No School Levy

In an article in today's paper, the school board has said they will not move forward with a tax levy. This is the first time in 10 years they have decided not to ask voters to approve a tax increase.

Given the state of affairs of the economy and the fact the city has indicated they will be asking voters to approve a public safety levy, I think this is a good idea.

Refreshing Attitude

By now we all know the school levy failed. In today's Tribune, Superintendent Cheryl Crawley has a short commentary about supporting the school district in this difficult time.

She was not condescending or critical of those who voted against it. In fact, she said she thinks the community is made up of good people who are currently hard hit with a variety of economic concerns. I have never heard her be negative toward those who were not convinced the levy was the way to go.

It has been very refreshing to witness the professionalism that she and members of the school board have exhibited. Board members Mr. Cahill and Mr. Erwin were polite and nonconfrontational when they visited the blogs, even though they were faced with criticisms and very real concerns about this issue.

If only the majority of the city commision would behave in the same manner.

Speaking Of The School Levy...

Here, school trustee, Jan Cahill, indicated he would get back to us about some programs offered at Great Falls High that I questioned.

"I will provide information on the three positions (upward bound, vision and golden triangle) tomorrow", which would have been around April 24th.

He didn't. Did he forget or did he think going into details about these programs might not ensure positive votes?

Finally, An Anti-Levy Letter

In today's Tribune, there is finally one anti-school levy letter to the editor (published one day before the election). It is in response to the "you've got to be kidding" guest opinion written by local attorney, Elizabeth Best, about two weeks ago. Unfortunately, I can't link to today's letter, because unlike the Billings Gazette, the Tribune does not post letters to the editor on their free online publication.

After reading Ms. Best's opinion, the writer is voting against the mill levy. The gist of the writer's argument is that even though one may not support the war in Iraq does not mean one does not support the troops; likewise the levy. Just because one does not support the levy, does not mean one does not support the kids. "We must vote no on this levy to send a message...we will not be cowed into supporting a levy which is much higher than it has to be".

Maybe it's just a coincidence that this letter was published when it was, but it does give one cause to pause about the timing of it.

Thanks For Participating

Thanks to those of you who participated in my two polls.

The majority of you found that Ms. Balzarini did not behave appropriately when questioned by Commissioner Jolley. Whether somebody likes somebody or not or doesn't like the questions being asked, professionalism and civility must prevail.

The school levy poll took on a life of its own. In fact, the votes had changed so much it was thought on Tuesday that maybe somebody was tweaking the numbers.

Yesterday, I received an e-mail that indicated a former member of the school board sent an en masse e-mail telling everyone to vote in favor of the levy. And evidently they did. I also received at least 25 visits from Georgetown University during the past two days, which seems just a tad coincidental, considering they were only on the site for a second or two (just enough time to vote)? I might also add that almost all of these visits came from different IP addresses.

Even though this poll was about as unofficial as it gets, it showed that the levy is a hot topic and for some, generated a "grass roots effort" to show support for it.

Accreditation Standards

I received a tip today about the source of the accreditation standards that Mr. Cahill refers to in his comments found here.

The standards are set by the State Board of Education whose members are, at least according to those biographies posted online, teachers.

Why wouldn't teachers be in favor of more administration positions given that those jobs are filled by teachers and of course, pay more than a teaching position?

It now makes perfect sense why the high schools have three associate principals and some positions that even a school board trustee doesn't totally understand.

Thanks, Tipster.

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

I Haven't Changed My Mind

So, did today's article in the Tribune about the $2.71 million school levy change your mind? It didn't mine.

I'm still waiting to hear what is being done at the administration/support level.

According to the article, the Assistant Superintendent for Elementary Schools indicated that maybe one full-time staff position would be cut. Whoopee. But they are prepared to cut the summer learning camps, which last year taught 780 kids reading and math. I guess the reasoning behind this is because this program is not part of the regular school term. That's right. Cut programs that teach kids some of the basics. We sure wouldn't want literates running around now, would we?

The Assistant Superintendent for Secondary Schools didn't mention anything about cutting staff. According to the principals, there isn't anymore fat to trim, except for teachers.

Let's take a look at the administration/support of the two traditional high schools:

CMR - 1600 students

Principal
Associate Principals (3)
Special Education Coordinator (1)
Smaller Learning Community Coordinator (1)
Administrative Assistant (1)
Administration (1)
Secretaries (8)

Great Falls High - 1726 students

Administration/Support:

Principal
Associate Principals (3)
Special Education Coordinator (1)
Attendance (2)
Finance (1)
Records (1)
Scheduling (1)
Support Personnel (6)
Golden Triangle (1) *
Upward Bound (1) *
Vision (1) *

Maybe a member of the school board will explain:

1. * If these positions are unique to GFH or does this staff also work with CMR students? What exactly are these positions?

2. Why all of the administration/support positions at GFH and CMR are required and are not even being considered for cut if the levy should fail.

Two Polls

OK folks. I have two polls up; one pertains to the school levy and the other to the dustup from Tuesday night.

If you don't know by now what happened, click here too view a portion of the commission meeting.

And don't be afraid to vote. I have no idea who you are!!!

School Budget & Mill Levy Info.

School board member, Steve Erwin, has posted budgetary information at his weblog.

Thanks very much Mr. Erwin for that information. He can be contacted at 761-3300 or 899-3300.

Also:

I posted here about two associate principal positions that were open and wondered if they were replacing current positions or were they in addition to. Jan Cahill, school board member, contacted GeeGuy and said that these two positions are replacements for two current principals retiring.

Thank you Mr. Cahill for the clarification. To reach Jan, e-mail GeeGuy and he will give you his number.

No To School Levy

Unless I have missed it, I have not heard one word about what changes the school district is planning to make at the administration level if this levy fails.

Last month a citizen at a neighborhood council meeting asked Stu Nicholson (school board member) if the rumor that GF High was getting another associate principal was true. Mr. Nicholson didn't know. Yesterday I did a search and found TWO job openings for associate principals; one at GF High and the other at CMR. (The information now appears to have been pulled).

Are the current APs leaving their positions or is the district now hiring two additional ones?

Several years ago I worked for a company in the private sector that fell on very hard times. We did not have the luxury of holding out our hand to ask for help from the taxpayers. We had to figure out ways to keep the ship from sinking. Speaking from personal experience, it's amazing what can be accomplished when options are few and far between.

Quite often, most businesses do not operate as efficiently as they should be. Unless they find themselves in a serious bind, this usually goes unchecked; business as usual. People get very used to doing certain things in a certain way and actually believe there is only one way to do them. Not so. Being on the ropes forces one to reevaluate how work is being accomplished and if it is being accomplished in the most productive manner. Very often there is room for major improvement.

Yes, folks were laid off. Nobody wanted to see it happen, but very hard decisions had to start being made. No employee took a pay cut, but we didn't get raises either, cost of living or otherwise. And it was understood. Folks were just glad they still had a job. It's not even common sense to think that there should be pay raises when money is getting tighter by the day.

This company eventually went out of business, but the experience I gained from staying the course was invaluable. For those of who think the only way to gain an education is from a book, think again. NO advanced accounting textbook or otherwise prepares one for this kind of challenge. It's OJT, all the way.

Until the administration tells me how they plan to efficiently move the cheese at the top, I will be voting against this levy.