Learn

Resources and Reflections

Sunday, May 15, 2011

RSU73 Budget Q and A

Add Questions in the comment section

See Post a Comment

8 Comments:

At 4:35 PM , Blogger Techlearning said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 5:23 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

This site can be used to post a comment, question, or idea as the RSU 73 Board puts together the first budget for RSU 73.

 
At 10:59 AM , Blogger Tim said...

Supers,

If the board is going to be asked to evaluate one budget item option vs another can we make sure that there is true transparency(Bus repair cost $80,000 vs $51,000)(beginning English Teacher vs experienced Teacher)? There is nothing wrong with adding contingency, please identify where it is and how much it is.

 
At 11:06 AM , Anonymous Cindy said...

What is MePERS PLD?

What is SW operations?

What are the con't professionals?

My thoughts on the principal assignment are to have a principal for each HS and to do away with the MS assistant principal and have a admin. support assit. at that level. The assistant principal/AD could do the AD job for both the HS and MS.

 
At 11:00 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Eliminating the Ed Tech III positions in the Livermore schools and then rehiring them as Ed Tech II's is essentially demoting them and cutting their pay. Does their job performance warrant this action? When this same action was taken in Jay there were no changes in job responsibilities/duties, this was simply a way to balance the budget on the backs of the employees least able to make that sacrifice, to make matters worse, Ed Tech hours were slashed at this time too. There are conscientious, caring, committed educators holding these positions, they do not deserve to be treated as a number on the balance sheet. Employees who are valued, treated fairly, and compensated competitively give 100%+, employees who are not treated appropriately suffer from poor morale and do not give 100%. How does this benefit students? Making all Ed Tech positions at Jay Ed Tech II's does not reflect the reality of what these Ed Techs are required to do in their daily responsibilities. Comparing these responsibilities with Ed Techs III's in other districts would highlight the discrepancies. Make a call to the state Dept. of Ed. and inquire about job descriptions and appropriate classifying of Ed Techs. Talk to the Ed Techs in both Livermore and Jay about what the ACTUAL REALITY of their jobs, rather than the sanitized version the supt. uses on paper to justify his cost cutting actions.

 
At 11:00 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Eliminating the Ed Tech III positions in the Livermore schools and then rehiring them as Ed Tech II's is essentially demoting them and cutting their pay. Does their job performance warrant this action? When this same action was taken in Jay there were no changes in job responsibilities/duties, this was simply a way to balance the budget on the backs of the employees least able to make that sacrifice, to make matters worse, Ed Tech hours were slashed at this time too. There are conscientious, caring, committed educators holding these positions, they do not deserve to be treated as a number on the balance sheet. Employees who are valued, treated fairly, and compensated competitively give 100%+, employees who are not treated appropriately suffer from poor morale and do not give 100%. How does this benefit students? Making all Ed Tech positions at Jay Ed Tech II's does not reflect the reality of what these Ed Techs are required to do in their daily responsibilities. Comparing these responsibilities with Ed Techs III's in other districts would highlight the discrepancies. Make a call to the state Dept. of Ed. and inquire about job descriptions and appropriate classifying of Ed Techs. Talk to the Ed Techs in both Livermore and Jay about what the ACTUAL REALITY of their jobs, rather than the sanitized version the supt. uses on paper to justify his cost cutting actions.

 
At 2:08 PM , Anonymous DavidgWja said...

<$BlogBacklinkSnippet$>


<$I18NPostedByBacklinkAuthor$> @ <$BlogBacklinkDateTime$>

 
At 10:02 AM , Anonymous Tamiko said...

<$BlogBacklinkSnippet$>


<$I18NPostedByBacklinkAuthor$> @ <$BlogBacklinkDateTime$>

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home