The resolution is below:
To the maximum extent practical, the Superintendent’s budget should strive to:
- Preserve and support existing academic programs designed to promote student achievement.
- Provide an adequate compensation package to employees including, if possible, both a step increase and some degree of a COLA
- Minimize increases in class sizes
- Maximize operational efficiency
- Expand the use of user fees
- Seek savings in the areas of non-School-based staffing, recruitment and non-academic programs
I'm not surprised, but continue to be disappointed with this boards inability to face reality when it comes to the budget. These priorities show little cognizance of the economic situation the county finds itself in. Here are my thoughts on these "priorities."
ReplyDelete1. Preserve existing academic programs --- Sounds good, but shouldn't there be some assessment as to the effectiveness of these programs or are we just assuming everything the schools do is excellent and worth the money spent. Academic programs need to be assessed for effectiveness and relevance, with those not grading well potentially eliminated or reduced in size and scope. You would think this happened all the time, not just during a budget crunch. Apparently not even then.
2. Provide adequate compensation packages, including pay raises --- The point many today would make is that being employed is adequate compensation compared to not being employed. That aside, how can the board push for pay raises in this environment. Other local counties have already announced freezes in salaries. Harvard University just today did the same. And these raises have nothing to do with merit. There needs to be a freeze in wages across the board until the county's revenues stabilize.
3. Minimize increases in class sizes --- A favorite of the board because it provides a good distraction. Studies have shown that class size has little impact until the number get truly large, and then only when other resources are scarce as well. Look at South Korea. They have class sizes two to three times the US average, yet the kids routinely significantly outscore US students in all academic comparisons. The board needs to get off this hobby horse and concentrate on real problems, or at least explore innovative solutions like open enrollment or year around school.
4. Maximize operational efficiency --- Why isn't this number 1? It does not seem to be mutually exclusive with any of the other priorities. Shouldn't the superintendent be doing this on a constant basis? Again, a skewed idea of priorities.
5. Expand user fees --- Sounds good to me, but will probably face public opposition. And once you start giving "breaks" based on socio-economic status (and you will) this will fall apart like a house of cards, causing more ill will than any small amount of revenue gained.
6. Seek savings in non-school based staffing --- This sounds like a move to reduce administrative staffing overhead. People have been calling for this for years. Why is this at the bottom of the list?
Maybe the board views the list differently than I read it, but it seems almost inverted from what it should be if you are serious about dealing with the budget crunch.