I want to be very clear that I believe that we MUST pass Measure D in order to "fully" fund athletics. I also believe that the district as a whole need the parcel tax in order to function next year. The board has been forced to cut very deep. And while no matter what we need and have always needed extra revenue I would like to point out where the board has CHOSEN to cut. The board is cutting at the classroom level and saving district jobs in the process. The following is from the mdusd blogspot and highlites tehir efforst to save HIGH PAYING jobs while taking away athletics!
Here is the list of 16 Directors and Asst. Directors the board was cutting from on January 27, 2009:
1. Assistant Director Curriculum 2. Assistant Director Student Services 3. Director Adult Ed 4. Director Alternative Ed. 5. Director Curriculum 6. Director Certificated Personnel 7. Director, Classified Personnel 8. Director Student Services 9. Director Fiscal 10. Director M & O 11. Director Purchasing 12. Director Technology Support 13. Director Technology & Information Services 14. Director of Development 15. Director Technology Application 16. Director Food Services
Of these 16, after tonight (assuming the board approves the cuts) we will have cut four of the positions from the general fund:
1. Assistant Director Student Services 2. Director Alternative Education 3. Director M & O 4. Director of Technology Application
As alternatives to cutting other positions we will have made the following personnel cuts at the district office:
1. Personnel Coordinator (as alternative to the Classified and Certificated Directors) 2. Supervisor of Technology and Customer Support (as alternative to Directors of Technology, and in addition to Director of Technology Application) 3. Reduce Director of Curriculum by 20%. 4. Reduce Administrative Legal Services budget by $150,000
In addition the board is also CREATING a new associate to the general council position at a rate of $200,000.00!
These are facts. The board must know that while we recognize that we all must tighten our belts that they can and must bring back SOME funding to guarantee high school athletics next year. We cannot allow the board to dictate. They are an ELECTED body. If the community values athletics and cuts can be made elsewhere...farther away from kids and classrooms...THEN THOSE ARE WHERE THE CUTS must be made. The total cost of the districts athletic contribution last year was $721,400.00, with $383,000.00 being paid as coaching stipends. Let parents and the community fund for coaches pay. But the district should be responsible for the balance at a minimum. I know for a fact that my child has benefitted far more from the $1500.00 the district paid his coach than anyone will get from yet another attorney. WE MUST PASS MEASURE D THE DISTRICT MUST GUARANTEE MINIMAL EQUITABLE FUNDING FOR ATHLETICS
Wow, the your comment is so wrong it is unbelievable. My post, which you copied from mdusd.net shows that we did, in fact, cut from the district office. And yes, I fully support hiring another attorney, and so will any rational person. We spend over $1 million on outside attorneys' fees per year (given our size, this is not out of line). Even with the additional cost of the new attorney, we will save at least $150,000 and probably more like $250,000 in outside lawyer fees by hiring another lawyer. This is exactly the same issue as speech pathologists - by hiring our own, even with an additional incentive, we will save about $20K per speech pathologist. Lawyers just provide a substantially higher savings per individual. This is a cost saving measure and will keep us from eliminating another $200,000 of teachers, coaches or other personnel - why would anyone object to this?
You fundamentally misread this post or you have an agenda to misrepresent the facts.
You did cut from the district but not at the level that the board "threatened" to cut. I realize that the board did cut 4 district level positions and merged 2 others, but why were the other 8 saved? And I appreciate the fact that hiring lawyers and speech pathologists may save money in the long term, and if that is in fact the rationale then the board must consider the tremendous loss of ADA money that will coincide with the elimination of high school athletics. That is having forsight and good economic sense and protecting our kids. Next, you ask how can anyone object to your rationale, well when you consider dollars spent per child impacted the most effecient monies that the district has ever spent is on athletics. Also if you expect to save $250,000.00 then deicate that as seed money for athletics. The district should and must at least partially fund athletics. This message will get louder and louder and louder. The district syas they are looking into the feasiblity of "pay to play", well guess what, parents in this district have been paying to play for years. I don not how many car wash tickets, discount cards, or donation letters I have been charged with assissting with. The local businesses are already tapped by all of the high schools and in this economy how many are going to reach deeper to assisst a district that is being touted as one of the only districts in America that is set to lose athletics. We object because we are stick of being handed the bill over and over again while the people at the tops lives change very little. But hey maybe you also think that those good old boys at AIG deserve those bonuses, after all top down economics is a fantastic working model to adopt. You may not respond here and I understand but hopefully people will find this site and learn about all that is going on. VOTE YES ON D
They threatened to cut all 16 positions, the former district superintendent resigned and then the board withdrew or restructured 12 of the positions, and that is all on the other site. But there has never been any reason given as to the change.
Again, anon 10:31 is spewing completely false information. We never "threatened, or discussed, or even mentioned cutting all 16 positions. That is simply a complete lie. Please get the facts straight before making these statements. You sound like the guy at the Saturday meeting who knew nothing about what actually happens with the school district.
What the board did was direct Mr. McHenry to come back with a proposal to cut SIX, not SIXTEEN positions. And we lived up to making cuts. Many of the 16 positions are funded by categorical (restricted) funds, so it would not help the general fund to cut them. Bottom line - we did what we said we would and basically every cut proposed by Mr. McHenry was made. Once again, you are completely off base. If you have questions about what is happening, ask - don't just make false allegations. I recommend you call me first before embarrassing yourself in public (of course you can just hide behind being anonymous and never actually have to be honest).
As for using the $250K in savings from hiring a lawyer to fund athletics - again, you fundamentally don't understand what is happening and you make assumptions about what is going on around you. We have already built that savings into the budget. If we had not made that change, we would be cutting another $200K+ - it is not as if that money is sitting around waiting to be spent. In fact, our ending fund balance at the end of two years is only $200K - against a $280 million budget. We should have no less than 1% (and probably far more) as a buffer in our budget, but instead, due to the fact that we don't want to cut, we have less than 1/10 of one percent (and don't start talking about the 2% required reserve, because it MUST be paid back by the next budget event, which is typically less than 2 months away at any given time).
As for pay to play - it is illegal to require payment and exclude those who don't pay, so "pay to play" won't be allowed. What is being investigated is a donation program that can fund athletics district wide. Under that approach, no players are refused the right to play, unless they all are.
"We object because we are stick (sic) of being handed the bill over and over again while the people at the tops lives change very little."
Right now, California is 47th in the nation in per pupil spending, BEFORE the current cuts. Public schools should be funded in a manner that students have what they need and everything should be included in that education, including athletics. The harsh reality is that California does not fund education properly, so either we can ask more from our parents, or not support certain activities. What do you mean by the people at the tops lives change very little? Who are you talking about? If you are talking about our district, we have cut positions from the very top of our district during this cutting (CFO last year, long before many of the other cuts).
As for Anon 10:28's question, it might help to read the entire post I made, rather than just the selection that the other anon chose to put in these comments. You can find that entire post here:
Again to Anon 9:58 - you are not supporting Measure D through your false statements, you are actually hurting it. People read this blog and believe that the board has not been responsive - that is flatly contrary to the reality of the situation. I challenge you to call me to find out the truth about the situation before making these assertions. My contact information is available at mdusd.net.
I think the fact that your even suggested that I would not respond demonstrates that you are quite new to this game. Just take a couple dozen hours to read our blog (mdusd.net), our responses, the MDUSD Parents Blog (mdusdparents.blogspot.com), the MDUSD Teachers Blog (mdusdteachers.blogspot.com), and Claycord (claycord.com) and all of our responses to comments and you will see that I am very willing to engage on these blogs.
I am happy to answer questions and I encourage folks to ask them - I just ask that you understand the issue before making allegations that can't be supported.
I appreciate that you did respond although I would not have expected you to start personally insulting me and some other interested guy who was at your saturday meeting. And apparently anyone who doesn't see things exactly your way is wrong or ignorant. What you need to realize is that the athletic community is larger and more mobile than any other group in the district. We are used to volunteering, we are used to being involved in the process and sitting on boards because that is what we have done for years while our kids participated in youth sports. And now we will start to look at how this all happened. We don't need anymore info about how this is all the states fault. Most of us who read realize that the states way of funding schools is flawed. But you were elected to public office so you must answer our questions and you must listen and consider our voice. We all have to make sacrafices but the ONLY 2 PROGRAMS that were eliminated were sports and 4th grade music, evreything else was reduced or restructed. Someone was savvy enough to realize what burden the parents would bare either by paying to play or by supporting a tax. What I am saying is this, you cut the 2 groups whose support you desperatly need the deepest. We will support because we will do anything for our kids, but you and other elected officials should be and I hope will be held accountable for it coming to this. We want our programs restructed, we want something to hang onto. Heck the 150,000.00 we spent on ousting McHenry would be a start. And would you please respond to the lack of economical forsight as it related to the elimination of sports and the huge impact on ADA funds. How about just that question.
HOW DOES THE DISTRICT PLAN TO OFFSET LOST ADA REVENUE DUE TO DECREASED ATTENDANCE AS A RESULT OF THE LOSS OF ATHLETICS?
Anon, I consider it an insult to have you make false allegations about me - you do that and I will respond. How can you possible say "We all have to make sacrafices but the ONLY 2 PROGRAMS that were eliminated were sports and 4th grade music, evreything else was reduced or restructed." Have you reviewed the list of cuts? I guess you just don't understand that we are in a very dire situation.
You also said "But you were elected to public office so you must answer our questions . . ."
Do you realize that Gary and I (and Sherry these days too) are the most available public officials around? Certainly we believe that we should answer your questions, but most politicians don't go out of their way to be available like we do.
Do you have any idea how hard we work for the school district? Do you realize I have another actual job I have to perform to pay my bills?
Do you realize that I spend thousands of hours on the district for almost nothing?
The $150,000 we spent on McHenry's contract was well spent - we have a far better chance of passing Measure D now and we did not backfill the position of Director of M&O this year, so all of that savings should be recognized as well. You are clearly grabbing at straws at this point. Do you realize that only about $40,000 of the McHenry buyout affects this conversation? Most of the money will be spent this year, not next (which is when we are cutting).
Why don't you just call me? You could learn a lot about what is going on by talking to me.
At least tell me whether you are the SOS Blogger - you should know that the SOS Blog is now getting a few negative comments on the MDUSD blog.
We may lose ADA because of athletics - we may lose ADA by cutting teachers, librarians, music, VPs and many other programs. What I am trying to convey to you is that we have no choice but to make cuts that we would have never otherwise made.
Does it not matter to you that we cut over $25 million BEFORE we cut athletics and other programs. Can you not see that this shows that we consider athletics and the other programs cut at the end to be high priorities?
It is time to work together, not against each other. Spend your time doing something useful, not making false allegations.
If my allegations are false please point out other programs in the released cut list that start with the word "eliminate" not people but programs. I cannot find them and am looking to you for an answer I cannot glean on my own.
Of course the other cuts matter and all of these will probably result in another cost to me...moving.
No I am not the SOSblogger just a parent who got a free t-shirt read the back and logged on.
I realize that the district cut 25 million and still didn't cut athletics. I am saying that the same efforts should have been made to ensure the program was maintained in some form rather than eliminated as a whole.
Once again you will lose ADA due to the elimination of sports how is the district planning to bridge that gap.
In budget talks you decided that it would be more cost effective to create another attorney position so you bridged a budgetary gap.
Please have the same forsight when it comes to my kids.
This is from the mdusd blogspot about aninformational meeting, looks like it overlaps with the CVHS meeting
We will hold an informational meeting for site captains - or those considering it - on Wednesday March 18th 6:30pm at the Measure D headquarters. For information, call me at 925-202-3178. We'll have pizza and drinks.
I appreciate Mr. Omania for supporting our schools and creating this web site for us to blog, gain support and get information. I appreciate the passion of both "Parent Anon" & Mr. Strange and hope we can all work together through this difficult time and position we are forced into here in MDUSD. Correct me if I'm wrong but both of you are for Measure D? How can we move forward together on both sides of the table to keep what we ultimately want, which for me as a parent, coach and supporter is fully funded athletics in MDUSD? Can we have our parents, kids and coaches join together to campaign for the parcel tax? This weekend I saw Diablo Valley College drew publicity and support by taking a group up to our State Capitol's doorstep to protest the budget cuts. This was mentioned in the board/study hall on Saturday morning? Should we go up as a truly unified MDUSD, including; parents, coaches, students, student athletes, librarians, support staff, teachers, administration, and School Board members to show our discontent for the position that we are now put in. Our local leaders are being forced to cut from the foundation of the future of our country - EDUCATION (which up until recently includes ATHLETICS!)! This is coming directly from the top in our STATE Leaders, passed on to our local leaders and now it has hit us hard here at home. It hurts and it is harsh, but we can all agree that they are trying to step on what they believe will give them the least grief - Education. We are common people in working class America, who won't have the heart, voice or means to fight back. So, they will continue to step on us, until we unite in a time like this to fight back for what is right and let our leaders know that Education and Athletics are important to us and we will not quietly allow this to happen without a fight.
A parent and I were talking about the negative toll this will take on our entire community. The economy right now will already increase our crime rates, but honestly not having education support and athletics will not only increase our crime rates, but possibly teenage death rates, addictions to alcohol, drugs, and even greater youth incarceration. I do not currently own property in Concord, California, but at some point in the near future I would like to. Would I rather pay a parcel tax to support our local community/education or pay for a youth inmate and more jails. I will choose the parcel tax to support our local community in a positive manner. Do I like that we are being forced into this, no. This is where we are now, so if this is one of the only options currently on the table to help our community as a whole out, I hope more people will get behind it and see the positives that will come out of it.
I do coach and support Mt. Diablo High School and their student athletes, parents, custodians, librarians, staff members, teachers, administrators and other supporters mean a lot to me. If the parcel tax will benefit the greater good, please support it and lets move forward together. We can agree to disagree on some items, but we will be more powerful bound together fighting for what we believe in - EDUCATION & STUDENT ATHLETES. God bless.
I am so darn disappointed with Mr. Strange and this constant anger when statements are made about the budget. The truth of the matter is that we can all read. 6 directors which was stated at the board meeting is very different than $600,000. If you just take $178,000 for cost of maintenance and operations director and multiply by 6 then it is much more than $600,000. The $600,000 cut amount came in part from school site budget in the form of $10,000 and $20,000. Elementary gave up planning meetings for next year and I hear high schools cannot have any more supplies. Now how that money is taken from the district office adjustments as stated by Dr. Nichol is beyond my understanding!!
The pink slips cost the district money because each one was sent certify mail to the teacher as well as the time that it took to mail and organize the signed receipts. The cost to send was $6.07 each. Yes I understand legal issues so please Mr. Stange do not explain in your kind ways to me.
But...do we have surplus teachers this year that are drinking coffee in the teacher room all day that we need to unload 500 teachers? Guess I just do not get it.
I just keep wondering.....how we are going to teach children. Are the directors going to be assigned teaching positions? Are their assisting personal going to be going in to classrooms to "teach"? Do they have the credentials? Or is the district going to be run on long term substitutes?
As with the sports issues...not much is well thought out these days.
I understand and appreciate the hours that Mr. Strange spends on school issues but we all do it too. Try teaching on a shoestring budget at schools without parent ability to support teachers with money!!
I do not think there is a teacher, coach, or parent that does not put many hours caring about students. So please, Mr. Strange, give a little more kindness and professionalism.
Cutting school sports would be a huge mistake on the districts part. Grades would drop tremdously. More students than you may think keep their grades up just so they are able to play school sports. Taking away school sports from the student leaves nearly no motivation for many high school students to keep their grades up. Its like taking candy away from a child. Something that doesn’t seem that big of a deal to anyone else may mean the world to someone else; and because of that, it shouldn’t be taken away. Sports have an enormous impact on student’s lives. A good portion of high-schoolers stay after school until five or even later because they are dedicated to their chosen after school sport. Seeing all the committed student-athletes working hard in after school sports shows they are willing to create time in their already busy lives to make sports a priority as well as staying on top of school work. If sports are cut, how are athletic scholarships given? Do athletes who spend over half their lives practicing, hoping, and dreaming about getting a full ride and playing for a great college still have that chance to do so? Dropping sports could effect more people in more ways than you could think of. Sports keep many people out of trouble. This could cause students to stay on the streets, causing trouble for neighborhoods. This could lead of the demand of police in the streets. Keeping athletics keeps students out of trouble that they could be involved in if sports were cut. Having athletics cut would be a GIANT slip for many many reasons. PLEASE HELP SAVE SCHOOL ATHLETICS. --CVHS STUDENT
I apologize in advance for the lenth of this post - WE NEED ADDITIONAL EDUCATION FUNDING. There is no way around that basic issue. The federal and state governments seem content with mandates, but not adequate funding, for the local districts to implement. So, if we cannot get adequate funding from those bodies that provide lip service to the importance of education, we must provide it at the local level. I AM WHOLEHEARTEDLY IN FAVOR OF THE PARCEL TAX. If nothing else is accomplished by its passage than we escape without further cuts to our district budget - that in itself is a win for us and something worth fighting for. I have signed up at the measure website – I urge all other MDUSD parents to do the same.
I am the father of 4 MDUSD students. My oldest lost her way in high school, and is currently trying to complete her HS requirements via Adult School. One son is a HS student/athlete. Another son is a 4th grader. My youngest is autistic. The cuts forced upon this district hurt each and every one of my children, and my children are not alone.
The elimination of high school sports – for me, that cut is the hardest to swallow. That action has the most dramatic impact, the cut that has spurred me to action. The cuts that impact my 3 other children result in reductions in the staff of the district. And while I regret the losses to the teaching and support ranks, the programs that they need continue to be provided. Their programs have not been eliminated. The program my oldest son needs – athletics - has been eliminated.
The teenagers who participate in athletics at the high school level, by and large, have participated in their sport(s) for 5-10 years by the time they reach 9th grade. Each year, they devote considerable time, energy and focus to hone their skills and their understanding of their sports. Every level requires more and more skill, more and more practice, more and more dedication. Over the years, fewer and fewer of their peers continue to participate. To put that much time in over the years - they do it because they have found something that they enjoy, something that provides them with positive self-image and positive rewards. If you make the team at the high school level, it is because you enjoy your sport, are committed to it, have devoted yourself to improving. IF YOU MAKE THE HIGH SCHOOL TEAM, YOU HAVE EARNED IT.
By their own count, MDUSD has about 10,400 high school students across the 6 campuses. The 6 campuses provided 5,200 athletic participation opportunities in 07-08. I call it that because we all know there are some athletes that participate in 2-3 sports each year. The district counts the number of roster spots on the various teams. Athletics serves a large proportion of our students, not a limited few as some might think. I assume that 1/3 of the participants are multi-sport athletes. That means that about 3,500 unique teenagers are active participants in our high school sports programs. That’s about 35% of our students. Athletics is clearly a very popular, pervasive and impactful program. Through their hard work and dedication over several years, 3,500 of our students HAVE EARNED A SPOT ON THE TEAM.
With the elimination of the athletics program, that spot on the team has been taken away from them. About 2,600 students would be returning athletes next year (9th-11th grade this year). They have tasted the high school sports experience, but are having that experience taken away from them. They will lose out on something that is known and tangible to them. The incoming freshman class will have about 900 students who will not have the opportunity to continue their sports involvement. For the vast majority, their high school years are the height of their athletic careers. My wife remembers little of her classes or teachers, but she remembers her coaches and her teammates. Her most vivid memories of high school all relate to the playing fields. So do mine and I wasn’t a student athlete. I was a spectator, but I attended every football and basketball game, cheering on and supporting my friends and my school. We are taking those memories away from our children through the elimination of the athletic experience. That is a huge impact, an impact beyond comprehension.
Right now, the fate of 3,500 student/athletes rests on 1 of 2 solutions.
FIRST - Pass the parcel tax and then hang on for dear life and survive the potential for other state budget reductions yet this year, or next year. If we realize new revenue, the district has set athletics funding as a priority for restoration. I applaud the district for this decision. I will work vigorously for Measure D, because without that initial step, nothing positive for our district’s revenue can happen. Now, there are several variables that might result in Parcel Tax funds not saving athletics. The district needs this money – whatever they are able to save or restore will have a positive impact on our students.
SECOND - Replace the district funding with private funding from the community and the affected families. The district is beginning work in that direction. There is a problem with this solution, one that is relatively unknown outside the existing HS athletics ‘family’. The district puts the price tag on athletics at $721,000. This is the amount that they currently are attempting to figure out how the generate from the efforts of the parents, booster clubs and community at large. The problem is that the district funds only a portion of the cost of the athletics programs at our 6 high schools. There are entire sports that the district offers for which they provide $0 in funding.
At my son’s high school, the families/boosters raised more than $120,000 last year to supplement the district budget. If my school is average, the 6 booster clubs currently raise and spend well over $700,000 each year to supplement the district budget and provide our students with a competitive athletic experience. That support comes predominantly from the parents. So, the true cost of the elimination of the district athletics budget is to place the task of raising nearly $1,500,000 onto the parents, their friends and neighbors and the community at large. That is a huge burden to place on the athletes, their families and the community.
For years, the high school sports programs have been a PARTNERSHIP between the district, the parents and the community. Not any longer. What many of the parents are so agitated (irate as some would say) about this issue is – kids who have worked very hard for many years to earn a spot on the team now have no team. The kids suffer. The parents, who have long funded the athletic endeavors of their children, are potentially forced into a position to go it alone.
If it comes to the parents/community funding athletics, the district will reap the current benefits – stronger connection to school/community, better attendance, better academic performance (all of which tend to increase state ADA revenues to the district) from the student/athletes - without being a financial partner in the endeavor. Some of the district administrators might even see this as a positive, even desirable outcome. As a parent, it seems patently unfair to me. I was originally supportive of this avenue, but have rethought my position. The athletics program MUST remain a partnership with the district, parents and community, because we ALL BENEFIT from the program.
It didn’t have to come down to this – this ‘all or nothing’ situation that has many parents and students so up in arms. The district chose, in some measure due to time constraints, to eliminate the funding and eliminate the sports program. This creates a very vivid, very real picture that frightens the parents – no athletics for our deserving children next year. When the program was eliminated, and the hard road for the parcel tax was explained to the athletic families, the district had no fall back plan. This creates even more angst and anxiety for the parents. Had the district reduced the funding 50%, this fear would not exist, as the future of the program would not be completely in doubt - the significant distractions that threaten the passage of the parcel tax would not exist – the potential added burden on the parents would not be so daunting.
I realize that budgets had to get passed and submitted to those that our district has to answer to, and on tight deadlines. Now that that has been accomplished, the district should work toward some creative solution that finds middle ground – where the budget is revisited and further tweaked to create a level of district funding that would guarantee very basic, minimal high school athletics programs next year, regardless of the outcome of either option they are now working through. The sports programs would not be on par with what we have now, but they would not be eliminated should the worst case scenario play out this spring.
LET’S ALL GET TO WORK PASSING THE PARCEL TAX. Let’s let all the other stuff happen quietly, without being a distraction, in a cooperative atmosphere. WE NEED TO PULL TOGETHER, UNITED IN OUR EFFORTS ON BOTH FRONTS – PASS THE PARCEL TAX & RESTORE A WORKABLE LEVEL OF DISTRICT FUNDING FOR ATHLETICS. They are not mutually exclusive; one does not have to come before the other. Everybody espouses to want both. Everybody acknowledges that the district needs both. THEN LET’S GO GET THEM BOTH DONE.
Many California communities, if not most, are turning to local property taxes to fund education. In 2008 Oakland, Pittsburg, and West Contra Costa County (includes Richmond) all passed parcel tax measures. Oakland’s residents passed a $195/parcel tax with 79% of the voters. West County passed a 7.2 cent per square foot parcel tax (1,500 sf equals $108) with 79% of the voters. Pittsburg passed a $65/parcel tax with $6 increases per year with 72% of the vote. Many other school district, both affluent communities and those that are not, have done the same. Most of the districts surrounding Mt. Diablo Unified rely on parcel tax revenue for some portion of their overall budget.
I want to be very clear that I believe that we MUST pass Measure D in order to "fully" fund athletics. I also believe that the district as a whole need the parcel tax in order to function next year. The board has been forced to cut very deep. And while no matter what we need and have always needed extra revenue I would like to point out where the board has CHOSEN to cut.
ReplyDeleteThe board is cutting at the classroom level and saving district jobs in the process. The following is from the mdusd blogspot and highlites tehir efforst to save HIGH PAYING jobs while taking away athletics!
Here is the list of 16 Directors and Asst. Directors the board was cutting from on January 27, 2009:
1. Assistant Director Curriculum
2. Assistant Director Student Services
3. Director Adult Ed
4. Director Alternative Ed.
5. Director Curriculum
6. Director Certificated Personnel
7. Director, Classified Personnel
8. Director Student Services
9. Director Fiscal
10. Director M & O
11. Director Purchasing
12. Director Technology Support
13. Director Technology & Information Services
14. Director of Development
15. Director Technology Application
16. Director Food Services
Of these 16, after tonight (assuming the board approves the cuts) we will have cut four of the positions from the general fund:
1. Assistant Director Student Services
2. Director Alternative Education
3. Director M & O
4. Director of Technology Application
As alternatives to cutting other positions we will have made the following personnel cuts at the district office:
1. Personnel Coordinator (as alternative to the Classified and Certificated Directors)
2. Supervisor of Technology and Customer Support (as alternative to Directors of Technology, and in addition to Director of Technology Application)
3. Reduce Director of Curriculum by 20%.
4. Reduce Administrative Legal Services budget by $150,000
In addition the board is also CREATING a new associate to the general council position at a rate of $200,000.00!
These are facts. The board must know that while we recognize that we all must tighten our belts that they can and must bring back SOME funding to guarantee high school athletics next year.
We cannot allow the board to dictate. They are an ELECTED body. If the community values athletics and cuts can be made elsewhere...farther away from kids and classrooms...THEN THOSE ARE WHERE THE CUTS must be made.
The total cost of the districts athletic contribution last year was $721,400.00, with $383,000.00 being paid as coaching stipends. Let parents and the community fund for coaches pay. But the district should be responsible for the balance at a minimum.
I know for a fact that my child has benefitted far more from the $1500.00 the district paid his coach than anyone will get from yet another attorney.
WE MUST PASS MEASURE D
THE DISTRICT MUST GUARANTEE MINIMAL EQUITABLE FUNDING FOR ATHLETICS
Wow, the your comment is so wrong it is unbelievable. My post, which you copied from mdusd.net shows that we did, in fact, cut from the district office. And yes, I fully support hiring another attorney, and so will any rational person. We spend over $1 million on outside attorneys' fees per year (given our size, this is not out of line). Even with the additional cost of the new attorney, we will save at least $150,000 and probably more like $250,000 in outside lawyer fees by hiring another lawyer. This is exactly the same issue as speech pathologists - by hiring our own, even with an additional incentive, we will save about $20K per speech pathologist. Lawyers just provide a substantially higher savings per individual. This is a cost saving measure and will keep us from eliminating another $200,000 of teachers, coaches or other personnel - why would anyone object to this?
ReplyDeleteYou fundamentally misread this post or you have an agenda to misrepresent the facts.
You did cut from the district but not at the level that the board "threatened" to cut. I realize that the board did cut 4 district level positions and merged 2 others, but why were the other 8 saved? And I appreciate the fact that hiring lawyers and speech pathologists may save money in the long term, and if that is in fact the rationale then the board must consider the tremendous loss of ADA money that will coincide with the elimination of high school athletics. That is having forsight and good economic sense and protecting our kids. Next, you ask how can anyone object to your rationale, well when you consider dollars spent per child impacted the most effecient monies that the district has ever spent is on athletics. Also if you expect to save $250,000.00 then deicate that as seed money for athletics. The district should and must at least partially fund athletics. This message will get louder and louder and louder. The district syas they are looking into the feasiblity of "pay to play", well guess what, parents in this district have been paying to play for years. I don not how many car wash tickets, discount cards, or donation letters I have been charged with assissting with. The local businesses are already tapped by all of the high schools and in this economy how many are going to reach deeper to assisst a district that is being touted as one of the only districts in America that is set to lose athletics. We object because we are stick of being handed the bill over and over again while the people at the tops lives change very little. But hey maybe you also think that those good old boys at AIG deserve those bonuses, after all top down economics is a fantastic working model to adopt. You may not respond here and I understand but hopefully people will find this site and learn about all that is going on.
ReplyDeleteVOTE YES ON D
So they did cut those 16 positions or they cut some or what exactly happened?
ReplyDeleteThey threatened to cut all 16 positions, the former district superintendent resigned and then the board withdrew or restructured 12 of the positions, and that is all on the other site. But there has never been any reason given as to the change.
ReplyDeleteAgain, anon 10:31 is spewing completely false information. We never "threatened, or discussed, or even mentioned cutting all 16 positions. That is simply a complete lie. Please get the facts straight before making these statements. You sound like the guy at the Saturday meeting who knew nothing about what actually happens with the school district.
ReplyDeleteWhat the board did was direct Mr. McHenry to come back with a proposal to cut SIX, not SIXTEEN positions. And we lived up to making cuts. Many of the 16 positions are funded by categorical (restricted) funds, so it would not help the general fund to cut them. Bottom line - we did what we said we would and basically every cut proposed by Mr. McHenry was made. Once again, you are completely off base. If you have questions about what is happening, ask - don't just make false allegations. I recommend you call me first before embarrassing yourself in public (of course you can just hide behind being anonymous and never actually have to be honest).
As for using the $250K in savings from hiring a lawyer to fund athletics - again, you fundamentally don't understand what is happening and you make assumptions about what is going on around you. We have already built that savings into the budget. If we had not made that change, we would be cutting another $200K+ - it is not as if that money is sitting around waiting to be spent. In fact, our ending fund balance at the end of two years is only $200K - against a $280 million budget. We should have no less than 1% (and probably far more) as a buffer in our budget, but instead, due to the fact that we don't want to cut, we have less than 1/10 of one percent (and don't start talking about the 2% required reserve, because it MUST be paid back by the next budget event, which is typically less than 2 months away at any given time).
As for pay to play - it is illegal to require payment and exclude those who don't pay, so "pay to play" won't be allowed. What is being investigated is a donation program that can fund athletics district wide. Under that approach, no players are refused the right to play, unless they all are.
"We object because we are stick (sic) of being handed the bill over and over again while the people at the tops lives change very little."
Right now, California is 47th in the nation in per pupil spending, BEFORE the current cuts. Public schools should be funded in a manner that students have what they need and everything should be included in that education, including athletics. The harsh reality is that California does not fund education properly, so either we can ask more from our parents, or not support certain activities. What do you mean by the people at the tops lives change very little? Who are you talking about? If you are talking about our district, we have cut positions from the very top of our district during this cutting (CFO last year, long before many of the other cuts).
As for Anon 10:28's question, it might help to read the entire post I made, rather than just the selection that the other anon chose to put in these comments. You can find that entire post here:
http://mdusd.blogspot.com/2009/03/march-3-2009-agenda.html
Again to Anon 9:58 - you are not supporting Measure D through your false statements, you are actually hurting it. People read this blog and believe that the board has not been responsive - that is flatly contrary to the reality of the situation. I challenge you to call me to find out the truth about the situation before making these assertions. My contact information is available at mdusd.net.
I think the fact that your even suggested that I would not respond demonstrates that you are quite new to this game. Just take a couple dozen hours to read our blog (mdusd.net), our responses, the MDUSD Parents Blog (mdusdparents.blogspot.com), the MDUSD Teachers Blog (mdusdteachers.blogspot.com), and Claycord (claycord.com) and all of our responses to comments and you will see that I am very willing to engage on these blogs.
I am happy to answer questions and I encourage folks to ask them - I just ask that you understand the issue before making allegations that can't be supported.
By the way, the MDUSD Parents Blog does have information about Measure D, but you should have a link to the actual Measure D site-
ReplyDeletehttp://protectourlocalschools.org
I appreciate that you did respond although I would not have expected you to start personally insulting me and some other interested guy who was at your saturday meeting. And apparently anyone who doesn't see things exactly your way is wrong or ignorant. What you need to realize is that the athletic community is larger and more mobile than any other group in the district. We are used to volunteering, we are used to being involved in the process and sitting on boards because that is what we have done for years while our kids participated in youth sports. And now we will start to look at how this all happened. We don't need anymore info about how this is all the states fault. Most of us who read realize that the states way of funding schools is flawed. But you were elected to public office so you must answer our questions and you must listen and consider our voice. We all have to make sacrafices but the ONLY 2 PROGRAMS that were eliminated were sports and 4th grade music, evreything else was reduced or restructed. Someone was savvy enough to realize what burden the parents would bare either by paying to play or by supporting a tax. What I am saying is this, you cut the 2 groups whose support you desperatly need the deepest. We will support because we will do anything for our kids, but you and other elected officials should be and I hope will be held accountable for it coming to this. We want our programs restructed, we want something to hang onto. Heck the 150,000.00 we spent on ousting McHenry would be a start. And would you please respond to the lack of economical forsight as it related to the elimination of sports and the huge impact on ADA funds. How about just that question.
ReplyDeleteHOW DOES THE DISTRICT PLAN TO OFFSET LOST ADA REVENUE DUE TO DECREASED ATTENDANCE AS A RESULT OF THE LOSS OF ATHLETICS?
Thank you
Anon, I consider it an insult to have you make false allegations about me - you do that and I will respond. How can you possible say "We all have to make sacrafices but the ONLY 2 PROGRAMS that were eliminated were sports and 4th grade music, evreything else was reduced or restructed." Have you reviewed the list of cuts? I guess you just don't understand that we are in a very dire situation.
ReplyDeleteYou also said "But you were elected to public office so you must answer our questions . . ."
Do you realize that Gary and I (and Sherry these days too) are the most available public officials around? Certainly we believe that we should answer your questions, but most politicians don't go out of their way to be available like we do.
Do you have any idea how hard we work for the school district? Do you realize I have another actual job I have to perform to pay my bills?
Do you realize that I spend thousands of hours on the district for almost nothing?
The $150,000 we spent on McHenry's contract was well spent - we have a far better chance of passing Measure D now and we did not backfill the position of Director of M&O this year, so all of that savings should be recognized as well. You are clearly grabbing at straws at this point. Do you realize that only about $40,000 of the McHenry buyout affects this conversation? Most of the money will be spent this year, not next (which is when we are cutting).
Why don't you just call me? You could learn a lot about what is going on by talking to me.
At least tell me whether you are the SOS Blogger - you should know that the SOS Blog is now getting a few negative comments on the MDUSD blog.
We may lose ADA because of athletics - we may lose ADA by cutting teachers, librarians, music, VPs and many other programs. What I am trying to convey to you is that we have no choice but to make cuts that we would have never otherwise made.
Does it not matter to you that we cut over $25 million BEFORE we cut athletics and other programs. Can you not see that this shows that we consider athletics and the other programs cut at the end to be high priorities?
It is time to work together, not against each other. Spend your time doing something useful, not making false allegations.
I appreciate your hours and time and responses.
ReplyDeleteIf my allegations are false please point out other programs in the released cut list that start with the word "eliminate" not people but programs. I cannot find them and am looking to you for an answer I cannot glean on my own.
Of course the other cuts matter and all of these will probably result in another cost to me...moving.
No I am not the SOSblogger just a parent who got a free t-shirt read the back and logged on.
I realize that the district cut 25 million and still didn't cut athletics. I am saying that the same efforts should have been made to ensure the program was maintained in some form rather than eliminated as a whole.
Once again you will lose ADA due to the elimination of sports how is the district planning to bridge that gap.
In budget talks you decided that it would be more cost effective to create another attorney position so you bridged a budgetary gap.
Please have the same forsight when it comes to my kids.
Hey Jason thanks for setting up the site...looks like things have gone a bit sideways though.
ReplyDeleteHas anyone attended a Measure D meeting? Has there been one? What is the plan?
This is from the mdusd blogspot about aninformational meeting, looks like it overlaps with the CVHS meeting
ReplyDeleteWe will hold an informational meeting for site captains - or those considering it - on Wednesday March 18th 6:30pm at the Measure D headquarters. For information, call me at 925-202-3178. We'll have pizza and drinks.
I appreciate Mr. Omania for supporting our schools and creating this web site for us to blog, gain support and get information. I appreciate the passion of both "Parent Anon" & Mr. Strange and hope we can all work together through this difficult time and position we are forced into here in MDUSD.
ReplyDeleteCorrect me if I'm wrong but both of you are for Measure D? How can we move forward together on both sides of the table to keep what we ultimately want, which for me as a parent, coach and supporter is fully funded athletics in MDUSD?
Can we have our parents, kids and coaches join together to campaign for the parcel tax?
This weekend I saw Diablo Valley College drew publicity and support by taking a group up to our State Capitol's doorstep to protest the budget cuts. This was mentioned in the board/study hall on Saturday morning? Should we go up as a truly unified MDUSD, including; parents, coaches, students, student athletes, librarians, support staff, teachers, administration, and School Board members to show our discontent for the position that we are now put in. Our local leaders are being forced to cut from the foundation of the future of our country - EDUCATION (which up until recently includes ATHLETICS!)! This is coming directly from the top in our STATE Leaders, passed on to our local leaders and now it has hit us hard here at home.
It hurts and it is harsh, but we can all agree that they are trying to step on what they believe will give them the least grief - Education. We are common people in working class America, who won't have the heart, voice or means to fight back. So, they will continue to step on us, until we unite in a time like this to fight back for what is right and let our leaders know that Education and Athletics are important to us and we will not quietly allow this to happen without a fight.
A parent and I were talking about the negative toll this will take on our entire community. The economy right now will already increase our crime rates, but honestly not having education support and athletics will not only increase our crime rates, but possibly teenage death rates, addictions to alcohol, drugs, and even greater youth incarceration. I do not currently own property in Concord, California, but at some point in the near future I would like to. Would I rather pay a parcel tax to support our local community/education or pay for a youth inmate and more jails. I will choose the parcel tax to support our local community in a positive manner. Do I like that we are being forced into this, no. This is where we are now, so if this is one of the only options currently on the table to help our community as a whole out, I hope more people will get behind it and see the positives that will come out of it.
I do coach and support Mt. Diablo High School and their student athletes, parents, custodians, librarians, staff members, teachers, administrators and other supporters mean a lot to me. If the parcel tax will benefit the greater good, please support it and lets move forward together. We can agree to disagree on some items, but we will be more powerful bound together fighting for what we believe in - EDUCATION & STUDENT ATHLETES. God bless.
I am so darn disappointed with Mr. Strange and this constant anger when statements are made about the budget. The truth of the matter is that we can all read. 6 directors which was stated at the board meeting is very different than $600,000. If you just take $178,000 for cost of maintenance and operations director and multiply by 6 then it is much more than $600,000. The $600,000 cut amount came in part from school site budget in the form of $10,000 and $20,000. Elementary gave up planning meetings for next year and I hear high schools cannot have any more supplies. Now how that money is taken from the district office adjustments as stated by Dr. Nichol is beyond my understanding!!
ReplyDeleteThe pink slips cost the district money because each one was sent certify mail to the teacher as well as the time that it took to mail and organize the signed receipts. The cost to send was $6.07 each. Yes I understand legal issues so please Mr. Stange do not explain in your kind ways to me.
But...do we have surplus teachers this year that are drinking coffee in the teacher room all day that we need to unload 500 teachers? Guess I just do not get it.
I just keep wondering.....how we are going to teach children. Are the directors going to be assigned teaching positions? Are their assisting personal going to be going in to classrooms to "teach"? Do they have the credentials? Or is the district going to be run on long term substitutes?
As with the sports issues...not much is well thought out these days.
I understand and appreciate the hours that Mr. Strange spends on school issues but we all do it too. Try teaching on a shoestring budget at schools without parent ability to support teachers with money!!
I do not think there is a teacher, coach, or parent that does not put many hours caring about students. So please, Mr. Strange, give a little more kindness and professionalism.
Oakland Unified has sports and they are going to a state championship, how many parcel taxes have they passed to keep athletics?
ReplyDeleteCutting school sports would be a huge mistake on the districts part.
ReplyDeleteGrades would drop tremdously. More students than you may think keep their grades up just so they are able to play school sports. Taking away school sports from the student leaves nearly no motivation for many high school students to keep their grades up. Its like taking candy away from a child. Something that doesn’t seem that big of a deal to anyone else may mean the world to someone else; and because of that, it shouldn’t be taken away.
Sports have an enormous impact on student’s lives. A good portion of high-schoolers stay after school until five or even later because they are dedicated to their chosen after school sport. Seeing all the committed student-athletes working hard in after school sports shows they are willing to create time in their already busy lives to make sports a priority as well as staying on top of school work.
If sports are cut, how are athletic scholarships given? Do athletes who spend over half their lives practicing, hoping, and dreaming about getting a full ride and playing for a great college still have that chance to do so?
Dropping sports could effect more people in more ways than you could think of. Sports keep many people out of trouble. This could cause students to stay on the streets, causing trouble for neighborhoods. This could lead of the demand of police in the streets. Keeping athletics keeps students out of trouble that they could be involved in if sports were cut.
Having athletics cut would be a GIANT slip for many many reasons.
PLEASE HELP SAVE SCHOOL ATHLETICS.
--CVHS STUDENT
I apologize in advance for the lenth of this post -
ReplyDeleteWE NEED ADDITIONAL EDUCATION FUNDING. There is no way around that basic issue. The federal and state governments seem content with mandates, but not adequate funding, for the local districts to implement. So, if we cannot get adequate funding from those bodies that provide lip service to the importance of education, we must provide it at the local level. I AM WHOLEHEARTEDLY IN FAVOR OF THE PARCEL TAX. If nothing else is accomplished by its passage than we escape without further cuts to our district budget - that in itself is a win for us and something worth fighting for. I have signed up at the measure website – I urge all other MDUSD parents to do the same.
I am the father of 4 MDUSD students. My oldest lost her way in high school, and is currently trying to complete her HS requirements via Adult School. One son is a HS student/athlete. Another son is a 4th grader. My youngest is autistic. The cuts forced upon this district hurt each and every one of my children, and my children are not alone.
The elimination of high school sports – for me, that cut is the hardest to swallow. That action has the most dramatic impact, the cut that has spurred me to action. The cuts that impact my 3 other children result in reductions in the staff of the district. And while I regret the losses to the teaching and support ranks, the programs that they need continue to be provided. Their programs have not been eliminated. The program my oldest son needs – athletics - has been eliminated.
The teenagers who participate in athletics at the high school level, by and large, have participated in their sport(s) for 5-10 years by the time they reach 9th grade. Each year, they devote considerable time, energy and focus to hone their skills and their understanding of their sports. Every level requires more and more skill, more and more practice, more and more dedication. Over the years, fewer and fewer of their peers continue to participate. To put that much time in over the years - they do it because they have found something that they enjoy, something that provides them with positive self-image and positive rewards. If you make the team at the high school level, it is because you enjoy your sport, are committed to it, have devoted yourself to improving. IF YOU MAKE THE HIGH SCHOOL TEAM, YOU HAVE EARNED IT.
By their own count, MDUSD has about 10,400 high school students across the 6 campuses. The 6 campuses provided 5,200 athletic participation opportunities in 07-08. I call it that because we all know there are some athletes that participate in 2-3 sports each year. The district counts the number of roster spots on the various teams. Athletics serves a large proportion of our students, not a limited few as some might think. I assume that 1/3 of the participants are multi-sport athletes. That means that about 3,500 unique teenagers are active participants in our high school sports programs. That’s about 35% of our students. Athletics is clearly a very popular, pervasive and impactful program. Through their hard work and dedication over several years, 3,500 of our students HAVE EARNED A SPOT ON THE TEAM.
With the elimination of the athletics program, that spot on the team has been taken away from them. About 2,600 students would be returning athletes next year (9th-11th grade this year). They have tasted the high school sports experience, but are having that experience taken away from them. They will lose out on something that is known and tangible to them. The incoming freshman class will have about 900 students who will not have the opportunity to continue their sports involvement. For the vast majority, their high school years are the height of their athletic careers. My wife remembers little of her classes or teachers, but she remembers her coaches and her teammates. Her most vivid memories of high school all relate to the playing fields. So do mine and I wasn’t a student athlete. I was a spectator, but I attended every football and basketball game, cheering on and supporting my friends and my school. We are taking those memories away from our children through the elimination of the athletic experience. That is a huge impact, an impact beyond comprehension.
Right now, the fate of 3,500 student/athletes rests on 1 of 2 solutions.
FIRST - Pass the parcel tax and then hang on for dear life and survive the potential for other state budget reductions yet this year, or next year. If we realize new revenue, the district has set athletics funding as a priority for restoration. I applaud the district for this decision. I will work vigorously for Measure D, because without that initial step, nothing positive for our district’s revenue can happen. Now, there are several variables that might result in Parcel Tax funds not saving athletics. The district needs this money – whatever they are able to save or restore will have a positive impact on our students.
SECOND - Replace the district funding with private funding from the community and the affected families. The district is beginning work in that direction. There is a problem with this solution, one that is relatively unknown outside the existing HS athletics ‘family’. The district puts the price tag on athletics at $721,000. This is the amount that they currently are attempting to figure out how the generate from the efforts of the parents, booster clubs and community at large. The problem is that the district funds only a portion of the cost of the athletics programs at our 6 high schools. There are entire sports that the district offers for which they provide $0 in funding.
At my son’s high school, the families/boosters raised more than $120,000 last year to supplement the district budget. If my school is average, the 6 booster clubs currently raise and spend well over $700,000 each year to supplement the district budget and provide our students with a competitive athletic experience. That support comes predominantly from the parents. So, the true cost of the elimination of the district athletics budget is to place the task of raising nearly $1,500,000 onto the parents, their friends and neighbors and the community at large. That is a huge burden to place on the athletes, their families and the community.
For years, the high school sports programs have been a PARTNERSHIP between the district, the parents and the community. Not any longer. What many of the parents are so agitated (irate as some would say) about this issue is – kids who have worked very hard for many years to earn a spot on the team now have no team. The kids suffer. The parents, who have long funded the athletic endeavors of their children, are potentially forced into a position to go it alone.
If it comes to the parents/community funding athletics, the district will reap the current benefits – stronger connection to school/community, better attendance, better academic performance (all of which tend to increase state ADA revenues to the district) from the student/athletes - without being a financial partner in the endeavor. Some of the district administrators might even see this as a positive, even desirable outcome. As a parent, it seems patently unfair to me. I was originally supportive of this avenue, but have rethought my position. The athletics program MUST remain a partnership with the district, parents and community, because we ALL BENEFIT from the program.
It didn’t have to come down to this – this ‘all or nothing’ situation that has many parents and students so up in arms. The district chose, in some measure due to time constraints, to eliminate the funding and eliminate the sports program. This creates a very vivid, very real picture that frightens the parents – no athletics for our deserving children next year. When the program was eliminated, and the hard road for the parcel tax was explained to the athletic families, the district had no fall back plan. This creates even more angst and anxiety for the parents. Had the district reduced the funding 50%, this fear would not exist, as the future of the program would not be completely in doubt - the significant distractions that threaten the passage of the parcel tax would not exist – the potential added burden on the parents would not be so daunting.
I realize that budgets had to get passed and submitted to those that our district has to answer to, and on tight deadlines. Now that that has been accomplished, the district should work toward some creative solution that finds middle ground – where the budget is revisited and further tweaked to create a level of district funding that would guarantee very basic, minimal high school athletics programs next year, regardless of the outcome of either option they are now working through. The sports programs would not be on par with what we have now, but they would not be eliminated should the worst case scenario play out this spring.
LET’S ALL GET TO WORK PASSING THE PARCEL TAX. Let’s let all the other stuff happen quietly, without being a distraction, in a cooperative atmosphere. WE NEED TO PULL TOGETHER, UNITED IN OUR EFFORTS ON BOTH FRONTS – PASS THE PARCEL TAX & RESTORE A WORKABLE LEVEL OF DISTRICT FUNDING FOR ATHLETICS. They are not mutually exclusive; one does not have to come before the other. Everybody espouses to want both. Everybody acknowledges that the district needs both. THEN LET’S GO GET THEM BOTH DONE.
Anon March 20 9:34
ReplyDeleteMany California communities, if not most, are turning to local property taxes to fund education. In 2008 Oakland, Pittsburg, and West Contra Costa County (includes Richmond) all passed parcel tax measures. Oakland’s residents passed a $195/parcel tax with 79% of the voters. West County passed a 7.2 cent per square foot parcel tax (1,500 sf equals $108) with 79% of the voters. Pittsburg passed a $65/parcel tax with $6 increases per year with 72% of the vote. Many other school district, both affluent communities and those that are not, have done the same. Most of the districts surrounding Mt. Diablo Unified rely on parcel tax revenue for some portion of their overall budget.
YES on Measure D.