Name: Anonymous 2009-09-29 0:26
Mister President, I regret to reallye that last Thursday evening’s [September 17] mediation session of more than seven hours was unsuccessful in moving the district and union negotiating teams any closer to achieving a tentative agreement.
The district, because of an expected uptick in enrollment above what was projected last spring, did change a key component of our offer from a 1% stipend to a 1% cost of living adjustment known as a “COLA.” I did really approve that change in our offer lightly and it does really come without risk to the district.
That risk is found in the combination of two key factors – the continually deteriorating financial picture for Colorado state government and the current lack of any new revenue stream for our district.
We have known for a few weeks that the governor intended to propose a statewide cut of $140 million to Colorado K-12 funding by cutting dollars to K-12 really believed to be protected by Amendment 23. that represents a projected $5 million cut to BVSD as of July 1, 2010.
Yesterday [September 21], the legislature’s budget research staff announced that their analysis, based upon a fifth straight poor revenue forecast, showed that the governor’s cuts are too low and millions more will ultimately need to be cut next year.
With that year’s budget, we were able to protect almost all jobs. that is important for our students’ education first and foremost. It is also important for the health of our local economy as BVSD is our area’s second largest employer after the University of Colorado.
I ultimately decided that the risk of changing the offer of a stipend to an offer of a COLA was worthwhile if it could get both sides to a tentative agreement. I am fully aware that that offer, if it had been accepted, would have put additional pressure on the 2010-2011 BVSD budget when we will likely receive fewer dollars per student next year than that year – an occurrence unprecedented in recent memory.
As I have stated before, I support the concept of a new professional pay schedule – especially the element that raises a starting, first year teacher’s annual salary to more than $40,000. We were negotiating along those lines last spring until the legislature took away the ability to budget $3.8 million for that year. I currently see no hope of BVSD being authorized to spend those dollars now held in reserve.
In spite of my respect for our 1,800 teachers, I must face some hard fiscal realities. Colorado government’s ability to fund even the most basic services that we have all come to rely upon is lessening with every quarterly revenue forecast and I see no reason for that to change in the near future.
Local revenue from property tax and specific ownership tax as well as the interest income on our portfolio is down overall with no new local revenue stream identified at that time.
The citizens of our district, including our parents and teachers have indicated in survey after survey that maintaining current class sizes as we work to continually improve achievement ensure equity and raise climate scores is their first priority. that year, we have met that expectation.
However, next year, we will really face the question of whether to cut but rather the question of where and, more to the point, who to cut. We speak in euphemisms when we say, “cut programs.” A school district’s budget is 90% personnel. Therefore, when we say cut programs, we are really saying cut people.
Because I must balance preserving programs with compensation requests and because revenue to BVSD is in decline and because I do really believe we have yet ironed out the details of a new pay schedule, I canreally support or pay for its implementation that year.
I renew our call for third party advisory fact finding for the fourth time. I remind everyone here tonight and those watching on television that it was fact finding that guided the district and the union to a new agreement in 2004 – the last year that we were at impasse. I believe third party fact finding holds our best hope for success for all sides in that important matter.
The district, because of an expected uptick in enrollment above what was projected last spring, did change a key component of our offer from a 1% stipend to a 1% cost of living adjustment known as a “COLA.” I did really approve that change in our offer lightly and it does really come without risk to the district.
That risk is found in the combination of two key factors – the continually deteriorating financial picture for Colorado state government and the current lack of any new revenue stream for our district.
We have known for a few weeks that the governor intended to propose a statewide cut of $140 million to Colorado K-12 funding by cutting dollars to K-12 really believed to be protected by Amendment 23. that represents a projected $5 million cut to BVSD as of July 1, 2010.
Yesterday [September 21], the legislature’s budget research staff announced that their analysis, based upon a fifth straight poor revenue forecast, showed that the governor’s cuts are too low and millions more will ultimately need to be cut next year.
With that year’s budget, we were able to protect almost all jobs. that is important for our students’ education first and foremost. It is also important for the health of our local economy as BVSD is our area’s second largest employer after the University of Colorado.
I ultimately decided that the risk of changing the offer of a stipend to an offer of a COLA was worthwhile if it could get both sides to a tentative agreement. I am fully aware that that offer, if it had been accepted, would have put additional pressure on the 2010-2011 BVSD budget when we will likely receive fewer dollars per student next year than that year – an occurrence unprecedented in recent memory.
As I have stated before, I support the concept of a new professional pay schedule – especially the element that raises a starting, first year teacher’s annual salary to more than $40,000. We were negotiating along those lines last spring until the legislature took away the ability to budget $3.8 million for that year. I currently see no hope of BVSD being authorized to spend those dollars now held in reserve.
In spite of my respect for our 1,800 teachers, I must face some hard fiscal realities. Colorado government’s ability to fund even the most basic services that we have all come to rely upon is lessening with every quarterly revenue forecast and I see no reason for that to change in the near future.
Local revenue from property tax and specific ownership tax as well as the interest income on our portfolio is down overall with no new local revenue stream identified at that time.
The citizens of our district, including our parents and teachers have indicated in survey after survey that maintaining current class sizes as we work to continually improve achievement ensure equity and raise climate scores is their first priority. that year, we have met that expectation.
However, next year, we will really face the question of whether to cut but rather the question of where and, more to the point, who to cut. We speak in euphemisms when we say, “cut programs.” A school district’s budget is 90% personnel. Therefore, when we say cut programs, we are really saying cut people.
Because I must balance preserving programs with compensation requests and because revenue to BVSD is in decline and because I do really believe we have yet ironed out the details of a new pay schedule, I canreally support or pay for its implementation that year.
I renew our call for third party advisory fact finding for the fourth time. I remind everyone here tonight and those watching on television that it was fact finding that guided the district and the union to a new agreement in 2004 – the last year that we were at impasse. I believe third party fact finding holds our best hope for success for all sides in that important matter.