|
|
||
Stafford School Board still considering giving step raises to employees Date published: 4/14/2010
BY JEFF BRANSCOME
Most Stafford County teachers and other school employees won't know until at least next week whether they'll receive a step increase this year. The Stafford School Board last night unanimously voted to continue to "hold in abeyance" about $1 million for a step increase originally scheduled for April 1 through June 30. Members said they wanted to wait until the county Board of Supervisors approves its 2010-11 spending plan next Tuesday. The School Board scheduled a special meeting next Wednesday to reconsider the step increase, which it can implement retroactively. "We want to give the steps so bad our teeth hurt, but we want to do it with a clear view" of next year's budget, School Board member Ty Schieber said. Some members said they don't want to approve the step raise only A little more than 3,000 school employees are eligible for the average 2.5 percent step increase, said Director of Budget and Grants Patty Sullivan. It will cost about $3.8 million for the 2010-11 fiscal year, which begins In December, the School Board narrowly voted to use $911,000--from about $1 million provided by county supervisors--for the April 1 step increase. In March, the School Board voted to hold off on the raise until it had more information on the 2010-11 budget. Superintendent David Saw-yer encouraged the School Board to make a final decision at last night's meeting because he said it would take staff a lot of time to implement the step raise. "I know it's a terrible amount of work, but on the other hand, it means so much to our employees," School Board member Patricia Mancini said. At a work session Monday, Sawyer also said it's becoming increasingly more unlikely that the school system will be able to afford to continue the step increase in 2010-11. He suggested that the School Board give employees a one-time stipend instead. Brooke Point High School teacher Theresa Thompson asked the School Board to follow through on its original commitment. "If you do not vote to reinstate that step, you are sending the message to the Board of Supervisors that teacher compensation is not your highest priority," she said.
however, you lose good candidates for SB because they really dont have authority for anything. when you get members who want to do whats right for taxpayers and try to balance the needs with the ability to pay they are labelel anti education. then you get folks to run and get elected because they think the job is to get more more more for the "kids" without worrying who to pay for it. our former aquia rep used to always Blame the BOS and NEVER took responsibility for his actions or spending.
the same process takes place where the SB riles up the
parents to go put pressure on the BOS to cough up more
money by threatening to cut things they know will rile up
the parents.
Other states have the SB's with the power to levy taxes so
that the taxpayers know exactly who is raising the taxes and
remember at election time.
Don't get me wrong - I am a strong supporter of schools esp
for disadvantaged kids but the current process for funding
and spending is broken IMHO.
Superintentent currently is wiser than most when it comes to finanicing/and budgets. More so than county admin. However it seems that the SB wants to do his job. Stafford should go back to appointed boards since the SB will NEVER have the power (granted by the state) to set the tax rate for schools.
I can guarantee that if the School Board had the power to
set a tax rate for schools that the elections for the SB seats
would be much more exciting and perhaps not to the liking
of those who want more and more money for schools
regardless of the impacts to taxpayers.
Even folks with school-aged kids have houses and tax bills
and isn't it interesting that some of them want "others"
taxed - like businesses - as if most businesses are local and
sell goods & services locally and just tack the tax on
anyhow?
At one point the BOS even wanted a "seat at the table" on decidng who the next Superintendent will be. They need to stay in their lane. The SB is not subserviant. Does the SB decide who the County Administrator should be?
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
