the middle school the districts table on how many are at each step seems to support this) is about $74,000. 3. There are 1200 plus teachers on staff, but less than 1000 are accounted for in the buildings. Based on the numbers that are listed. I am not going to bother to add them all up. Please note that the Special Education staff is not included in any of the FTE counts for any school. Nor are speech therapists, PTs and OTs. 4. The summary numbers on the teacher's step table are wrong (take the time and add the rows and columns up for yourselves). Yes, there is a typo for the BA total. Embarrassing but not criminal. 5. Now do this take the 2002-3 budget that is on the website and try to match budget lines to the new budget. Some funny things happen. In 2002 the schools got medicaid money from both the state and the federal government, but it does not show in 2009-2010. See page 44. 6. They also got money from the UofM for married student housing, again not shown in 2009. The funny thing is if you add up the revenue for state, local, etc. The numbers do not add to the subtotals that AAPS gives. They are short by large amounts of money. Please do your own math here. Really? Where? Or is that the 250 million thing again? These numbers are explicitly labeled GENERAL FUND. 7. I am disappointed that Custodians and Principals are lumped in the same number in the school buildings, it makes it difficult to see who is really earning what. Oh well. In also includes our counselors and secretaries too. 8. Also there is a huge productivity difference from building to building for Custodians, with no information on why. Again, our buildings are VERY different. Clague is different from Slauson which is different from Forsythe. I can tell you that the Custodial budge was significantly cut with the middle school restructuring. For example, my room is now only swept once every two days. 9. In the tables of classrooms if you subtracted the reserved classrooms, they do not add up to the number of available classrooms. They do at the middle school. Dont care. Typos happen. 10. Pre-school which was supposed to be budget neutral, is not, based in the numbers that are in 2009 document, it is subsidized at the rate of about $3 million a year. The pre-school includes the head start and special ed preschool students. The building costs for the pre-school are 4.3 million. Not including money that goes to other schools too, they get IDEAIA 746,140, Head start 749,875, Early on 92,360, and Great start readiness 248,200. That leaves $2.5 million, not $3 and does not include the mixed funds or tuition (yes, many of the preschool kiddies pay tuition).

A2Realilty

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 9:11 p.m.

@DonBee - I sincerely appreciate the time that you spent digesting the budget that was posted. I think that you have raised some excellent questions regarding some discrepancies... discrepancies that add up to some significant dollars. Clearly, the budget could be better summarized and presented. @DonBee - After praising your work on the budget, I'm going to say that your argument with Lisa regarding the nubmer of hours for which the teacher's contract calls and your use of this to justify an annual projected salary is silly and ridiculous. Using "math," kids are required to get 180 days of school. Using the 1096 number that you cited, divided by 180 days means that each teacher should only have to work 6 hours a day. That's absurd. Please don't devalue the work that you've done analyzing the budget by coupling it with your analysis of the teacher salary using your "1096 approach." @Lisa Starrfield - I applaud your efforts to voice the opinion on behalf of the teachers. It is an important view to hear. Please don't let bruno-uno's comments weigh heavily on your mind. bruno-uno seems focused on trying to justify why he/she isn't making more money; you won't solve this challenge for him/her.

The Grinch

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 9:02 p.m.

Lisa, The problem here is that DonBee and his ilk KNOW what they KNOW and cannot be talked to ragtionally. They KNOW that: 1) Teachers are overpaid 2) Teachers are underworked 3) Teachers are lazy 4) Unions are the causes of all of the ill in the world. Because they KNOW this there is no use explaining to them that most of us work nights, weekends and on those so-called "vacations." Because they KNOW this there is no use in explaning to them about the c--p we must tolerate from students and from their parents that no professional should have to endure. Because they KNOW this they do not wish to consider the fact that 1/3 of new teachers leave the profession within three years and 1/2 leave within five years (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/08/AR2006050801344.html). Gee, if they KNEW THAT factoid, they might have to wonder why young new teachers were leaving the profession. Surely it's not because they are overpaid and underworked. But, NO, that basic fact would blow all of their biases and preconceptions. And then, DonBee's mixing pots of money--is it out of ignorance or maliciousness?. Only he can know the answer to that question but, in any event, he KNOWS that the schools are better funded than they were a decade ago. He may say he WANTS us to draw our own conclusions, but his misrepresenting the numbers as he has done can drive one only to his conclusion, one which is false given his (willful? ignorant?) misreading of the budget. So, yes, I agree with Spambot. You are wasting your time.

carlam

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 8:46 p.m.

@1bit-Even without counting these "intangible" hours, districts have more hours than just instructional time built in contracts. Most contracts include a minimum before and after school time, professional development days, as well as staff meeting time. Perhaps it is difficult to quantify the additional time that teachers work outside of their contract, but our schools would look very different without this.

DonBee

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 8:38 p.m.

@carlam - Please carefully read the original post. What I said was that Lisa needed to be careful to say that she was only paid for the hours in the contract or someone would flip the argument on her. She argued that teachers are not paid for any days the school is not in session - which it technically correct. But that means that under her argument (not mine) that she is only paid for the 1098 hours in the contract and by extension she only works 53 percent of the time. This is what I was trying to point out. We all work hours that we are not technically paid for. Lisa was arguing that she was only paid for the 1098 hours. She did not get paid for any day the school was closed. While that is what the contract indicates and is technically correct. It is not what most teachers work, but if she wants to be a strict about what she is paid for then by extension she is paid for 53 percent of the year. This could lead to the argument that I pointed out. We all know that teachers work a full time job. Lisa needs to admit that teachers get paid to work a full school year and that her pay check is her annual salary. That is what I put in the original post, if you read it carefully.

limmy

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 8:37 p.m.

I noticed that the rate per pupil is the lowest at Pioneer for all of the high schools. But, I don't think that everything shows up in these figures. There are people at Pioneer on "special assignment" and who knows what they are making, what they are doing, or where the money is coming from. There is also something called a "rising scholars" program. Can anyone tell me what that is, who is in it, who pays for it, etc? There seems to be a lot that is being left out.

sh1

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 8:30 p.m.

Regarding this bit of misinformation: "I...have seen the unions stranglehold on the public sector and the manufacturing sector be the number one cause for our economic turmoil in the rust belt. This includes our teachers whether you want to face reality or not," can you please give examples of Ann Arbor's teachers' union putting a stranglehold on the public sector and causing economic turmoil?

carlam

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 8:27 p.m.

@Donbee It is still not accurate to say that teachers work 53% of the time. The amount of time you are using, 1098 hours, is only time spent with students. This doesn't count the countless other hours teachers work.

Andrew Smith

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 8:12 p.m.

I looked at the "user-friendly" version of the budget, but I'd like to see the actual document, and more importantly, the general ledger as kept by accountants. That would be more informative, and could easily be posted on the web.

Lisa Starrfield

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 7:56 p.m.

Spambot, Someone has to speak out for teachers. If I am silent and you are silent, then who controls the information? As we see, folks are spreading stories again and again about our salaries. If we don't correct them, what will the public believe?

DonBee

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 7:52 p.m.

@glacialerratic - Sorry I don't think I do. The total budget expanded by $53 million a year from 2002 to 2009. The increase in bonds was $4 million (from 12 million in payments in 2002 to $16 million in payments in 2009). In 2002 more than $7 million had to come out of the general fund (operations) to pay bonds. In 2002 more than $ 2 million had to come out to pay for capital - reducing the real operating funds by $9 million. The tax payers found money to cover that. Making more funds available to run the schools - heat, lights, supplies, salary. Yes, construction happened, and yes the bond bill went up by $4 million a year. But at the same time, many maintenance costs that re-occurred routinely were fixed by replacing roofs, boilers and windows. All of this renovation made the schools better and safer (both good things) but they also reduced the maintenance cost of the schools - making more money available to operate the schools. Yes, the money in the special funds is restricted, but that money allows the unrestricted money to be directed into the operations, not the bonds, not bus purchases, not furniture, not new boilers, etc. That means you have more to use for daily operations. A good thing in my mind. Arguing that the money does not fix the problem is on one level right, but on another level it is not right. If that money was not there (and it is not in most districts in the state) then you would have to pay those costs from the general fund. Add to that tax payers found more money for special education, so that less general fund money had to be directed to that area, means yet more money is available for day to day operations. I could not run my business if I did not acknowledge all sources of income and look at how I could use them. AAPS does the same thing. As I indicated the piece of the puzzle that you and the other teachers want to pick on is not keeping up. But in total, thanks to local tax payers, the overall budget has out paced inflation over the last 7 years. If my logic is flawed please take the time to put the same level of effort into putting the numbers forward for people here to look at. The numbers provided by AAPS show that the TOTAL revenue has increased by 27 percent over the last 7 years, while enrollment is down by 1 percent. That is way better than any other district in the county has done.

glacialerratic

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 7:23 p.m.

DonBee, you continue to miss the point.

DonBee

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 7:14 p.m.

@carlam- My apologies - I messed up the last 2 numbers. 1098 is correct, not 1086. That makes it almost 53 percent of a 2080 hour year. And that would mean $198,000 for a 2080 hour year. Again I point this up not because I believe this is a right number, but because it is the flip side of Lisa's argument. I have not here and never have argued that teacher salaries should be cut. They are the only salaries that are easy to determine from the 2009-2010 AAPS budget document, and I have to wonder why that is? @glacialerratic - In 2002 the school district had to take $7 million out of the general fund to pay bonds. In prior years it was even more than that (but 2002 is the oldest budget document that is easy for any reader to get off the AAPS website). In 2009 they did not because the bond millage now covers it all. This means that that $7 million is available for operating the schools. In 2002 the Special Ed Millage gave the schools $ 8 million from county tax payers, In 2009 it is $18 million. That does not sound to me like a stagnant budget. I see you trying to take a piece of the puzzle and arguing it did not get bigger, which I have to agree, given the Consumer Price Index - that portion of the budget has not kept up. I am trying to get a total picture and in TOTAL income the schools are well ahead. @SpamBot1 - Yes, I am and so does the school, if the sinking fund or the bond fund was not big enough to cover costs (as history shows in old budgets), then the school has to take money from the general fund to cover these costs. Today special millages in the county provide $49 million in additional monies - freeing that amount of the general fund to be used for operation. I agree you can not take Bond funds and pay teachers, or sinking fund money and buy fuel for buses. But you can go the other way. AAPS had to for a long time, and taxpayers provided millage to fix this. In many districts in the state local tax payers have not and the schools have to dip into the general fund to cover ALL their costs. This is the way it works. Even if you do not want to admit it. As to your slight, I am disappointed a teacher in Ann Arbor would stoop that low. Lisa - I welcome you and other running the numbers that AAPS provided. To all - Look over the budget, do your own math and ask your own questions.

Commoncents

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 7:09 p.m.

Lisa: When you say "educated" what do you mean by that? I'm hearing that getting any piece of paper that says "bachelors" is a good education and then getting ANY piece of paper that says "masters" means that person is even more educated. All degrees are equal? More degrees means more pay is deserved? On the job training in industry isn't "getting education"? I know plenty of teachers in AAPS, one of which is getting a degree from Phoenix online to increase that person's base pay. I don't blame them for working the system and stacking up the degrees from crappy, online, cheap universities, but that's not how it works in the real world - thought I'd point that out. If you get a crappy degree from an institute ANYONE can get a degree from, you're less marketable. Not in union-land... a degree is a degree, if you get the masters you get more money, period. Is that fair in comparison to the real world?

proudtobeme

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 6:55 p.m.

Let's pay teachers like babysitters. $5 per hour per kid.That would only be about $30 a day per kid,cheap if you look at how much daycare centers charge. Do the math and then tell me teachers get paid too much. Babysitting is so much easier than teaching.

glacialerratic

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 6:47 p.m.

In his analysis of the AAPS budget, DonBee uses what he calls "total income." By toting up every nickel, including $31+ million for the sinking and bond funds, this picture shows a ballooning budget over the past eight years. But it misrepresents the actual state of the districts annual operating budget, which since 1993 has not grown anywhere near the proportion suggested by this picture of the districts total income. The bond fund and the sinking fund are not used to meet the annual operating costs of the schools. These funds are reserved for construction and infrastructural costs including repairs and renovations. The growth seen in a total income budget represents the construction costs of a new high school and the most extensive renovation of district buildings in decades. Whether these construction costs were well-advised can be a matter of another discussion. The funding crisis facing the district, however, is in meeting annual operating costs. These include costs of paying teachers and staff, of heating and lighting the buildings, of operating buses, etc. By far, the largest revenue source for the operating budget is the revenue coming from the statethe foundation budget. Measured on a per pupil basis in 2009 dollars, this budget has shrunk considerably since 1993.

Lisa Starrfield

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 6:43 p.m.

Don, Let's talk about my building, Clague. A few years back when the district was also in financial straits due to the state's lack of support, the Middle Schools underwent a MASSIVE restructuring. A proposal was brought to the Union and the Union accepted it despite the fact that it involved cutting many positions. At Clague, I believe we lost five teaching positions. At the time when the Union voted it on it, the district was telling us that cuts would eventually be coming to the elementary and high school level in the two following years but I don't know that those ever happened. Students went from 4 academic classes and 3 electives to 4 academic classes and 2 electives with in small increase in class length. Teachers when from teaching 4 academic courses and an elective with 2 planning periods to teaching 5 academic courses with a single planning period though some of my coworkers were teaching three different preps (a prep is a course.. 7th grade Math, 6th grade Social Studies). That may not sound like a big deal to you but the change still resonates today. Teachers have had to change how we teach because we no longer have the time to do everything we used to do. Students who are taking band and a language can no longer take art or tech ed. Students who are struggling faced a choice between orchestra or getting the support they need. That's the current reality. I don't know what the district will cut now. I hate to think about it to be honest because there isn't much fat left for us. Now, if you want me to analyze the numbers (and I like numbers), you will have to wait until my boys are fed and in bed.

SpamBot1

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 6:26 p.m.

DonBee.... --- You use the numbers from the budget as you want to, mixing operating and sinking funds into one pot, despite the fact that they cannot be used for the same purposes, and put your "facts" forward as biblical, unquestionable, truth. And then, when Lisa points out that she is not paid for time that school is not open, which is written, published, black-and-white fact, you say it is "technically" true?????? --- Amazing. --- Lisa, as a colleague of yours, I'd suggest that you stop arguing with the children.

DonBee

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 6:05 p.m.

@Jed I Knight - Technically Lisa is correct. The teacher contract calls for 1086 hours of work for their pay. That is the time school is in session. A typical worker working a typical 40 hour week 52 weeks a year would have a contract for 2080 hours (I know no one really works a 40 hour week). So the teacher's contract calls for roughly 52 percent of a standard working year. This having been said, most teachers do not work only the 1086 hours that are in the contract. But technically Lisa is correct - she does not get paid for the time the school is not in session only for 1086 hours. Now Lisa, you can argue that you are not paid for it and be right technically, but someone could also go - At Clague teachers cost the school system $105,000 for 52 percent of the year - so if they really worked a full year they would really cost $201,000 a year. So be careful how you argue, or it could come back to you haunt you.

Lisa Starrfield

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 6:03 p.m.

Jedi, I am not paid for the days the district is shut down. I can choose to spread my pay for the days I work out over the entire year and most of us do, but we don't get money for the time the building is closed.

Commoncents

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 5:54 p.m.

Don Bee is the truth.

Jed I Knight

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 5:53 p.m.

"I'm not paid for ANY of the time the schools are shut down." If you are a teacher; you certainly are. You are paid all summer when the schools are shut down, in addition to the current two weeks, the 'mid-winter' break Feb 19th-26, Spring Break April 1st - 9th, etc.

David Jesse

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 5:30 p.m.

@Grumpy: We are preparing a spreadsheet and will publish. We're sitting down next week with the district to ask a variety of questions. If you want me to ask some for you, please e-mail me at davidjesse@annarbor.com. If you want to ask administrators directly, go to one of the budget meetings. First one is on Thursday night.

Grumpy

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 5:21 p.m.

Great discussion between Lisa and Don. But what is the argument here? Teacher salaries or a shady school district withholding, hiding, and/or skewing budget information? I didnt vote on this because I didnt know enough about the issue. But if a revote were held tomorrow, Id vote against it based on Dons research. He is citing numbers and numbers dont lie. Although, I do agree that the fully loaded number is misleading. In my opinion, if teacher salaries were doubled, it still wouldn't be enough to compensate them for the service they provide. Many people choose to move to Washtenaw County because of the great public school systems and everyone benefits from that. Don said he had to do much digging to find the numbers cited in previous posts which he shouldnt have had to do. The data should have been presented clearly. Since the school district and aa.com wont do it, I think it would be great if Don and/or Lisa could upload a simple spreadsheet summarizing their findings. That would be worth a thousand words and the info could easily be picked apart. I know aa.com wont allow that so perhaps they could be uploaded to a wiki site or twitter or something. Then if Lisa, Dr. Roberts, or anyone else wants to dispute Dons numbers, it will be easy to do so. There is no way Im going to burn three days researching a misleading bureaucratic document when Don is providing his services. I will allow this forum and aa.com to sway my opinion on the millage and then vote the next time around.

xyz

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 5:03 p.m.

Since there is stronger support for public education in AAPS district, there might be ways to get around this crisis. Solicitating donations and charging parents for non-education services such as transportation and after-school activities could be considered, in addition to cutting fats out of the school system.

DonBee

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 4:52 p.m.

Lisa - I am disappointed that you, a school employee do not know the way things work under the law. The general fund can be used to pay for capital improvements and bonds, in Ann Arbor, the tax payers have chosen to give the school more money to cover these costs and leave more of the general fund for paying for classrooms and operating costs. The restrictions are NOT on the general fund, they are on the extra money. Many school districts do NOT have sinking funds or bond issues, and take those costs out of the general fund. Sorry Lisa you need to go back to read the rules on the various funds. We the taxpayers have agreed to give AAPS approximately $49 million beyond what we have to. This is to run an excellent school system. What I and others are trying to do is to figure out how the money is being spent. This document creates more questions than answers for me. I wonder, have you pulled out the document and built a spreadsheet, have you looked at your building, do you agree with the numbers the district put out about your building? Other buildings? Do you like how the numbers are presented? At Clague - Your school - the budget document shows average teacher total compensation of $105,219.16 and for all staff members (Secretaries, Principals, Custodians, and Teachers) the average is $102,058.61 - The highest of any of the middle schools. At Clague - Your school - the students enjoy the best student to teacher ratio of any middle school - 21.5 students to the teacher, if all instructional staff is included it is 19.1 students to the instructor. The school has $281 per student for teaching supplies (not including books). It costs $6326 per classroom to heat, light and maintain (no capital like furniture, roofs or custodian salary here) each classroom. The total cost per student at Clague is $8224.78 according to the budget. I don't see you commenting on the numbers Lisa. Again I advise people to dig into the budget and do the math, go to the meeting and ask questions.

josber

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 4:51 p.m.

Unfortunately, teachers don't control market forces...there are many people not doing well in the county, and they chose not to support an increase. It's called democracy. You are also at the mercy of market forces. The local and state economy has tanked. No one can stop this, and who exactly do you want to blame? GM? The Republicans? Michigan Legislators, who simply never saw an economy so bad in all their lives? The rest of the county? It doesn't matter who you blame, the money is disappearing. The school can't pay you more if they don't have more. If they lose $20 million in revenue over the next few years, it's a loss. If the union leadership wants to insist that there can be no concessions to salary and bennies, then something has to go. If layoffs are how the district is forced to proceed, it will be hard on the kids, and it will be very hard on those remaining staff that will lose supports, and have bigger classrooms. Teachers get many days off during the school year, and the district pays for those labor days twice, once, top dollar for the original teacher, and cheaper, outsourced, subs of what quality and consistency?..The truth is just negotiating less days off during the school year would save a lot of money, this from a crowd that doesn't work full time in the first place. How ironic it will be the union leadership that will control the outcome. That's the last set of people I would want to be in charge of the children's welfare, because those people work for the union, not the kids. Their very job depends on them acting in a selfish manner.. But in the end, the administration doesn't manufacture money, and if the pot of money continues to shrink so precipitously, it is going to be very tough. Either teacher take an income cut or they will be working under really miserable and tough conditions, and lots of times, the job where the demands are severe and support is poor and criticism and bad outcome are around you ends up not being worth the stress.

Lisa Starrfield

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 4:30 p.m.

Josber, $16 a month was too much for many with a $200,000 home. Now you are going to TAX me (after all, my paycut will basically be making up for the taxes refused outside Ann Arbor) for schools and try to guilt trip me that it is the students who suffer. Students are going to suffer no matter what. They already are at the Middle School level; we cut positions and electives a few years back. It has had a SIGNIFICANT impact on students in my opinion. It's only going to get worse.

Lisa Starrfield

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 4:23 p.m.

DonBee, The General Fund is separate from the other funds by law. They can't be used for operating costs which is why they are excluded from the GENERAL Fund information. They even spell out that they are excluded and why in the document linked in the article.

josber

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 4:08 p.m.

No matter how you slice this, the payment, total compensation package is what will need to be changed. The situation is simply is moving to a crisis situation. I find the press release too vague, what is up with not mentioning how many special ed people or TA's are in a building? A little bit of sophistry? Too weird, too specific an omission...not credible. So here's the problem, the teachers and other staff have to make less money somehow. It has to happen, because what are they going to cut, heat? busses? athletics? Even after all those are cut, it is unsustainable to continue to pay top dollar or even really good dollar(s) and step increases and those nice benefits packages nobody else in the county has.The administration will have to renegotiate contracts, and the teachers perhaps will chose not to negotiate, and perhaps a really prolonged strike with very little education for the kids in town is in the works...The union leadership probably are the most important people in this upcoming drama of how this impending crisis and how bad it will be as it unfolds. Because there is no more money, just more shortages, and if they adopt the every man for himself or more accurately,every union member will not cede a point,not a penny, not a percentage, because, after all, damn it we're worth it, it'll be the children who end up shortchanged.

DonBee

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 3:58 p.m.

Lisa - I said and will continue to say "TOTAL Revenue". Some if it is in the $191 and the rest is not, but the school has TOTAL Revenue of $243 million. The other $52 million is spent by the district. If that money was not there, then there would be even less to spend in the classroom. AAPS has $243 million to spend. Yes, it was approved by voters - that is obvious. To say that they only have $191 million is like saying "my bank deducts my mortgage from my paycheck so I only have xxx dollars spend each month. Since the bank takes it out first, I don't really make that money." This is the argument that is made with the $191 million is the operating budget. If you look back to 2002, the school had to take $7 million out of the operating budget to pay bonds, in 2009 they did not. So instead of the operating budget increasing by $30 million (AAPS budget document differences) the real increase was $37 million. This is because voters approved the bond issue and now cover all the bond costs for the district out of the bonds instead of having to take some of it from the operating budget. To compare, you have to start with all the revenue and all the expenses. In 2002 based on the budget, the schools spent $185 million of $190 Million. In 2009-10, I can find $223 million in expenses in the document and revenue of $243 million. Someone at AAPS did not do a good job at listing all the expenses. For instance, all the capital (books, furniture, buses, and building improvements, etc) are missing. Anyone who spends time in this document will find a lot of questions. Please read and do the math. Then go to the meetings and ask the questions.

bruno_uno

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 3:53 p.m.

I really dont care about your factoids, Im on the outside and over the past 40 years have seen the unions stranglehold on the public sector and the manufacturing sector be the number one cause for our economic turmoil in the rust belt. This includes our teachers whether you want to face reality or not.

Lisa Starrfield

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 3:53 p.m.

Bruno, I have already answered that question. Nope. But their employees get paid vacation days. I don't. One of them shuts down for a bit in the summer and actually, now that I think about it, much of the other does as well.

Lisa Starrfield

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 3:46 p.m.

DonBee, It looks like most of what you listed was included in the 191 million. The exceptions are not part of the General Fund and should not be included. Most of that money was taxpayer approved.

bruno_uno

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 3:46 p.m.

Lisa- do those same employers shut down for the summer and the other extended vacation days in spring?

bruno_uno

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 3:46 p.m.

Lisa- do those same employers shut down for the summer and the other extended vacation days in spring?

Lisa Starrfield

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 3:40 p.m.

Smoothie, If you shut down a school of 450, you still have to have teachers for that 450 no matter where you put them. You will have the same number of teachers. Unless you lose students. If you lose students you lose their revenue, which does mean fewer students to teacher but that means fewer dollars to pay for utilities, transportation and other necessities. Yes, you will save some building costs and maybe get 1 time payment on selling the building. But in the long run the loss of students will hurt. As for your notion that Community and Ann Arbor Open are special academies and shouldn't be funded by taxpayers, I can't say a lot about Ann Arbor Open as I don't know the program well but I DO know Community. High school students across the district are able to take advantage of many of the things which make Community special just like they can take advantage of some of the special things at Huron or even WCC. There is a lottery for getting into Community; luck not privilege gets you in.

Lisa Starrfield

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 3:29 p.m.

Bruno, I'm not paid for ANY of the time the schools are shut down.

Lisa Starrfield

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 3:28 p.m.

Oh and Bruno, while we are at it, I know people with only a Bachelor's degree and 2 or 3 years experience making 20% to 30% more than I and others with my same experience but less education making 2 to 3 times what I make. They were off the last two weeks as well. They don't get as much time off as I do but they can schedule it when they please and they don't have to use PTO to see the doctor or get a car fixed... they just do it. Am I complaining about this? No. Am I demanding that they are paid too much even though I am partially paying for their salaries? No. What I am furious about (and I think I have every right to be) is the animosity directed at teachers permeating these boards. My compensation is appropriate and I will fight for myself and my coworkers. And if the public thinks my making $100,000 is too much given that I don't work summers, perhaps it is because you keep spreading misinformation that teachers make $100,000. We don't. Not even close. You are comparing your salary to the average teacher's total COMPENSATION, not salary. They aren't the same and it is a deceptive practice.

DonBee

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 3:27 p.m.

@Smoothie - Sorry but moving the Ann Arbor Open students to another grade school would probably raise the costs. The Ann Arbor Open is a below average cost for a grade school per student in Ann Arbor. The average elementary school student costs the district $7652.12 and Ann Arbor Open is $7414.30 - $200 below average. While in spirit I could agree with your premise, the budget numbers indicate that Ann Arbor Open at Mack is a cost effective program for the district. Community and Skyline are about even in cost per student (yes - the Skyline building is only 1/2 full). It is less costly per student than Huron.

DonBee

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 3:20 p.m.

Lisa - The $243 million comes from the budget document: Foundation $156,250,000- This is the Proposal A money Delinquent taxes -$200,000 - this accounts for local taxes that will not be paid Local Sources (1) - $2,540,000 State Sources (2) - $13,100,000 Federal sources (3) - $0 Other Sources (4) - $20,100,000 Athletic - $294,723 Sinking Fund - $15,673,703 Bond Fund - $16,019,662 School lunch $3,677,016 Rec and Community $7,872,201 Grants $8,415,164 Totals $243,963,246 Notes: (1) U of M Married Housing (note not shown in the 2009 budget, but in the 2002 budget). Tuition (note same number used in 2002 and 2009), Income from investment, Rental of school facilities, Universal Service Fund (again in 2002 and not in 2009) and parking project. The total shows 2,540,000 but the detail is $400,000 short of this number. I suspect the difference is the U of M married housing which is not in the budget document. (2) bilingual education, special education, adult education, vocational education, Golden Apple (zero in 2009), Drivers Ed (dropped and zero in 2009), Medicare fee for service (zero in 2009) - The subtotal provided in the budget is $13,100,000 but totaling the numbers given comes up $1 million short. Since the Medicare is zero in 2009 and is over $300,000 in 2002, I suspect that part of the difference is in this category. (3) In 2002 this shows as Medicaid outreach for $390,000 - it is not discussed in the 2009 budget document. (4) Other sources County special education, tuition from other districts (again the same number is used in 2002 and 2009), reimbursement for prior years. The subtotal given is 20,100,000 the specific items add to $1.8 million less than the AAPS provided subtotal. It took digging through the document several times to find these numbers. Using the 2002 document, where it was all in one place was helpful in finding and organizing the numbers. These are my numbers, based on the AAPS document. All the quoted numbers are in the document. Please read the budget document and do your own math.

SMOOTHIE

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 3:16 p.m.

Lisa, Those students can be absorbed into the current schools. So you add a few students to each classroom...you may need a few of the teachers...so be it, but not all of them by any means. You sell a building or two. You no longer have to maintain it...eliminating that expense. So some people send there children to a private school...you say less revenue for the schools. I say fewer students to teach! I get the impression that you are missing my point... why "Special Academies" on the back of the taxpayers??

SMOOTHIE

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 3:04 p.m.

Maybe it is just me, but is this a good time to talk about the two special "academies" we have in the "Ann Arbor Open School at Mack" and "Community High School". I was always of the belief that the public schools should be like vanilla ice cream...everyone gets the same flavor. If you want strawberry or chocolate, pay for it out of your own pocket and not on the back of the taxpayers! I understand "A.P." classes and "Special Ed."...they are handled within the current school buildings. the "Academies" educate 963 students...to the tune of 7,900,000.00...in separate buildings, with separate staff. Am I alone voice??

bruno_uno

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 3:04 p.m.

Lisa- do those same employers shut down for the summer and the other extended vacation days in spring?

Lisa Starrfield

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 3:01 p.m.

Bruno, The animosity in your posts is simply baffling and frankly, misplaced. I can think of at least two other MAJOR employers in this area who shut down for the last two weeks. Schools aren't alone.

Lisa Starrfield

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 2:56 p.m.

DonBee Can you explain where you get the 243 million number from? Because I simply don't see it.

Basic Bob

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 2:20 p.m.

@SMOOTHIE, I agree with your thoughts on the purpose of *public* education. As long as we have space in existing schools, these students amd teachers can be reassigned with a significant cost savings to the district. If we have such dedicated and special teachers and students at a school like Community, why wouldn't we want to share them to benefit the entire district? However, the benefit of the entire district is not being served. Ann Arbor Open and Community serve a privileged few who hold too much influence over the board and superintendent. If they want to operate outside the system, they should be re-opened as private or charter schools.

bruno_uno

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 2:18 p.m.

thanks for the corrections Lisa, enjoy the final day of having two weeks off! just talk amongst yourselves with other teachers about your next break (whether it be pre-spring break, spring break, or snow day on Monday based on cold temperatures)

Lisa Starrfield

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 2:18 p.m.

Smoothie, No matter what building you close you still have those students to educate which means you still have most of that staff... including all of the teaching staff. You might be able to cut a secretary here or there or maybe an administrator but that's all. Cutting Ann Arbor Open and Community will not save a whole lot in the long wrong. Instead, it will likely drive some families to private schools and the district will lose revenue.

Lisa Starrfield

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 2:07 p.m.

Bruno, Let's do get real. I have a BS, an MA plus an additional 90 credits, and 10 years experience but not all of it is in Ann Arbor so that $60,000 number you are throwing around is actually pretty close to what I make. But in addition to your salary, your employer also pays benefits, social security and more just like mine. That is standard. Oh and while I won't be back at work tomorrow, I am looking forward to returning to my classroom on Monday so I am not sure why you are accusing me (or any other teacher) of whining or having anxiety.

bruno_uno

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 1:47 p.m.

Lisa- get with reality...I have a masters degree that consistuted over 60 university credits and make less than 60,000 and am grateful for my job. Teachers need to understand that they work for the public and that making over 100,000 a year that includes a masters degree that usually hovers around half the university credit hours (30) is pretty much an overpaid employee considering the do not work summers. In addition, the perks not mentioned like the apple laptops that each teacher gets??? Lets get real here and in touch with the rest of the working world. Finally, Im so sick of hearing teachers are the only ones with anxiety for having to go back to work tommorow.

DonBee

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 1:15 p.m.

@glacialerratic - You are right as far as you go. The proposal A funds (the main funding for the schools) have not kept up. BUT... If you take the total revenue for AAPS in 2002-3 it was $190 million and change. If you take the total revenue for AApS in 2009-10 it is $243 million and change. These numbers come from the AAPS published budget documents available on the web site and include all revenue from all sources. The difference in students from 2002-3 to 2009-10 is a decrease of 205 students or roughly 1 percent (again from these two documents AAPS published). So total revenue (all sources) per student in 2002-3 was $11,450. In 2009-10 total revenue (all sources) per student is $14,840. Included in these numbers but not yours are: - 1) Sinking fund 2) County special education millage 3) Bond fund 4) Federal sources 5) Grants 6) Parking money 7) State bilingual and special education funds 8) Adult and vocational education funds 9) Medicaid funds (state and federal) 10) School lunch money 11) In the case of 2002-3 the number is inflated by a $ 3 million dollar malpractice settlement. 12) U of M married housing fees 13) Income from investments 14) Rental income from buildings That is an increase of $53 million in available funds with a decrease of 205 students. Or roughly a 27% increase in overall funds or an increase of 29 percent over 7 years per student. Checking the CPI I do not find a 29 percent increase over that time. Please dig into the budget documents and understand what is going on, please the numbers are there. Form your own opinions. OBTW - In 2002 non proposal A taxes on the taxpayers in AAPS brought in $28 million for the district (Sinking fund, Bonds and Special Ed) - in 2009 they will bring in $49 million. These numbers are included in the budget and in the numbers above. Please dig in and do the research.

glacialerratic

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 12:32 p.m.

A quick observation. The AAPS budget document reports 1993-94 per pupil funding allocation was $7,574, and in 2009-10 it was $9,723--an apparent increase of $2,149 per pupil over 16 years. Using the Consumer Price Index to measure the changing value of the dollar, however, today it would cost about $11,285 to buy the goods and services that $7,574 could purchase in 1993. In other words, measured in current dollars, the purchasing power of the current budget year allocation represents a real per-pupil decline of about $1,562 over this period.

jns131

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 12:11 p.m.

Say NO to a short term solution to privatizing bus drivers and monitors and custodians. I would hate to have someone my child does not know cleaning the schools and who knows what else. We need to look at the teachers salary and how long they have been there. We also need to buy out hi end teachers and send them packing. The minimum starting wage for a teacher per year is $45,000 in AAPS. I know of a few teachers making $75,000. We need to end this horrid spending. No other district I know of has teachers making this much. By the way, teachers taking pay freeze is a joke. Take a look at the contract. They are still getting a pay raise. This is why they took a pay freeze. Because they are still getting their raises. They never froze their raises. Just a thought. I plan to fight the board on privatizing bus drivers and custodians. So should you.

Lisa Starrfield

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 11:49 a.m.

DonBee, Salary means how much money an individual gets in a year as payment for their job. Total compensation is salary plus benefits and is the term that I think you are looking for. Given that the more than 54% of teachers having been teaching more than 10 years in our district and more than 2/3 of our staff have Masters Degrees or more education, it is not a surprise that total compensation averages above 100,000. Not unreasonable for an educated and experienced staff.

Commoncents

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 11:28 a.m.

I am so thankful for Don Bee.

hypsi

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 11:27 a.m.

@a2karen Ypsilanti is holding community budget workshops open to everyone that is interested. The first one will be held on Thursday, Jan 12th at 7:00 P.M in the media center (lower level) at Ypsilanti High School You can find more information here: http://www.ypsd.org/pdf/2009-10pdf/couierad.pdf

The Grinch

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 11:19 a.m.

Wow! I didn't know A2 had so many CPAs!!

DonBee

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 11:08 a.m.

@sh1 - In fact in the world I work in "fully loaded" means salary and benefits. I used the terms that I am familiar with. If this is a problem - I apologize. Each industry seems to have its own dialect of English and I forgot that others might not use the same terms. In terms of the numbers though - they are what is in the budget and all I did was "X" divided by "Y" equals. So if @Eric or others have a problem with the result - I would suggest there is a problem with the budget's "X" and "Y" numbers. That is why I said over and over in my original post, get into the budget and do your own math. I have my own ideas why some of the numbers don't make sense, but I don't want to put my opinions out for others. I would suggest you form your own opinions and do your own math.

SuperFreckleFace

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 10:59 a.m.

FTE = Full Time Equivalent Employee... two half time employees equals one full time employee?? Some of the notes for our particular school read: "Notes: excludes Special Education classroom teachers and teacher assistants." Why are the teacher assistants not included per school, do they work at other schools? I think, especially, at our school there is a lot of "fat" with regard to teacher assitants. It's "nice" but we gotta get "not nice" for a while.

sh1

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 10:50 a.m.

DonBee, perhaps the problem is in your wording that "the average teacher salary, fully loaded is over $100,000." When people hear the word "salary," they typically think of money paid to an employee. When asked your salary, do you include the amount of money your employer pays for all of your expenses?

DonBee

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 10:41 a.m.

@Eric and @sh1 - I did not make up the numbers. All I did was divide the number of teachers into the cost numbers for the building for salary and benefits. If my results are wrong, then I suggest that the underlying data has a problem. That is why I posted it. I am having trouble with the numbers in the budget. I would suggest you go through the numbers for your building and see if they are right Eric, since you teach in the district. I wanted to point out what I found, not that the results were right or wrong, only that I have more questions now than I did before the budget came out. Please feel free to work through the budget document and find your own answers.

David Jesse

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 10:35 a.m.

I believe the $100,000 figure referenced by DonBee includes salary and benefits. We're looking at the numbers. Feel free to send me suggestions of questions you might have for me to ask the AAPS.

sh1

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 10:11 a.m.

The average teacher salary in Ann Arbor is not $100,000! That number isn't even on the pay scale. Haven't we been over this a million times?

Eric

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 9:41 a.m.

Did they mention how long some of those teachers were working in the district to earn 100,000? Because I can tell you I'm married to a teacher who is works at a school in ann arbor and they do not make 100,000 a year. Not even close. I'm not saying that there are better ways to use money in any given district, but it seems to me that teacher salary is always the first thing people complain about when it comes to school budgets. I think teaching is one of the few jobs where you are required to get college credits all during the course of your career. Not to mention that it is a five year degree and you have to do student teaching as well.

DonBee

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 8:56 a.m.

I wish to thank AAPS for releasing this document. It really helps me understand what is and is not going on. I spent 3 days in the document. I have a large number of questions that occur from it. I would recommend you spend some time in it too. There are very large differences in the cost to clean, heat and light classrooms. The average teacher salary, fully loaded is over $100,000 (do the math for each of the buildings if you don't believe me). There are 1200 plus teachers on staff, but less than 1000 are accounted for in the buildings. Based on the numbers that are listed. The summary numbers on the teacher's step table are wrong (take the time and add the rows and columns up for yourselves). Now do this take the 2002-3 budget that is on the website and try to match budget lines to the new budget. Some funny things happen. In 2002 the schools got medicaid money from both the state and the federal government, but it does not show in 2009-2010. They also got money from the UofM for married student housing, again not shown in 2009. The funny thing is if you add up the revenue for state, local, etc. The numbers do not add to the subtotals that AAPS gives. They are short by large amounts of money. Please do your own math here. There is a lot more in the budget report that does not add up if you go through and do the math. I am disappointed that Custodians and Principals are lumped in the same number in the school buildings, it makes it difficult to see who is really earning what. Also there is a huge productivity difference from building to building for Custodians, with no information on why. In the tables of classrooms if you subtracted the reserved classrooms, they do not add up to the number of available classrooms. With a central purchasing and accounting staff that costs almost $5 million a year (the number varies in the different sections of the budget). One would think that the numbers would be consistent and correct. I also find it interesting that there are numbers (tuition for one) that have not changed from 2002 to 2009. Same 5 and 6 digit numbers all ending in 4 zeroes. Pre-school which was supposed to be budget neutral, is not, based in the numbers that are in 2009 document, it is subsidized at the rate of about $3 million a year. Overall if you add up all the revenues for 2002 and 2009 - sinking fund, county millage for special education, grants (OBTW - no grants are shown for 2002), parking, Proposal A and all the other revenue - the AAPS has a budget increase of just about 27% since 2002, not bad. i would hope that Dr Roberts and his team will work with Ann Arbor.Com to come up with answers to the math questions that the budget document raises. I hope that many people take the time to read the budget document and do their own math here.

eduadvocate

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 8:43 a.m.

Chelsea held community forums prior to the millage election to discuss the education funding crisis in November, and is also holding community forums in January.

a2karen

Sat, Jan 2, 2010 : 8:05 a.m.

This is important, but also important is that fact that A2 passed the millage and it was voted down by the other communities in Washtenaw county so the follow up questions would be how is Milan also sharing and distributing this same info? They voted down the millage by the largest percentage (over 60% I believe). Dexter, Chelsea, Lincoln, Ypsi and Willow Run are they also reaching out to the community to communicate the budgets/cuts?