627 replies to this topic

[TM70]

Funny thing... 5.25% has been on the table, but now the latest from the district has all sorts of other enhancements above and beyond the 5.25% I don't know if they are checking their numbers too closely. I mean the school board president was giving out 8.5% raises last time I checked.

[Robert Giacometti]

Yes, they will be posting a "new" schedule this Tuesday, but it's pointless. Not sure where I said they were not. We are not using that schedule yet. We are using the '05-'06 schedule for paychecks right now. The "new" schedule is for comparison only. It may boost us somewhat. At least out of the cellar, but again, we are not using that schedule yet. When it goes up with their "new" figures we will NOT be using it. And here is another thing. There is not guarantee that they are going to update our salaries back to July of last year when the new schedule comes out(retro). That will all have to be "negotiated." And I use that term loosely as the district never actually "negotiated" once since they made their first offer. They tried to be like Carmax...here is the price you pay, take it or leave it. Problem is that there is a process to the negotiations. I honestly think the superintendent just thought he could waltz in here and throw his weight around. I think the school board and district negotiation teams know this, but they will never admit it. I wouldn't, you'd lose face like crazy...

Your $5 million includes all employees and that's fair. Trust me, last time we did this impasse thing we were lucky enough to have a few good people who could find where the district was squirreling away the money. Unfortunately we don't have the services of those people anymore and the district knows it. That's why the new superintendent is so confident. And besides the financial officer is a sharp cookie.

Labor negotiations can be an emotional process along with being very complicated, so I can understand your passion about this.

Its been said that some feel that the District isn't negotiating. IF indeed, the District calculated the estimated additional funding from the state, estimated projected costs for all areas and then added in projected increases for what they could afford to offer....In theory, I could understand their logic in doing what they are doing. You don't have to agree with everything, but it could be a possibility.

I can sympathise with you regarding trying follow and understand government budgets. If your organization struggles trying to uncover where the District may have "squirreled" away funds with transfer of allocations and appropriations, just imagine how frustrated the average citizen gets trying to do it on their own! At least you have an union that can use some leverage to getting your questions answered. When I ask questions about budgets, I generally get the "dear in the headlight looks" or they will get back to me. Although to be fair I should acknowledge the District has been more responsive than other agencies to my questions.

I think I can safely say most of the residents would like to see this resolved in a fair and equitable manner without affecting other programs.

[tessieca]

Labor negotiations can be an emotional process along with being very complicated, so I can understand your passion about this.

This teacher is going way beyond passion. There is certainly some anger there, and it probably started before any negotiations issues.

I think I can safely say most of the residents would like to see this resolved in a fair and equitable manner without affecting other programs.

I agree, Robert. People are mostly interesting in having this matter resolved. Even people with a really good understanding of the issues and strong support for the teachers have acknowledged they do not think it is necessary to give in to the teachers' every demand. And they don't want program and staff cuts to fund a raise. That's why I think not many parents came out for the "protest." Attacking on defensiveness isn't becoming, TM. I never put down the parents who did come out -- again, I AM one.

[tessieca]

Thanks for the compliment to the Deputy Superintendent. She IS one smart cookie, and she does an excellent job. She can't be squirreling anything, though, because public budgets are public. District budgets aren't just signed off by the Deputy Supt., but they are passed along to the County and reviewed there as well. One of the guys at SCOE who did this was/is a Folsom resident who ran for the board one year. He couldn't find any holes in the budget with which to make a successful bid for board, even though this was his apparent platform. It's public, it's there for all to see, it's reviewed by people who are neutral and understand school budgets. I already explained what goes into the bottom line, including state-required reserves, etc. That would be a strange place to store money if one were trying to "hide" it (in plain sight).

[aubie84alum]

You say we shouldn't listen to the spin from the district office... but aren't you biased as well???

I don't think I'm biased. I'm expressing an informed opinion. I heard the news, channel 10, I think. They were the only ones even interested in the parents' supportive picketing. The news said that the district said that they offered 5.24%(or 5.25), plus health benefits. If that wasn't an outright lie, it was a complete misrepresentation. They have offered the exact same percentage at each meeting. Breaking the offer in various ways to equal the same amount is their M.O.

At the board mtg. last Thur. several people brought up the $40,000 raise that Godwin recieved; also, some listed the huge salaries given to the new big wigs that were hired. In addition, these same staff members are new, extra big wigs, as if we aren't top heavy enough. This is not a for profit business. There will be no trickle down effect.

If you don't believe me ask the big wigs to prove their numbers. They called for impasse, while the union wanted to keep negotiating. It's okay with us if they want to go there. There will be a neutral fact finder. When the facts are documented that will be great. I'm sure the district will say that we refused to take their last, best, offer, which, as I understand it, is legal-speak and what you're supposed to say right before impasse; however, Larry Brubaker has said it at every mtg. I guess they always wanted to go to impasse and were trying to make us look like we are greedy and that they will have to do away with programs, etc. It's as much B.S. as little georgie spouts about his budget....

must run, I have to email some of my former and present students and catch up on their current lives. True caring never stops and sometimes breaks your heart.

P.S. Besides saying the thing about the spin, I IMPLORED you to seek the facts, do some research, but my guess is you know the answers already, and you're using one tiny piece of my entire message to spin....doctor. The entire entry regarding the spin and money is much more enlightening and accurate. Were you at the mtg? Was I facing you while I spoke? Come on. You can tell me. I was the one in green, crying.

[aubie84alum]

Funny thing... 5.25% has been on the table, but now the latest from the district has all sorts of other enhancements above and beyond the 5.25% I don't know if they are checking their numbers too closely. I mean the school board president was giving out 8.5% raises last time I checked.

That's a joke, right? I know for a fact that if something was different in their offer, it didn't make the evening news, and I didn't hear anything at our mtg Friday afternoon.

[aubie84alum]

Thanks for the compliment to the Deputy Superintendent. She IS one smart cookie, and she does an excellent job. She can't be squirreling anything, though, because public budgets are public. District budgets aren't just signed off by the Deputy Supt., but they are passed along to the County and reviewed there as well. One of the guys at SCOE who did this was/is a Folsom resident who ran for the board one year. He couldn't find any wholes in the budget with which to make a successful bid for board, even though this was his apparent platform. It's public, it's there for all to see, it's reviewed by people who are neutral and understand school budgets. I already explained what goes into the bottom line, including state-required reserves, etc. That would be a strange place to store money if one were trying to "hide" it (in plain sight).

"If you think education is expensive, you should try ignorance." Bok, Harvard U. President

my guess is that you too have some close relationship with the ones not wearing green; in fact, you might even work at the D.O., but you have a secretary.

[aubie84alum]

Tomorrow at 11:30 a.m. I'll be interested to see how many and who else shows up to this protest. I feel like I need to support my child's teacher on this one. From what I have seen, I'm not seeing the greedy money grubber that some on this forum are assuming. Maybe it's just me, but some of the people on this forum went a little overboard. I don't know everything that TM70 wrote, but some of the other people really went after that person.

After picking up my child today at school I found out that indeed the teachers are going to "impasse", proper spelling this time. Now it sounds like a waiting game for them. At least they don't have to wear those green shirts anymore.

FYI, they, the rich ones, not the ones in green declared impasse. We keep trying to negotiate. They only played with a pea under a shell. Same pea, same shell, making money on the interest while our cost of living goes up. Sad really.

[font=Palatino Linotype]I do appreciate all those who support and continue to support our green team. Thanks!!!

[aubie84alum]

No, I said the district does not want to make cuts again after five years of cutting. Giving more than a 5.25% raise would require cuts. I don't want to get caught in a trap where I'm trying to guess which cuts would be good to give a larger increase in pay to teachers, and inevitably to other staff, and so on. I just asked a proponent who suggested cuts in order to give the teachers a fatter paycheck to say where exactly they would cut.

School districts' reserves size is dictated by law. Folsom Cordova's minimum reserve is 3%. If anyone is looking at the reserves as money for salaries, they should understand that would be illegal, and would likely result in a state takeover at some point.
?? If the union weren't asking for a raise, the matter would be settled.

More than 65% of teachers have already received between 3% and 13% increase. The 5.25% offer would increase every teacher's salary including being placed on top of the already-increased salaries of that 65+%.

It's too bad you can't afford to live in Folsom, Aubie. There was a lot of discussion about making affordable housing available to teachers, firefighters and other public service workers. Unfortunately, Folsom values spun out of control. I couldn't afford my house if I were to want to purchase it now.

Cost of LIVING ADJUSTMENT to keep up with INFLATION is NOT a raise. Those levels, as I AM SURE you well know, were negotiated years ago and have nothing to do with this. Hey, let's add up all the COLA we didn't receive over the last several years, plus the cut we (were tricked into volunteering to take - with the vote schedule at 4 pm...well after school let out for spring break) took, compounded by the %age of loss of those monies across all employees from then to now. Oh yeah, let's not forget how you've been hanging on to our summer checks in violation of the laws governing employee pay, and claiming all that nice interest. I guess a lawyer could tell us, maybe you know one. How long has the district been involved in that practice? Just curious. Will you be showing us those sums?

Maybe you'll just entertain us once again with that lovely condescending, yet patronizing, sigh as if we who disagree with you are just the waste you'd scrape off your Prada pump.

[TM70]

That's a joke, right? I know for a fact that if something was different in their offer, it didn't make the evening news, and I didn't hear anything at our mtg Friday afternoon.

Easy! We're on the same side. Read this post with some sarcasm and it'll make more sense. Take a look at the docs on the district website and run some of those numbers. They added something. I don't know what, but it's something. Not sure if it's true, but it doesn't look official. Look at the dates on those numbers. Something weird is going on.

[TM70]

"If you think education is expensive, you should try ignorance." Bok, Harvard U. President

my guess is that you too have some close relationship with the ones not wearing green; in fact, you might even work at the D.O., but you have a secretary.

As far as I know, and I have been replying to her a lot...tessieca is Teresa Stanley, school board president.

[TM70]

Cost of LIVING ADJUSTMENT to keep up with INFLATION is NOT a raise. Those levels, as I AM SURE you well know, were negotiated years ago and have nothing to do with this. Hey, let's add up all the COLA we didn't receive over the last several years, plus the cut we (were tricked into volunteering to take - with the vote schedule at 4 pm...well after school let out for spring break) took, compounded by the %age of loss of those monies across all employees from then to now. Oh yeah, let's not forget how you've been hanging on to our summer checks in violation of the laws governing employee pay, and claiming all that nice interest. I guess a lawyer could tell us, maybe you know one. How long has the district been involved in that practice? Just curious. Will you be showing us those sums?

Maybe you'll just entertain us once again with that lovely condescending, yet patronizing, sigh as if we who disagree with you are just the waste you'd scrape off your Prada pump.

Damn!!! Not it's getting going. Now, it's on! Finally, I'm not alone in responding to all of this.

I mean, oh golly gee, I'm so happy that there are other people who are passionate and would like to express the same opinion as me. Yippity skippity...

[DougP]

Damn!!! Not it's getting going. Now, it's on! Finally, I'm not alone in responding to all of this.

I can see why you deleted all of your original posts. Unfortunately, your most recent diatribe is twice as bad as the original.

To be quite honest, all you've done is convince me that we have some very irrational people filling the ranks of teacher in this area.

You should read all of your contributions to this discussion again, and see if you really think they're an asset to your cause.

[DrKoz23]

TM...

You sound like one angry person. I'll second DougP... you haven't done anything to help your case. Actually deleting your posts said everything I needed to know.

[TM70]

TM...

You sound like one angry person. I'll second DougP... you haven't done anything to help your case. Actually deleting your posts said everything I needed to know.

Sigh...now everyone is calling me angry...I haven't helped my case.

Seriously, is that all you've got? "You sound angry...deleting your posts" You have to read between the lines. I deleted my early posts and look at this thing. It's gone through the roof. I never thought it would do that. I figured I would just walk away, but other people started posting instead of me doing almost everything. You've been against me and my stance the whole time, why change now?

Are you not reading any of my posts? I don't care...This is an outlet...an impartial arbiter is going to look at both sides of the case and make a non-binding suggestion at the outset. Should be in the next few weeks. I doubt that he or she is reading any of this...

Oh yeah, and I don't want to go on strike.

Just had to add that...