AlphaAlpha

Sun, Aug 8, 2010 : 1:07 p.m.

No, not garbage. And those numbers are not mine, they are A2.com's. Evidently, you have no links to support your implied assertions that public teacher education level corresponds to student outcome, do you?

John Q

Sat, Aug 7, 2010 : 10:31 p.m.

"According to U.S. Census Bureau statistics, the average per-capita income in Ann Arbor is $30,410 - less than half that of a city worker." Per-capita income? Why would you use a number that's based on every person living in the city including children? Again, your little fraud has been exposed. Ann Arbor residents are better educated and better paid than the national average. It's shown in their education levels and household income levels. As has been shown, people with a bachelor's degree earn twice as much as those without one, which is why they earn far more than the national average for household income. Your comparisons are garbage and you know it.

AlphaAlpha

Sat, Aug 7, 2010 : 8:18 p.m.

"But in Ann Arbor, where the percentage of college graduates is much higher, most people are getting paid an income that reflects their educational background and don't begrudge people of similar background getting paid a similar salary." But the salaries are not similar. Not at all. The average public employee makes much more. Much much more. According to the easy to post link: http://www.annarbor.com/news/controlling-employee-costs-may-be-ann-arbors-biggest-challenge/ quote: "According to U.S. Census Bureau statistics, the average per-capita income in Ann Arbor is $30,410 - less than half that of a city worker." Did you see the part about "Less than half that of a city worker"? In a town "where the percentage of college graduates is much higher". Local public teacher total compensation, at ~$104,000 / year, per info onsite, is about the same as the total compensation for city workers, ~$103,000. So, you are wrong. More likely, attempting to deceive. Again. And evade. Again. And don't bother with the per-capita vs. average income whine. Less than half is less than half, no matter how you measure it. In a town, "where the percentage of college graduates is much higher, [and] most people are getting paid an income that reflects their educational background", there is a subset paid way more than they should be: public employees.

AlphaAlpha

Sat, Aug 7, 2010 : 6:45 p.m.

"But in Ann Arbor, where the percentage of college graduates is much higher, most people are getting paid an income that reflects their educational background and don't begrudge people of similar background getting paid a similar salary." But the salaries are not similar. Not at all. The average public employee makes much more. Much much more. According to the easy to post link: http://www.annarbor.com/news/controlling-employee-costs-may-be-ann-arbors-biggest-challenge/ quote: "According to U.S. Census Bureau statistics, the average per-capita income in Ann Arbor is $30,410 - less than half that of a city worker." Did you see the part about "Less than half that of a city worker"? In a town "where the percentage of college graduates is much higher". Local public teacher total compensation, at ~$104,000 / year, per info onsite, is about the same as the total compensation for city workers, ~$103,000. So, you are wrong. More likely, attempting to deceive. Again. And evade. Again. And don't bother with the per-capita vs. average income whine. Less than half is less than half, no matter how you measure it. In a town, "where the percentage of college graduates is much higher, [and] most people are getting paid an income that reflects their educational background", there is a subset paid way more than they should be: public employees.

AlphaAlpha

Sat, Aug 7, 2010 : 5:03 p.m.

"Are you seriously going to claim that educational background has no impact on student performance? Please make your case. " Not 'educational background'; the supposed 'enhanced' educational background of public teachers you claim. Your notion that public teachers deserve higher pay because they are 'better' educated than private teachers sounds appealing, but what credible evidence is there to support your claim? It seems likely you don't have any evidence to support your claim, or else you would have provided it already, instead of evading the question.

stunhsif

Fri, Aug 6, 2010 : 10:59 p.m.

@AlphaAlpha, good point but regardless of that, we will no longer allow the unions to hold a gun to our heads and demand the "Cadillac" benefits and pensions they have been getting. It is over, may take a few years but it is over. They can cry all they want but they also know their days are numbered. The Jefferson's will no longer be livin on the east side in that deluxe apartment in the Sky high high!!

John Q

Fri, Aug 6, 2010 : 10:57 p.m.

"What studies show public teacher educational background differences affect student outcomes?" Are you seriously going to claim that educational background has no impact on student performance? Please make your case.

John Q

Fri, Aug 6, 2010 : 10:49 p.m.

For those interested in seeing how AlphaAlpha's phony comparison's deliberately skews the incomes that the average teacher gets compared to the average American worker, numbers that outline the differences in income based on education reveal how this game works. There's a huge household income disparity between those who have a college degree and those who do not. As you can see, the average household income of a worker with a bachelor's degree is almost twice as much as the person with only a high school degree. As those with any college degree represent just 1/3 of the workforce, the overall average for the entire workforce falls closer to the household income of the high school graduate than the college graduate. This allows AlphaAlpha to claim that teachers, as compared to the entire workforce, are overpaid. The same statement would be true of almost every person who has a college degree of any kind. This kind of game might work in a community where the population reflects the workforce of the entire country. But in Ann Arbor, where the percentage of college graduates is much higher, most people are getting paid an income that reflects their educational background and don't begrudge people of similar background getting paid a similar salary. To see the numbers, Google "US Household income" and education. I didn't want to include the direct link or the "moderation" process here leads to the post being excluded.

AlphaAlpha

Fri, Aug 6, 2010 : 10:46 p.m.

"private school teachers often don't have the same educational background or training as public school teachers" What studies show public teacher educational background differences affect student outcomes?

John Q

Fri, Aug 6, 2010 : 10:29 p.m.

AlphaAlpha - Are you looking to join the Tigers? You're batting zero for three tonight. At least you acknowledged the bogus nature of your ongoing attempt to compare the salaries of teachers to the broader employment market. Since you've cruised the BoL numbers, you know that only 30+ percent of the US workforce has a bachelor's degree or higher. If you want to play your comparison game, comparing wages among that group of employees would properly reflect the base educational background of every public school teacher in Michigan. As I'm sure you know but want to ignore, private school teachers often don't have the same educational background or training as public school teachers. But if your goal is to make a fool of yourself with your fake comparisons, keep rolling them out. I'll keep shooting them down.

AlphaAlpha

Fri, Aug 6, 2010 : 7:56 p.m.

""As mentioned, countless private sector employees, with wide ranging resumes, are working for dramatically lower wages than public employees." As has been mentioned every time you trot out these statistics, it's a bogus comparison. Using the salary of every worker to compare to a subset of workers is no more accurate than me saying every teacher is underpaid because compared to the average major league athlete, they make much less in pay. " Oh my. You are so right. About the subset, that is. The intended statement is this: "As mentioned, countless private sector teachers, with wide ranging resumes, are working for dramatically lower wages than public teachers." Apologies for the confusion. "I'm not a teacher and have zero desire to be one." Not a teacher, but yes, a very highly paid civil employee. "That's my point - if the pay and benefits are so great, why doesn't everyone flock to teaching?" They do. So many, in fact, that they can't all get jobs in their field.

ScottyBoy

Fri, Aug 6, 2010 : 1:56 p.m.

@Edward Vielmetti You are correct, however, they do pay co-pays. Some on this blog would have you think otherwise. The District gave them the $350 reimbursement.

ScottyBoy

Fri, Aug 6, 2010 : 1:51 p.m.

@Former Student All Saline teachers are given professional improvement money that can be used to go to conferences or a class. However, if you relied on it to pay for a Masters degree it might take 15 years since one year of professional development money will not pay for one college grad. course. And just to clear up the sick time issue - teachers in Salline do not get paid for unused sick time. On retirement all of the sick time is lost and definitly not paid. So, if you're someone who has been teaching for 38 years and has 150 sick days they are gone when you retire.

Stupid Hick

Fri, Aug 6, 2010 : 1:50 p.m.

Uh, why should any tax money go towards socialistic public education? Why shouldn't children be home-schooled unless their parents pay for private education? What ever happened to personal responsibility in this country?!

ScottyBoy

Fri, Aug 6, 2010 : 1:29 p.m.

@stunhsif What you say about the Saline teachers is untrue. A few years ago they gave up health insurance benefits that saved District $2 million. In addition, co-pays for prescriptions are $20 for generic and $40 for brand name. Do your homework. Facts, not B.S. Also, wasn't Saline High rated as one of the top high schools in the U.S. You get what you pay for.

InsideTheHall

Fri, Aug 6, 2010 : 10:03 a.m.

Couple of points here: 1. The low turnout always helps the vested interests (teachers, staff, parents) so the fact it was turned down meant that the parents did not buy in. 2. School requests will be voted down until the SEA renegoitiates their contract with the taxpayers. The line has been drawn in the sand. 3. Any school request for money should be voted down a minimum of two times before consideration. Amazing how a NO vote realigns priorities and a sense of reality.

John Q

Fri, Aug 6, 2010 : 6:02 a.m.

"As mentioned, countless private sector employees, with wide ranging resumes, are working for dramatically lower wages than public employees." As has been mentioned every time you trot out these statistics, it's a bogus comparison. Using the salary of every worker to compare to a subset of workers is no more accurate than me saying every teacher is underpaid because compared to the average major league athlete, they make much less in pay. "My point was, why don't we simply give all the taxpayers the same benefits/pay and pension that you get?" I'm not a teacher and have zero desire to be one. That's my point - if the pay and benefits are so great, why doesn't everyone flock to teaching? "I also feel that government employees should not be allowed to unionize because they are "public" employees and are already more protected than "private" employees." Non-unionized government employees enjoy no more protection than those who work outside of unions in the private sector. To claim otherwise is simply wrong.

snapshot

Fri, Aug 6, 2010 : 12:58 a.m.

Jimmy Olsen, I don't believe I addressed you as having the "entitled lifestyle", it was Saline Mom I was addressing with her explaination of what she thought were high medical costs. To Salineguy, My beef is the inflated costs associated with government expenses. This includes unsustainable employee comp plans and benefits. I also feel that government employees should not be allowed to unionize because they are "public" employees and are already more protected than "private" employees. I like to get what I pay for and government and its employees on all levels are not producing as they should.

stunhsif

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 10:03 p.m.

@AlphaAlpha, Saline teachers have even better pay and benefits than Ann Arbor teachers. Ann Arbor's overall average compensation is higher because their teachers are older and have more years employed. @John Q, typical of you union employees, never answer the questions. My point was, why don't we simply give all the taxpayers the same benefits/pay and pension that you get? Or course we cannot because the tax base could never support it just as we cannot suppor the schools as they stand today. We are your bosses, we pay your complete compensation package through our taxes. So why should you get the "Cadillac" program and not us? I have a college degree so don't say you are better educated. Answer the question please!

AlphaAlpha

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 10:01 p.m.

"Let me get this straight, conservatives complain about union-mandated wages and benefits and the lack of pay based on merit and your response is that every teacher, no matter what their experience, education or expertise, should get paid the same amount. I hope that you're not the product of a public school system. The contradictions make my head hurt. " No, the only complaint is that public employee wages are too high. Irrespective of representation, experience, education, or expertise, the pay scales are simply too high. They can be lowered substantially. As mentioned, countless private sector employees, with wide ranging resumes, are working for dramatically lower wages than public employees.

AlphaAlpha

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 9:54 p.m.

So, Persius... Perhaps you could help determine the average total compensation of teachers in your area; it would be a useful metric to help establish perspective. For comparison, per A2.com stories, the average total compensation (i.e. salary plus all benefits) is about ~102,000 for A2 teachers. That's nearly twice the average private sector total quoted above. It would be interesting to compare your area with others... Good luck.

John Q

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 9:53 p.m.

"The average private sector employee receives $57,179 total compensation per year per BLS numbers onsite..." Let me get this straight, conservatives complain about union-mandated wages and benefits and the lack of pay based on merit and your response is that every teacher, no matter what their experience, education or expertise, should get paid the same amount. I hope that you're not the product of a public school system. The contradictions make my head hurt.

AlphaAlpha

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 9:44 p.m.

"Funny how the people who complain about what teachers get paid are unwilling themselves to do that work." Most complaints regarding excessive compensation for teachers are directed toward teachers who are public employees. Countless excellent private sector teachers work for much lower wages...

mike from saline

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 9:42 p.m.

Former Student, you are wise beyond your years.

AlphaAlpha

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 9:33 p.m.

"How much should these overpaid teachers be making? " The average private sector employee receives $57,179 total compensation per year per BLS numbers onsite...

John Q

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 9:31 p.m.

"Why don't we simply give all full time workers in Michigan entrance into the MEA and give them the benefits that all MEA workers get?" If the work is so great for the pay and the benefits, why aren't all of these people complaining about what teachers get paid in the teaching profession? Funny how the people who complain about what teachers get paid are unwilling themselves to do that work.

stunhsif

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 8:33 p.m.

I sort of understand how SpamBot1 and SalineGuy feel like they are being picked on right now. For the past 30 years their unions have grown stronger and more powerful and extracted "unreasonable largesse" from the taxpayers with little to no notice. The school boards,when times were good just kept caving to their demands, the taxpayers were doing "ok" and listened to the ploy of "let's not hurt the kids". But just as the pay-healthcare and pensions were rising at a 20 degree angle for the teacher unions the opposite was happening in the private sector. Their pathes crossed around 7 years ago and are going in oppposite directions. We understand the unions digging in their heels. They find it hard to believe that this is happening to them because for the past 20 years they have been riding the "gravy train" to the "mashed potato field"! We in the private sector have no choice but to pay your way through our taxes, we have no choice as a gun is held to our heads. We are your employers, you work for us, period! We will decide what is fair and reasonable and it is neither fair nor reasonable that your benefits and pensions are beyond what anyone gets in the private sector. It is simply that simple! I have a good idea here which I think can solve everything. Why don't we simply give all full time workers in Michigan entrance into the MEA and give them the benefits that all MEA workers get? Then everyone can have great healthcare, they can retire after 30 years with a full pension and have healthcare for themselves and their spouse until they die 40 years later. Why don't we do that for all full time working Michigan residents folks? Because we could never afford it!

John Q

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 8:29 p.m.

"In any other industry, his poor performance would get him fired." Wrong. In every industry, there are poor performers and incompetents who get rewarded and promoted beyond their abilities. Look at the CEOs in a wide range of industries who continued to be rewarded with bonuses and golden parachutes while their companies and industries imploded. As a recent high school graduate, you don't have the life experience to make such declarations. But in case you think you do, you're wrong. And you're just as wrong to use one poor example of a teacher to trash an entire group of professionals.

Somewhat Concerned

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 5:18 p.m.

You bet the unionized teachers come and stay. Who wouldn't with their deal? Do they stay because they have the long term interest of the schools at heart or do they stay because they have the long term interest of their own wallets at heart and have little chance of making half as much doing anything else? Or do they stay because they rig the rules so they can't be fired no matter how lazy they have become, how out of date their knowledge is, or how little they care about the students?

FormerStudent

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 4:27 p.m.

To Spambot: The teachers' union does a lot of bad. I will give you an example: One of my teachers (who earns above $80,000) often talked about how he would wait until his retirement was at a maximum, and then leave to "milk the district" for all it was worth. He worked 8 hour days at most, often using his sick days or school hours to study for his own classes. He was getting a Master's, funded by the school (they pay teachers with Master's more) and told us he planned to use that degree on a financial job that was waiting for him once he left the district. He lazily and impatiently taught us via powerpoint slides assembled by another teacher. The grading he had to do was minimal, as he would have us grade our own homework. In my opinion, this teacher should be fired. In any other industry, his poor performance would get him fired. Instead, some of the new teachers who are much better than him and are barely earning $45,000 are the ones to get laid off. This is because the union has a policy of only taking care of the most senior teachers. This is just an example case, and I had several more teachers with similar stories. I think that this union practice is unfair and is causing too many tax dollars to be spent on poor teachers.

Persius

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 3:53 p.m.

I bet I'll be paying Saline taxes long after you retire, SpamBot. My interest goes well beyond the years my kids are in school. Your premise is poor.

SpamBot1

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 3:36 p.m.

Persius --- You sure are good at pounding the table. It's unfortunate that most of your argument against unions is based on half-truths, worst-case instances, and misconceptions. It sounds good though. All ---Things are rarely as simple as they appear. Those that really understood how a good, strong union, like the one in saline works, support them at every turn. Superintendents, principals, school boards, students and their parents all come and go. Each of these individuals are thinking only a few years ahead. Administrators average about 5 years in any one district and school board members serve 4 year terms. Parents and students are around a little longer, but in reality, most families are part of a school for 15 years or less. The fact is, almost no one has as vested an interest in the success of a school, academic and financial, as the union. When you have leadership that constantly looks over the horizon instead of "the crisis" that is at arm's length, you get a school like saline. ---I will not apologize for my benefits or salary.

John Q

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 3:20 p.m.

"As a student, I am horrified and very offended by these salaries and benefits. Especially in Saline, where the students are for the most part well-behaved and respectful, NO TEACHER should ever make anywhere near this salary, and not expect some kind of cut when times get tough." Horrified and offended? How much should these overpaid teachers be making?

SpamBot1

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 3:11 p.m.

I have to go get my boots on. It's getting deep in here.

Somewhat Concerned

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 2:56 p.m.

Voters in Saline at last may be tired of the tired union claims. "Pay us more and your school children will be better off." "Hire more of us and your school children will be better off." "We are on strike because it will make your school children better off." Perhaps voters have stopped believing the baloney. Next up, the police unions. "Pay us more and you will be safer." "Hire more of us, and you will be safer." What actually happens is that there are more, higher-paid officers sitting in their cars, keeping warm, talking on their cell phones, watching drivers do their best to get through intersections where the lights aren't working. The only reforms the teachers' or police unions support are reforms that raise their pay or increase their number. That is one reason voters are turning down tax and bond proposals.

Persius

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 2:32 p.m.

~SalineGuy I think characterizing my post as hate and venom is hyperbole. Lets deal with the issues, shall we? I respect your service, just like I respect the service of the office manager at my private-market dentist, who steered me through the arcana of getting my dental visit partly covered by my costly dental insurance. You want the respect due? You got it. But Im sorry, I intensely dislike the unions, probably including yours, and I absolutely reserve the right to savage them at will and to the utmost of my capabilities. Thats what they have been doing to my interests for years. They are patently greedy and corrupt, consistently putting themselves before the people they serve, the taxpayer, and their most junior members, whom they shaft in layoffs and bumpings. You say companies put their profits before shareholders, but at least people have a choice where to invest their money, and the companies arent funded with taxes (unless through the bailouts, which I oppose). Companies have to earn their keep. Would you scruple at this? Do the unions not guard their turf like a savanna lion and show blatant disrespect to those who would reform them? Consider this ending to a memo widely circulated within the NJEA (New Jersey) this past April: Dear Lord this year you have taken away my favorite actor, Patrick Swayze, my favorite actress, Farrah Fawcett, my favorite singer, Michael Jackson, and my favorite salesman, Billy Mays. I just wanted to let you know that Chris Christie is my favorite governor. Yeah, yeah, apologies were forthcoming from the union president who wrote it (who, incidentally, makes $150K); they always are, when someone gets caught, but they don t change the culture of hubris that spawned the offense. Besides, this guy still has his job. After all, he has seniority. You could argue that we free-marketers should have been making a bigger fuss about this during the good times, when the costs were less noticeable and the benefit packages were less out of whack; but I could more easily say that you should have been restraining your union bosses so that, when the bad times rolled around, teachers and many other government workers werent getting their hospitalization covered at 100% with no deductible, no coinsurance, and no out-of-pocket maximums, while many families in the private sector have $1,000 deductibles, are paying 80/20 coinsurance up to an out-of-pocket maximum of $1,500 per person and a family out-of-pocket maximum of $5,000, and are paying for it all on a 20% pay cut, oh, and paying taxes that never go down. Also, you talk about the critics of the unions being so horrible because they have a problem with the current state of affairs, while portraying yourself as noble because you didn't have a problem with them when they were out-earning you? This statement on your part betrays your ignorance of a key, underlying principle. They never cost you anything that you didn't have a choice about spending, and they still dont. They only serve at your pleasure when you buy from them. If you dont like BP, gas up at Shell. Don't like Walmart, go to Costco. Hate Chase, bank at United. But, sorry to have to be blunt, but you DO cost them money, and they have no choice. If I don't like the teacher unions, do I really have a choice? My taxes have been extracted and go toward "Big Ed" whether I want them to or not. The public sector, especially public education and the associated unions, is a government-sponsored monopoly, and because it is a monopoly, it tends naturally toward inefficiency. It should always serve at the taxpayers pleasure, but because of the unions and a cowed voting populace that nearly always votes the way the unions want it to, because they dont want to hurt the kids, it doesnt usually have to. The only thing that will rein in costs is criticism, pressure and reform. Thats where people like me come in. By and large, Big Ed has been insulated from the voting process (e.g. I cant vote the unions out), but all that goes out the window when it comes to voting on bond issues. And down it went. Its not about hate. Its about reasonable costs and the unions learning their place and reforming. We're not there, not even close. ~SpamBot1 You wrote: Do you mean salary and benefits between the private and public sectors should be "fair" or "equal"? Very young children often confuse those two concepts? Yes, I suppose little children do confuse equal and fair. But I suspect most any very young child could tell you that the above insurance scenario is neither equal nor fair. But its real.

Somewhat Concerned

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 1:36 p.m.

Finally, a place that says "we can't afford everything we want." Ann Arbor went the other way, and it will lose population to Saline and places which understand that neither families nor governments can spend all the money they would like to spend on all the good things on which money can be spent. The people who won't control spending will lose to the people who are sufficiently mature to control themselves. Congratulations Saline.

SpamBot1

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 12:14 p.m.

Do you mean salary and benefits between the private and public sectors should be "fair" or "equal"? Very young children often confuse those two concepts?

salineguy

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 11:54 a.m.

This is not bashing the public sector?...this idea of Saline Mom's goes, that the bond issue had nothing to do with union practices and wages, that they are separate issues altogether, guess again. The tax-payer's wallet feels the overall pinch of education, and it doesn't care if the pinch is coming from taxes for wages or taxes for buses. It all hurts. Because of the union excesses of the past, this bond failed. That is the link. Saline teachers don't pay toward their healthcare in any way, not in premiums nor in copays. Every one in the private sector does. Why is that fair, Saline Mom? Saline teachers have automatic step-ups in wages built into their contract, based solely on tenure/seniority... sure could have fooled me.

Greggy_D

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 11:48 a.m.

Persius isn't bashing the public sector. He's is bashing the utter lack of fiscal responsibility demonstrated by the Saline School District. And rightfully so.

salineguy

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 10:20 a.m.

Persius and other public sector bashers out there listen up. 25+ years ago I embarked on a public sector career. While my friends and college mates 'chose' to work in the private sector, I 'chose' to be a civil servant. The pay was much less at the time, but the benefits were decent as was the opportunity for a pension. While my step increases were set and small (2-3% range) the job was good, it was relatively secure and it was - in essence - a choice and a trade off when compared to my private sector friends who regularly received bonuses in the 1000s of dollars, big raises, etc. The pay continued to be less up until about two years ago when these private companies 'chose' to focus on profits before people and the needs of the shareholders. This is too bad. I feel for everyone who has been a victim of pay cuts, benefit cuts, job losses and everything else that has happened in the private sector. However, why am I - and other like me - who are at the mid-points of our careers, have advanced degrees, and have underearned our peers for the vast majority of our careers the focal point of such venom? I have done nothing wrong, the teachers have done nothing wrong, and I feel very fortunate to work in the public sector. Perhaps instead of pointing your finger at us and drinking the 'hater-aide', maybe you should thank us for serving our communities, our state, and our country. We hold nothing against you, nor did we when YOUR pay, benefits, pensions, and job security were in place and not subject to the next quarters' financials. I hear and understand your complaints, but I will NEVER apologize for serving this nation as a civil servant. I will serve you, the public, regardless of whether you are a flaming liberal or a right wingnut! Hooah!

belboz

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 10:17 a.m.

Ha. Spend $28 million so you can save $7 million. Sounds like people running Saline have been hanging out with my daughter. Thankfully the residents didn't give them a bump in their allowance.

Hot Sam

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 10:13 a.m.

Earlier 007 said: """Sorry, but isn't this hypocritical? You in fact WANT more money in YOUR pocket which is the RESULT from voting this down and in turn it takes money AWAY from Saline Schools. """ I'm sorry 007...the schools have no money...it is OUR money...this is somehow forgotten at every level of government these days...

Persius

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 10:03 a.m.

Just reviewed the Saline Teachers' health plan, via the link FormerStudent supplied. Excellent post FormerStudent! The teachers' plan is a dreamboat plan. Highlights: - "No deductible", meaning annual deductible. Total, 100% coverage for non-preventive (in-hospital, etc.) care starts at first dollar, so... - "No Co-payment", meaning co-insurance. Most plans are 80/20 these days, or at least 90/10, up to an out of pocket max of something like $1,500 or more. Some are 70/30 or even 60/40. - "$5 office visit co-pay", most people pay $20, $25, or more. - "Emergency Room co-pay", $25 for hospital, $5 for doc. I have never seen a plan in the private market that didn't charge at least $65 for hospital E-room. I know people who pay $250 here. - All standard coverage items are at 100% coverage. - Even "Mental health and Substance Abuse" are covered at 90%. Most plans for the private market pay a far lower percentage, and are capped in terms of total dollar outlays. This plan is unsustainable, and an unfair burden on the tax-base. There is a boat load of money to be saved here. The plan should be at most a 90/10 co-insurance plan, preferably 80/20, with an annual out-of-pocket max of some meaningful amount for non-preventive care. A standard amount here would be around $1,500, but it could easily be more to be more in line with what most folks have. (This entirely leaves out the idea of a deductible, which many have.) An HSA (Health Savings Acct) that the teachers could contribute pre-tax dollars to, and carry forward, would offset the occasional impact, here. E-room co-pays s/b $65 minimum, E-room doc co-pay s/b $10 minimum (versus current $5). Co-pays for preventive visits s/b minimum $10, preferably $15 or $20, and co-pays for brand-name prescriptions s/b $20, providing incentive to use generics at a $10 co-pay. Mental health s/b scaled back at least to 80/20 coinsurance with a cap on total expenditure in line with private market plans. I sold healthcare plans 5 years ago. Such a plan as I describe above would have been considered a very good plan then, and things haven't gotten any plusher since in the private market in MI, folks, as we all know. Meanwhile, the plans in the public sphere still provide platinum coverage, like this SEA plan. They are WAY out of date, and it can't continue.

Jimmy Olsen

Thu, Aug 5, 2010 : 6:52 a.m.

@snapshot My point was they pay "something" not "nothing" as was stated in the post. What they have is over the top in today's world no one could argue differently other than the SEA/MEA, and last I saw about 350 districts in the state still enjoy similar benefits. As to my "entitled lifestyle" - here are my facts. I have a Health Savings Account (HSA). These are like IRA's of the health insurance world. Any money I have "left" is mine to keep forever (I can only put in about %5,000 per year). By law, an HSA has to be connected to a high deductible health plan. So, I have no co-pays, but a $6,150 deductible per person. The plan pays for most preventative benefits, but these are also limited. Two people in the family have to meet the deductible ($12,300) BEFORE the plan kicks in and pays at 80%. For this I pay $700 per month. And, I'm lucky, because this was the only plan my employer offered, otherwise, we were going to get no health insurance. So please don't speak of my "entitled lifestyle" until you know all the facts.

FormerStudent

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 11:26 p.m.

I graduated from Saline High School last year and I noticed many ways that the school spends wastefully so I made sure to vote NO on this bond. The most significant problem in my opinion is the Teacher Salaries and benefits. If you look at the SEA contract for 2009-2012 http://www.salineschools.com/images/stories/2009-2012%20SEA%20Contract%20-%20FINAL(1).pdf or at the other contracts: http://www.salineschools.com/index.php/departments/business-services/459-budget-and-salary-transparency you will see that this district uses a seniority based system where the teachers who have been working for 15+ years can earn upwards of $85,000 BASE SALARY. And that doesn't include the annuity stipends, coaching money, and excellent medical, dental, and vision coverage outlined in the contract. And don't even mention the amazing pensions they get! Thanks to this system, there are currently 22 employees of the district earning more than $100,000. Also a teacher working there for 21+ years gets 20 days of sick leave a year (which they get paid for if they don't use) and 2 personal days - as if the holidays, summers off, and easy hours weren't enough! As a student, I am horrified and very offended by these salaries and benefits. Especially in Saline, where the students are for the most part well-behaved and respectful, NO TEACHER should ever make anywhere near this salary, and not expect some kind of cut when times get tough. How can these people even ask for more money??? For infrastructure?? They should have thought of that before they signed this appalling contract!

Persius

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 10:22 p.m.

Hey Stunhsif, thx, and likewise. I have been very busy retraining for a new career, but my schedule lightened up a bit recently. In my new career, I plan to infiltrate the teacher unions. I also owe Snapshot a thank you. I enjoyed your "clawback" idea, Snapshot. Let's go for it!

stunhsif

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 10:08 p.m.

@Persius, Only empty rhetoric coming back at you because those that disagree with your excellent post cannot defend their position(s). First time I have ever seen you post on A2.com, where ya been?

Persius

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 10:04 p.m.

~Saline Mom: In that you have come to the table and admitted that the teachers are not paying anything toward premiums, and that that is out of sync with the rest of the world, I thank you. If you are correct on the copays, I yield to some degree on THAT aspect. I say "to some degree" because another apparently informed post (AnnouncerMan) states that their copays are $5. If that is correct, they should be multiples higher. Also, as he also states, dental coverage, what dental coverage? My wife and I have paid for every dental bill for me, her, and all three kids, for 9 years now, flat out. Only just recently did we get any dental coverage at all, and we pay all of the premium. That is the real world. But, again, the bigger issue is payment toward premiums, and I thank you for seeing this. Finally, from where do you get your figure that negotiations with the union would only give us $1.5 million? Source? Even if that is so, I'll take what I can get. That alone would set the tone for future negotiations, saving us untold millions down the road. We need to start thinking longer-term, not just 2 years down the road. ~All: A very helpful thread that has developed in this discussion can be summarized as follows. While funds from this bond could NOT have been used toward salaries (a point I was never confused about, and neither was Stunhsif, from what I could see), "general operational dollars" (as Financial Facts points out) can be and are. They are the source for salary funds, he states. And as general operational funds CAN be used toward both salaries and for anything else, including "operation, infrastructure repair and maintenance, capital equipment, etc.", as again Fin'l Facts points out, now that this bond has failed, some of those general funds will have to be used to pay for things the bond would have funded. Graden admits this when he says [s]ome of the projects and upgrades to infrastructure really need to be done. Without a bond to pay for it, well have to look at operational dollars to cover those costs (as AnnouncerMan quotes above). Ergo, there will more pressure on salaries in the future, because those funds won't be there to be doled out of the general fund toward those salaries and perks. Therefore, there will be pressure either to lower overall salaries and reduce overall perks or to layoff teachers without tenure (the old LIFO, last-in first-out union shuffle). This should pressure the unions to come back and negotiate. As, again, AnnouncerMan says, "the MEA can in fact re-open negotiations....[I]f petitioned by the SEA and shown that many teachers are going to lose their job if something is not done, the MEA would have opened negotiations." Now, I may take issue with that a bit, because I wouldn't put it past the MEA to sell many teachers with the least seniority down the river, but if they do, there will be much more local pressure on them to reform. We need that desperately. Let the pressure begin. In the here and now, and in the final analysis, this vote, teacher comp packages, and union tactics are all interrelated. Because of this vote, there will be more pressure on the unions to reform in the future. Thus, SalineMom and others who have argued likewise, you can't just hide behind the shield of saying that this bond had nothing to do with salaries. ~AnnouncerMan: You wrote "...this was not a NEW mileage/bond, it was an extension of a current one. It would have cost NO ONE in Saline an extra dollar. Not one. Please don't forget this." With all due respect, this statement doesn't hold water. It would have been a cowardly, future new tax. Calling it an extension is mere semantics. How would you like it if your bank called you and said, "we're extending your mortgage payments six years beyond your current payoff date; but it's okay, because it's not a new mortgage and it's not costing you 'an extra dollar. Not one." I suppose you'd be fine with that? Come on... ~Murrow. So that was ad hominem, eh? What was your snide comment about the Tea Party? Fine tuned analysis? The casting of the tea party as ignorant and vindictive is MSNBC-type snobbery and ill-substantiated tripe, and I and millions of other tea-partiers could certainly do without it. Hence my response.

JWB

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 9:44 p.m.

First let me state that I voted No on the Saline Bond Extension. I too want good schools, but not at the expense of future students. When I first read about the proposed bond extension,in the AnnArbor.com print edition, several months ago, I had not heard about the bond extension proposal. I was not surprised as I have felt, for many years, that the then current school administration did not want the general public to know about any new spending. They do keep the Teachers, students, and their parents apprised but not the general public. What intrigued me, in the article, was a statement attributed to the consultant, that the extension would not result in any new taxes. Any extension of a debt issue is for new taxes. I have spent numerous hours educating myself about this issue. I found that many of the updates or purchases contemplated had life cycles of only 4-12 years. We the taxpayers would not even start paying for them until 15 years from now. Many of the items were previously funded out of the operating budget but were now going to be funded through long term bond financing. The reconfiguration of the student drop off areas, for safety reasons, seemed odd, as the original drop off areas had to be signed off for safety before they were even built. Cars and buses have not changed since these schools were built, I found out that there had been a policy change, made by the school district, of when and how a student may be dropped off at school. Again, this is not a safety concern as much as a policy change that was driving this request. Early last week I sent an email, to the Saline School Web Site for the Bond Proposal, asking for more specifics on some of the general item descriptions listed. I still have not heard from the moderator nor has anything been posted on the web page.

stunhsif

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 9:08 p.m.

@TheAnnouncerMan007, "Really? So to show the teachers union and their leader tim heim who is boss, you voted down an existing mileage/bond? Sorry, but isn't this hypocritical? You in fact WANT more money in YOUR pocket which is the RESULT from voting this down and in turn it takes money AWAY from Saline Schools. You have done EXACTLY what you are complaining about. I am sure you thought this through". Are you telling me that the money I earn is not mine and that it belongs to the Saline School District unless they tell me otherwise? I will, with my vote try and decide if more money comes out of my back side. At least this time the voters made the right choice based on the Saline School Districts entitlement attitude.

snapshot

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 8:31 p.m.

Saline Mom, you're so out of touch. When normal folks talk about paying for healthcare, we're not talking about co-pays, we're talking about something like $500 to $1,500 dollars out of pocket per month. the co-pays are additional. And 20 percent for dental, wow! What a hardship! Most folks don't have dental coverage at all! And those are the folks you want more money from. You are not doing your cause any good by revealing your entitled lifestyle.

snapshot

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 8:26 p.m.

Saline mom, We need to legislate "clawbacks" like the Feds are doing for financial institutions and the Madoff scam. The unions, supported by its members have scammed the public into usustainable pensions and benefits. We want to implement "clawbacks" through legislation due to fraud. The fraud is education hasn't gotten any better, test scores prove that. Teachers refuse to be accountable on any level. That's why you don't have any money from the federal (Top of the whatever) program that required restructuring, which unions oppossed. Imagine that?

snapshot

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 8:20 p.m.

Persius, well said! And I think some school districts have 85 percent of revenue going to salaries and benefits. Hey Ed how do you feel about "Clawbacks"?

snapshot

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 8:08 p.m.

Ed's Ghost, If the district had budgeted for maintenance to begin with instead of increasing salaries and benefits while "counting" on the good citizens to take up the financial slack, they wouldn't be in a financial mess. Schools pay 70 percent of revenues in salaries and benefits, and they're upset with the banking industry that only pays 40 to 50 percent of revenues in salaries and bonuses, yes includes bonuses that everyone is up in arms about. It's not about the kids anymore, it's how much the unions can get for their member. Folks are putting an end to that wagon train.

Financial Facts

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 3:30 p.m.

Well blueplate may have explained this better more simply than I. Although there is no "may" involved - it absolutely leaves more income in the Operating Fund for the union to utilize. Having a defeated millage gives Scot a reason to ask the union to open the contract.

LodiLibrarian

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 3:26 p.m.

Two points: 1 I believe that there was one rather vague story in the Saline Reporter, on 26 July, and one on AnnArbor.com, in the same week, which never made it into the print edition (?). I missed the story in the Reporter and do not usually have access to the internet, so all online sources are closed to me. So in fact I had not heard about the issue at all till I printed off my sample ballot at work on Monday night before the election. I suspect that for many voters, the first they heard of this issue was seeing it on their actual ballot on election day. Perhaps if the issue had been publicized earlier than the week before the election, or perhaps if we still had a real newspaper in this county, more informed voting might have been possible. As it is, many votes were probably based on little more than the language of the ballot issue (which was technical and confusing but clearly featured the salient phrase "$28 million in [long-term] additional debt"), and some prejudices pro and con. For me those would include Mr. Graden (PRO), buses (CON), educational technology (CON), Federal money (CON), tax rates (PRO--they're half of what I've paid elsewhere), and, yes, a general sense of the district's previous spending and labor relations (MIXED). It is on such a jumble of partial information and prejudice that many, perhaps most, votes are actually based. A voice in one ear says "Scott must know what he's doing"; but in the other, one hears, "but what on earth is he doing paying for (unnecessary) expendables like WiFi with long-term debt? Enough debt already!" And many of us resolve dilemmas like this with a simple rule: "when in doubt, say no." 2 In any school election involving money, it is probably fair to expect that both turnout and support will be high amongst school system employees. If so, then the vote (school employees excepted) may not have been so close as it appears, and public sentiment more hostile than the vote tallies indicate.

Financial Facts

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 3:23 p.m.

Announcer 007 - Scot Graden's quote really did not mislead it's just that government accounting is an animal unto itself. "Some of the projects and upgrades to infrastructure really need to be done. Without a bond to pay for it, well have to look at operational dollars to cover those costs. The "operational dollars" are the main income, the "operating millage" that goes to the general fund. These monies can be used for anything - operation, infrastructure repair and maintenance, capital equipment, etc. The more efficiently you use this tax revenue the less additional money you need to request from your taxpayers. Teacher's salaries are paid from this income source. The higher the teacher's compensation, the less money left over for other items. So, if the compensation is too high relative to the income received, it leaves less at the bottom to fund everything else. Hence, they need to ask the taxpayers for more money to pay for the additional items. It is true this "operating" millage is not intended to pay for a brand new building let's say; but buses? As the original buses depreciated money should have been set aside to replace them - but you can't set anything aside if you've negotiated it all away. It is true that any additional money can only be used for the purpose stated in the ballot. Lot of other legalities involved but that is the skeletal idea.

blueplatespecial

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 3:01 p.m.

@AnnouncerMan007. I think the point about the millage and salaries is this. Operational money can be used for salaries, infrastructure, and many other things. If the millage passes, it removes/reduces the infrastructure costs from the operating fund. This additional money in the fund may be used for salaries. So indirectly, passing the millage MAY allow higher salaries (note I use may).

Jay Allen

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 2:45 p.m.

Financial Facts: First, if I am wrong, I'll be the first in line to admit fault. I do agree it is "murky" LOL at best! But to quote Scot Graden: Some of the projects and upgrades to infrastructure really need to be done. Without a bond to pay for it, well have to look at operational dollars to cover those costs. Am I missing something here? Then, in the body of the article that substantiates my point is: "Bond money can't be used to pay for school employees salaries or benefits." This is what I have found, I have read and have been led to believe. If I am wrong, I'll admit it. I did do some research, I did ask questions, because if that money was to go to the Union, I would have voted no in a heartbeat. Can you lead this horse to water so I can verify if what I have read is wrong or if I was out and out lied to?

blueplatespecial

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 2:33 p.m.

I don't live in Saline, so I didn't have a horse in this race. But I was struck by the planned length of bond repayment-- 21 years from now. The average life expectancy for a bus is 12-15 years (http://www.nasdpts.org/paperBusReplacement.html) and with Michigan roads it is probably on the low end of that. So why would you use a 21 year debt instrument to fund items that will be long gone before you have satisfied the debt? In 10-15 years, you will need another millage for new buses while still paying for the old buses-- it makes no fiscal sense. It is just kicking the can down the road and is irresponsible leadership. (Not to pile on Saline-- many agencies are doing similar things.) Buses should be funded with bonds that are inline with the usable life, else they just keep piling up the debt. Technology has an even shorter usable life. I think it is insane to fund technology with a 21 year millage. Security is probably not much better. Infrastructure may be reasonable. A roof may last 20 years. But paint or flooring will need to be replaced multiple times in 20 years. Somewhere along the line it became the norm to pay for everything with debt. Given the response to government surpluses (give us back our money), perhaps it makes sense. But I think agencies need to think longer term than just this millage cycle to align the millage length with the life cycle of the purchases and have a plan for paying for the next round.

Financial Facts

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 2:29 p.m.

To The AnnouncerMan007 - I appreciate the time and effort you have taken to understand this issue - government finance is a murky affair. However I must differ with your conclusions. You state that you would not have voted for this if the monies were to be used for teacher compensation and benefits - in point of fact a vote for this did indirectly support the current level of teacher compensation. The general fund operations cannot contribute to infrastructure and debt repayment in part because the money is committed elsewhere - namely teacher's compensation.

Jay Allen

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 1:47 p.m.

dalast word. Please tell us ALL why the gold course was never built. And to your comment: "just look at the high school." This is just more rhetoric from an uninformed person. The CARES money and the tax dollars.......I am sure you know the difference. Waiting to hear on the gold course.

DaLast word

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 1:39 p.m.

Thank god for the Teaparty, finally people are paying attention to where the money goes. This school district has already demonstrated that they can't be trusted to make good judgement with our tax dollars, just look at the high school. Remember, they WERE going to build a 18 hole golf course on the property. What are we idiots?

Jay Allen

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 1:38 p.m.

OK, first some ground work. -I will debate with the best of them. AA.Com, please don't close this and do not delete posts. This is the BEST thing to happen on this issue, yet. -I am a conservative. I am NOT liberal. -I have been at meetings. I do speak with those involved because I wish to be EDUCATED on the facts. I am NOT speaking based on emotion but from an EDUCATED view. We moved to Saline 7 years ago and we have lived in Washtenaw county our entire lives. Saline WAS the place to be. I now have 1 child in the district (my daughter just graduated) and in way do I want the quality of education reduced. I cannot believe that a well educated town (as a hole) is making some of the poor decisions that are in fact being made. Typically, I am NOT for new taxes, but this was an easy one because it was already in place. And that is the first thing that grabs me the wrong way, this was not a NEW mileage/blond, it was an extension of a current one. It would have cost NO ONE in Saline an extra dollar. Not one. Please don't forget this. stunhsif: I too dislike tim heim and disapprove of his shenanigans. I have made my thoughts CLEAR on this (more in a minute on this). By voting this down, the 100.00 - 150.00 (maybe 200.00) per year you will save, I hope you enjoy the extra movie at Quality-16 and the extra meal at your favorite watering hole. Now, do not come back here complaining later on because all of you that voted no have shot yourself in the foot. This mileage/bond extension would not have paid the teachers. If this was in fact in some way to pay teachers, I TOO WOULD HAVE VOTED NO. By saying that: "We will vote NO on anything moving forward until the SEA give up reasonable cuts to pay/pensions/healthcare, period!" Really? So to show the teachers union and their leader tim heim who is boss, you voted down an existing mileage/bond? Sorry, but isn't this hypocritical? You in fact WANT more money in YOUR pocket which is the RESULT from voting this down and in turn it takes money AWAY from Saline Schools. You have done EXACTLY what you are complaining about. I am sure you thought this through....... Salinemom, I have agreed with you at almost every fork in the road. But here we must "somewhat" agree to disagree. The MEA can in fact re-open negotiations. Do they have to? No they don't and you are spot in there. It is nothing more than a shield to hide behind, something tim heim does well. But if petitioned by the SEA and shown that many teachers are going to lose their job if something is not done, the MEA would have opened negotiations. Keeping EVERYONE working (albeit at less money) is far smarter than losing staff. The FACT is tim heim is out of control. After the next round of contract talks, it is my prediction heim will no longer be in Saline. salinesal: Please, in ANY industry, ANY business, ANY school, and private home, show me where infrastructure does not wear out? Show me where improvements and basic maintenance is never needed. Your post on making improvements now and paying for them later is dead wrong, it is how business do this. Lastly, here on AA.Com I made several posts 6 - 9 months ago about the teacher's contract. A few of the early posts were removed because I in fact was reporting stuff that had not come out at that time. I was told that my facts were "unsubstantiated". OK, but guess what? Everything is coming true. One being the insurance. I was told face to face by a high ranking employee about a teacher at the High School who was HIGHLY UPSET that he had a 5.00 co-pay per child at the dentist. Really? I pay 20.00 per household member and I think that is a gift. I know that Administration did take a paycut to set the tone and the teacher's union balked. In this economy everyone is making less, staffs are reduced everywhere, it is the way it is. The insurance coverage is needed, do not take it away, but a policy that is FAR more in-line with what middle America has is justified and would save a TON of cash. I am not sure why the teacher's union feels as though they are above this. I really do not wish to see teachers laid off because a few are greedy, but that is what will happen. I really think voting this down was a big mistake and we have now shot ourselves in the foot.

Kris

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 1:28 p.m.

How many teachers live in Saline in order to be subjected to the millage they are asking for.

Mick52

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 1:27 p.m.

"The additional $18 million in new loans in the proposal would have cost the district $12 million in interest." "The district tried pass (sic) the bond now because low interest federal loans are provided until Sept. 30 under the stimulus package." Doesn't sound like low interest to me. Sounds like loan shark interest.

SalineMom

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 12:50 p.m.

@Perseus "Saline teachers don't pay toward their healthcare in any way, not in premiums nor in copays. Every one in the private sector does. Why is that fair, Saline Mom?" Actually, if you read the overview of their healthplan that is available on the web-site you'll find that the teachers DO pay co-pays for office visits, emergency room, emergency room physicains and urgent care visits. They also pay 20% of their dental claims. They also have limited vision benefits and I believe have drug co-pays. I won't argue that they don't pay any premium and I agree these benefits are over the top in today's world, but facts are appreciated, not broad statements like "nothing" and "everyone". My health plan has no co-pays either, but it is a consumer driven product, so I make the choices of how to spend my money. Preventative care is paid at 100%. The deductibles are large. "The unions need to make major concessions." So, maybe, like Stunhsif, you can enlighten us all on how you would handle that. Unfortunately, some of these posters think I disagree with that statement, I don't. My perspective was that any concessions will not provide enough money for many of the necessary infrastructure items the bond would have provided, so that the general fund will not be affected.

Lastand

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 12:07 p.m.

"Still, he pointed out voters passed a sinking fund and the CARES millage in May 2009." So a year later the district comes back for more?

SalineMom

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 11:45 a.m.

Maybe you all missed the board meeting where the "plan" on what to do with the bond money was laid out clearly in a binder presented by the consulting person. Maybe you missed the community forum where it was also discussed. Maybe you didn't read articles in the Saline Report or Ann Arbor.com. If you didn't know what the bond money was going to be used for "shame on you". @stunshif Signed contracts are just that. Neither side can force the other to open. So, tell us, how would you have the administration and board accomplish that?

Persius

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 11:38 a.m.

From the standpoint of fiscal discipline, this bond is worse than anything that has come down the pike so far. It didn't increase the amount of money coming in now (the more honest route, which, I understand, was turned down in the past), but rather, was a financial ploy to sell the voters on pushing the pain of today off on a future period spanning 15-21 years from now. In other words, why pay for today what your children can pay for tomorrow? We were told "it will save the district tons of money, because we can get low interest loans from the government." Yeah, loans made possible by Washington deficit spending in the form of the stimulus package. Washington pork. Edward R. Murrow, how come you always say "Good Night" but you never go away? You're like a bad guest who always says he has to be going, but never leaves? You are obviously a major liberal or outright socialist. Sorry, bro, but this country is still capitalist. We still believe in fiscal discipline, responsibility, and government being subject to the people (not the other way around). This, apparently, is anathema to you and your ilk, who seem to want government to tell them what to do and when to do it. Here's a piece of liberal logic for the liberals, like Mr. Murrow, who argued so forcefully for this bond. (No, I'm not saying that all liberals voted for it.) You guys are always saying you are concerned with the poor and with minorities. Where is that motive in all of this? By the standards of the rest of the country, Saline is still a very white and wealthy place. Our homes and paychecks are far bigger than average, we have more cars, a better standard of living in general, and far better schools. How dare we utilize funds that were extracted from so many less fortunate than we are (stimulus funds) in order to buff our schools? Those funds should be going to the poorest districts before they ever come here? Districts where they don't just need new computers, they need SOME computers (they have none). Yes, they are out there. I went to a presentation recently by a teacher whose school has no computers, and often lack books and paper. (Not even one white kid in the whole school, by the way.) Chew on that Saline Mom and Eddie Murrow. Now, as far as this idea of Saline Mom's goes, that the bond issue had nothing to do with union practices and wages, that they are separate issues altogether, guess again. The tax-payer's wallet feels the overall pinch of education, and it doesn't care if the pinch is coming from taxes for wages or taxes for buses. It all hurts. Because of the union excesses of the past, this bond failed. That is the link. Saline teachers don't pay toward their healthcare in any way, not in premiums nor in copays. Every one in the private sector does. Why is that fair, Saline Mom? Saline teachers have automatic step-ups in wages built into their contract, based solely on tenure/seniority. Nobody, NOBODY, in the private sector has that. Why is that fair, Eddie Murrow? Saline teachers get 12 sick days in a 3/4 of a year work year. If they don't take them, they can get paid for them. I've never had a job like that, and neither have most of the rest of us in the real world. Saline teachers have pensions, and what a hue and cry went up when the state made them pay 3% into them (not a "cut", as they called it, but money for themselves). The rest of us should BE so lucky as even to HAVE a pension. Yet, here they come, cap in hand, to the private sector, saying "the bond won't cause any new taxes, so don't hurt the kids by voting it down." The hurting of the kids happened over the last thirty years as this culture of entitlement and hubris grew in the unions, and they bullied school districts into hosing their constituents. And yes, it IS a new tax, for those paying taxes 15 to 21 years from now! But 'they don't count, because no one knows who they will be and they can't speak or vote for themselves today'? What kind of logic is that? What kind of value system is that? The unions need to make major concessions. We don't care how long we have to hold out on other spending to send the message. Until such concessions are made, bond issues will go down in flames, especially if they foist our obligations off on the next generation. Get it, Saline Mom? Get it, Eddie?

Salinedad

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 11 a.m.

It seems like the voters in Saline are very consistent in their voting pattern for our Schools. Where the explanation is straight forward about what the money will be spent on, spent over a short or medium term basis, with tight controls over the spending, the voters have approved it. This has been the pattern since the mid - 1990's when previous Supt. Ewing failed in her first attempt to get funding for new schools and related CARES funding. When she revised it, was much more consise about how the money would be spent, how the community would control the spending etc. the community supported it. Same thing happened with the Sinking Fund. Then Acting Supt. Brenton put a general proposal together and the community rejected it, then Supt. Graden put together a very specific Sinking Fund proposal with clear deliverables and a reasonable payment approach, the community approved it. Then last fall the County Wide School Enhancement failed. Why? Because like this most recent proposal, it was too general, to expensive and the repayment schedule was too far out. Seems like the School Board and School Admininstration should rethink how they approach this topic. Maybe focus on a shorter term repayment schedule, maybe just refinance the existing debt to reduce the interest rate on these loans and be much more specific about how this money will be used and over a much shorter timeframe. The SEA contract is not related to this Bond failure in a direct sense, because the bond funds can not be used to cover teacher salaries and benefits, but it does show that the lack of resolve on the part of our School Board to address the excessives in the existing contract does impact the public confidence that this governing body is representing the interests of the community. When they direct the School Supt. to get a contract without a lot of noise, regardless of the lack of cost constraints in the contract that creates a loss of confidence in them. The Board has given this message to every Supt. since the 1990's and without the Board giving a different message to the Supt. and the SEA Leadership, the ability of our School Admin. to get success for such a matter as this bond effort will be difficult. Once again the citizens of the Saline community have voiced their view. Maybe now our School Board will truly represent the interests of our community and not the interests of the MEA and it's local organization the SEA.

stunhsif

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 10:41 a.m.

@Pat Mueller, You could not be more wrong. 2,782 voters were very informed and voted no. A2.com, can you research for us and advise the last time if ever that a bond millage failed in Saline that funded the school districts infrastructure? As well can you tell us what percentage of registered Saline School District voters actually voted on this millage. I am certain it is well above 20% as stated by Pat Mueller.

Pat Mueller

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 10:29 a.m.

Only 20% of the registered voters bothered to visit the polling places yesterday. Being very frustrated by this, I've inquired, 'why didn't you vote?' The popular answer seems to be, 'I didn't feel informed enough to make a good choice.' This story about the Saline millage is the perfect example. If voters had been better informed the vote would have been different. Informing the public of the facts should be a simple matter, right? It doesn't seem to be easy at all because so many opinions get in the way of the basic facts... in my opinion!

jns131

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 9:53 a.m.

Dave? Teachers refused to take a pay cut in Ann Arbor as well. So whats the diff? You too will find your buses consolidated and your custodians taking a 10% hit to pay for teacher salaries. But whats a few more dollars between friends, right? MEA needs to bend a little too. Guess not.

Henry Ruger

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 9:37 a.m.

ViSHa writes, "Sorry, I have read this story twice. Can't seem to find the part where it says only tea party folks voted no." Well, maybe this shows how big the "Silent Tea Party" really is!

ViSHa

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 8:31 a.m.

Sorry, I have read this story twice. Can't seem to find the part where it says only tea party folks voted no.

rosewater

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 8:15 a.m.

Stop whining and do what everyone else is doingdo with less or go without! Its time the Saline school district looks at their wasteful spending habits. And if YOU are crying about how it will adversely effect your kids education, open your checkbook and make it out to the Saline School District.

stunhsif

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 8:01 a.m.

@SalineMom, "The SEA/MEA won't reopen-they don't have to-the contract is in place". We won't do it, you can't make us, nah nah nah nah nah!!! And that is why the voters said NO! It is mind numbing that Mr. Graden states in the article above that he is "interested in going back to the community to ask residents why they voted against it". Is he really this out of touch with his employers, that is the taxpayers? There are several million dollars a year to be saved, reasonable cuts to pay/healthcare and pensions which the unions are going to have to agree to or millages are never going to pass. The Saline School board had better find a way to get the teachers and administrators to the table quickly but that won't happen because the school board is run by retired teachers.

McGiver

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 7:08 a.m.

Was it possible to refinance the existing bond taking advantage of these low interest rates and thus saving property owners/taxpayers money? Living in this school district and watching how they spend money, I am not surprised this proposal failed.

SDP

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 6:32 a.m.

Thank you SMAIVE. Please correct the second graf of the story, the numbers are wrong. It is not 2,629 yes votes (48.59 percent) and 2,629 no votes (48.59 percent

SMAIVE

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 6:09 a.m.

According to the County Clerk's Office, the vote was: Yes 2629 48.59% No 2782 51.41%

SalineMom

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 6:03 a.m.

@stunhsif So the current SEA contract runs through 2012. Two more years. The SEA/MEA won't reopen - they don't have to - the contract is in place. Even with major changes after that you'll save 1.5 million tops? Maybe 2.0 million if you are a wild-eyed dreamer. So you sent a message alright - bigger class sizes, less teaching, less technology, etc - because those general fund dollars that the bond would have eased will now be spent on infrastructure, etc that the bond would have done. Like Mr. Olsen said - cut off your nose to spite your face. @Dave I think the administrators might contribute to health care, if they don't - it is because they have totally different (less expensive) insurance - probably less costly than the SEA/MEA.

A24Evr

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 5:48 a.m.

Why isn't anyone commenting on the Yes/No votes...was it really 2,629 to 2,629?

dave

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 5:32 a.m.

in addition to the TEACHERS UNION not paying anything towards their health care premiums, the SALINE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION also pays nothing towards their premiums. teachers won't take a pay cut either to help reduce the deficit! administration took a 10% reduction. everyone else in business sees their health care premiums increase every year. how can the teachers and administrators justify themselves paying NOTHING. run the schools like a business and quit asking for handouts (ie bonds and state subsidies) to help reduce your budget deficit every year.

heresmine

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 2:19 a.m.

"No, probably not. It appears all of the millages in the county passed by sizable margins except that in Saline. And looking at results on TV and in the Freep, that pattern seems to be repeated throught metro Detroit" Not so as the report from Northfield Township shows. Two passed by slim amounts and a third failed. So, what really was the Saline vote count? This story has it as a tie.

salinesal

Wed, Aug 4, 2010 : 12:01 a.m.

Mmmm...get 28 million to spend now...pay it back by 2031 long after the infrastructure improvements and buses are obsolete. And it will save money. How could you stupid voters pass up such a good deal? Next time, you should listen to your school overlords...they know what's best.

stunhsif

Tue, Aug 3, 2010 : 10:42 p.m.

@Jimmy Oslen, It is our hope that these funds come out of the "general fund". We need to pay for these things with current funds,not mortgaging our kids futures. Plus, this will get voted down because the teachers hiding behind Mr. Heim have not given up a dime, not a single dime. We will vote NO on anything moving forward until the SEA give up reasonable cuts to pay/pensions/healthcare, period!

PittsfieldPerson

Tue, Aug 3, 2010 : 10:40 p.m.

To - Alpha Alpha - just to clarify - this was not a millage renewal. It was a new bond issue, structured so that the millage rate went out longer, not up immediately. Personally, it was never clear to me what they planned to do with the $28 Million.

Jimmy Olsen

Tue, Aug 3, 2010 : 10:13 p.m.

Please, not one complaint from this crowd when the necessary funds will come out of the general fund and your child's education is impacted. Cutting off your nose to spite your face.

bruno_uno

Tue, Aug 3, 2010 : 9:41 p.m.

this whole bond proposal is described in one word from michigan voters: annoying.

Doctor5X

Tue, Aug 3, 2010 : 9:38 p.m.

The reason for the bond proposal? "The bond would have funded infrastructure and technology improvements and perhaps bought new buses." Sorry, not right now. Ask again when unemployement is 5%.

gsorter

Tue, Aug 3, 2010 : 9:32 p.m.

I don't see how we taxpayers "save" $7 million by borrowing it from the federal government. A bond is a debt, whether federal, municipal, corporate, etc. Whether the fed borrows $7 million or the district borrows $7 million it is still a debt some struggling taxpayer somewhere in the U.S must pay back. Why can't governments realize money cannot continue to be borrowed forever? Companies and households have come to that conclusion rather quickly recently

stunhsif

Tue, Aug 3, 2010 : 9:31 p.m.

This is the only signal the taxpayers could send to the SEA that pays not a dime toward health insurance and prescription copays. The best benefits and lifetime retirement in the entire world and Mr. Heim will not cough up a dime. Based on Obama's giveouts, we will get free money down the road (for this millage) as well, except we all know our country will suffer for it. But you and I on A2.com will be dead, it is our kids and grandkids that will pay the price. Enough is enough folks, our vote will be heard!!!! Logic At Work, No Luck Needed

AlphaAlpha

Tue, Aug 3, 2010 : 9:18 p.m.

Interesting: voters seemingly decline a $28 million tax renewal. (Even though they could 'save' $7 million by spending an extra $28 million.) While new taxes are problematic during recessions, the failure of a simple renewal suggests that voter attitudes toward taxes may be evolving faster than expected. Time to adapt to the new fiscal austerity...