Wednesday, April 23, 2008

School Levy Information

Thank you to Jan Cahill, school board trustee, for answering questions concerning positions at the two traditional high schools. Here are his comments:
I apologize for this being posted rather late at night but I had work, family and school board obligations throughout the day into the evening. I do appreciate this opportunity.
Let me begin by pointing out that the State of Montana requires each of our two high schools have a total of four licensed school administrators (1 building principal & 3 associate principals) at each campus. (Montana Accreditation Standards 10-55-705) This standard is set by the State Board of Education whose members are appointed by the Governor.

Years ago the high schools had one building principal, one vice principal and two dean of students. The high schools no longer have deans. Each high school has a special education coordinator to assure appropriate special education services are being provided to the roughly 11% of high school students who qualify for special education. There are 14 special education teachers at CMR and 13 special education teachers at GFHS. In addition, there are 12 special education para-professionals at CMR and 12 at GFHS.

Each high school has had a finance person for many years. Those individuals are responsible for student funds such as yearbook, athletic fees/events, library fines, various clubs, etc. These are clerical positions.

Surprisingly, enrollment at both high schools has remained stable during the past ten years. Enrollment declines have been mostly found in the elementary grades and most recently at the middle school level. I can't explain why there has not been a corresponding decline at the high school level. One explanation might be that elementary age children that attend parochial schools may decide to attend either CMR or GFHS when they reach those grades.

If I have counted correctly, there are seven secretaries at CMR and six at GFHS. These individuals work in all areas of the high school including main office, attendance, scheduling, records, and counseling. I have been told these positions have been in place for quite a few years.

Keep in mind that our high school enrollment has remained stable. Example: CMR enrollment 2003-2004 - 1736 students; 2005-2006 - 1681 students; 2006-2007 - 1725 students and GFHS 2003-2004 - 1873 students; 2005-2006 - 1937 students; 2006-2007 - 1921 students.

The small learning community learning coordinator positions are at both high schools and are funded through a grant - no district funds are used to pay for these two positions. I will provide information on upward bound, golden triangle, and vision as I need to do more research on these areas.

Additional information: during the past ten years the district has eliminated the following central office administrative positions - Human Resource Supervisor, Purchasing Supervisor, Transportation Supervisor, Library Supervisor, and the Public Relations Director. With the closure of PGMS three years ago, two administrative positions were eliminated as well as various support staff positions. The closure resulted in the reduction of over $2 million dollars in expenses.

I will provide information on the three positions (upward bound, vision and golden triangle) tomorrow. It is important to understand that no final decision has been made about any reductions in the event the levy should not pass. School administration has compiled a list of proposed reductions across the board in all areas. These potential reductions were reviewed by a committee of individuals representing the community, school administration, teachers, and board members during the budgetary process.

Our district has the lowest cost per pupil of any of the seven large districts in the state. I believe this demonstrates our commitment to excellence in education while keeping the cost of education to the lowest acceptable level.

I (and fellow trustee Stu Nicholson) will be at Schulte's 38th Street Store between 9:30 and noon on THURSDAY, APRIL 25, to answer any questions anyone has about the levy. Please stop by and enjoy a cup of coffee (Stu and I will buy) and visit about the levy or anything about your schools.


THANKS! I hope this has been helpful. More to come.
April 23, 2008 1:41 AM

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

I'm just going to give you a line up off my taxes here. This is why I am voting NO.

General school 80.85
High School 53.90
Vo-tech Center 3.68
University 14.70
st equal 98.00
total 251.13

District schools 451.63

elem ret. 63.58
high sch ret 37.83
elem transp. 14.65
total 116.06

add them all up 818.82 almost HALF of my taxes goes to shools already!

Has anyone else taken a look at their tax statement latley and accually LOOKED at it? I do. My house is a doublewide that we just set on a basement. Unfeakinbelievable!!!!

Anonymous said...

At 69 I have paid taxes for many years. My small pension plus SS total $1400/ per month. With everything on the rise, I am on the decline. Schools, like everything else will have to figure how to cope. I am voting NO on this for the first time in my life.

Anonymous said...

I will vote yes even though Jan Cahill has no credibility. Free coffee--that is your PR to discuss a tax increase? Give us a break.

On the othe hand, the letters to the editor from current and former board members make a compelling case.