According to reports filed with the state, Cave Creek Unified School District has more employees this fiscal year than last year. This, despite the supposed governing board cut of at LEAST 58.5 full time equivalent employees. This approved list included:| Claimed Teachers Cuts | |
| 1.5 | Elementary Band |
| 5 | Special Ed teachers |
| 15 | Schedule Adjustments |
| 0.5 | GLO |
| 2.5 | Instruction coaches |
| 1 | HS Sweeps Teachers |
| 25.5 | |
| Claimed Specialists Cuts | |
| 3.5 | .5 Librarians at seven schools |
| 2 | MS Counselors |
| 1 | HS Counselors |
| 0.5 | Elementary counselors |
| 7 | |
| Claimed Classified Cuts | |
| 1 | Nurse - One time |
| 1 | District Office |
| 1 | District Office |
| 1 | Director |
| 1 | Child Nutrition |
| 0.5 | Classified District Office |
| 1 | HS Copy Tech |
| 3 | Teacher aides |
| 5 | Special ed paras |
| 2 | HS Secretaries |
| 1 | HS Counselor secretary |
| ? | Kindergarten aides ? |
| 2 | MS Receptionists |
| ? | All other M&O aides ? |
| 0.5 | HS Library aide |
| 1 | Mechanic |
| 1 | Central Plant custodian |
| 1 | Nurse Tier 2 |
| 23 | |
| Claimed Administrator | |
| 1 | Director District Office |
| 1 | MS Assistant Principal |
| 1 | PIO |
| 3 |
You can see the full list here: Final Budget Reductions for 2009-2010
So one would think that after cutting 58.5 FTE’s that the district would have less than it did last year. Well, it doesn’t. According to the Arizona Department of Education CCUSD employs 613.5 FTE, up from 605.96 FTEs in FY 2009. That’s right, the district employs about 7.5 more employees than last year. Of course it also has about 100 or so less students. Here is the data:
| Actual | Approved | Expected | Actual | ||
| FY 2009 | FTE Cuts | 2010 | FY 2010 | Variance | |
| Administrative | 18.2 | 3 | 15.2 | 18 | 2.8 |
| Specialists | 21.6 | 7 | 14.6 | 22.1 | 7.5 |
| Teachers | 294.49 | 25.5 | 268.99 | 285.59 | 16.6 |
| Classified | 271.67 | 23 | 248.67 | 287.91 | 39.24 |
| Total | 605.96 | 58.5 | 547.46 | 613.6 | 66.14 |
Source: Arizona Department of Education
So in all the district is down .2 administrators, up .5 specialists, down 8.9 teachers, and up 16.24 classified employees. So what happened to the supposed 20% cut in administrative staff, the supposed cuts in librarians\counselors, or the 11% cut in M&O? In all the district seems to have 66.14 more employees than it should, based on the governing board approved cuts. Was this all backfilled by the ARRA funds or the budget carry over? If so, why aren’t these cuts again on the table, ahead of other cuts. Is it any wonder that almost every administrator in the district has an assistant and for the first time in a long time we have more classified staff than teachers.
Here is the district trend that shows we have more employees now than in 2007.
FY | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 |
| Students | 5856 | 5956 | 5881 | 5898 |
| Administrative | 18 | 18.2 | 19 | 19 |
| Specialists | 22.1 | 21.6 | 25.6 | 22.1 |
| Teachers | 285.59 | 294.49 | 294.29 | 289.25 |
| Classified | 287.91 | 271.67 | 290.65 | 272.38 |
| Total | 613.6 | 605.96 | 629.54 | 602.73 |
STR | 20.50 | 20.22 | 19.98 | 20.39 |
Now there is most likely some sort of reasonable explanation as to why every report the district files with the state is wrong. Someone will probably be dispatched to comment here on how this is WACKY! and that reports and data don’t actually mean what they say (these new classified positions are not teacher aides). Of course these reports also form the basis for the recent $1M in TEI funding that the district says it will receive next year (why weren’t we working to get the TEI money EVERY year?). Hope they are not too wrong.
One more thing. We keep hearing about the huge cuts in salary that our teachers are taking and how we can’t cut their pay for competitive reasons. Also found in those reports at the state are teacher’s average salaries.
| Teacher's Average Salary FY 2010 | ||
| Fountain Hills | $ 38,941 | |
| DVUSD | $ 40,006 | |
| Apache Junction | $ 40,529 | Career Ladder District |
| Scottsdale | $ 45,401 | Career Ladder District |
| PVSUD | $ 45,445 | |
| CCUSD | $ 46,037 | Career Ladder District |
Teacher’s average salary was down from $46592 in FY 2009 to $46037 in FY 2010, a 1.2% cut. So when you don’t hire new teachers, you layoff your lowest paid teachers, and every district employee moves up a step in the pay ladder, the savings are not as big as we could expect.
If you’d like to view these reports you can do so here. Feel free to tell us how we got it wrong
http://www.ade.az.gov/sder/publicreports.asp
Outrageous! Why are we letting them get away with this?
ReplyDeleteLife is too short to comment on most of what you posted here, Watch. but we can say this...
ReplyDeleteTEI is not funding the district can apply or "work" for beyond working toward teacher retention, which CCUSD has obviously done.
AZ Dept of Ed adds this funding to a school's budget based on a comparison to all other districts and the state as a whole. We are very fortunate to have a loyal AND experienced teaching team that sticks with us, even with an apathetic electorate and folks like you second-guessing budget details you do not even take the time to understand.
Along those same lines, you forgot the most important point of consideration when comparing average teacher salaries, and that's the average years of teaching experience for each district. Ain't it funny how the average years of experience goes up accordingly based on your comparison above (minus Fountain Hills, that is) ...
Fountain Hills 10.05
DVUSD 9.40
Apache Junction 9.55
Scottsdale 9.97
PVSUD 10.06
CCUSD 10.34
_________
obfuscation + character assasination = MORE HOOEY
At what point, as you run your smear campaign, do you admit a close relationship with someone who has taken out a packet to run for the board? Or will you pretend to be anything but a PAC at that point?
ReplyDeleteI actually have no problem with a Watch member or relative running for the board so long as they make their relationship known to the public both in their campaign. Plus, I think you will need to tag the relationship in the blog if you are going to play fair.
see comment at
ReplyDeletehttp://majiasblog.blogspot.com/2010/04/war-against-workers-public-teachers-in.html
Facing budget cuts, Cave Creek Unified School District Administration decided without prior community consultation to cut one of its two middle-schools [while simultaneously opening a selective prep academy, which is another sickening story].
All of the teachers currently at the middle school selected for elimination--Desert Arroyo Middle School--have been informed that they are "surplus" even though many of these teachers have been with the district for many, many years and have advanced degrees and outstanding professional records. This school has an excellent reputation and has been recognized year-year-year as an outstanding school by the state.
The teachers at the other middle school (Sonoran Trails), tend to be more recently hired, but are not going to be considered for riffing.
No even-handed, rationally-grounded, transparent evaluation of the merits of ALL middle school teachers is occurring.
This decision to prioritize one group of teachers, arbitrarily, over another defies reason.
This lack of reason is evident in the decision making about riffing at another school in the district as well.
The elementary school, Black Mountain Elementary School, has removed from consideration for riffing all teachers currently teaching multi-age classrooms, irrespective of their experience, teaching records, or advanced degrees and credentials.
Teachers who have been with the school for many years with master's degrees and proven records are being riffed over (relatively) inexperienced, newly-hired teachers.
One teacher who has been riffed has a master's degree, has taught multi-age, and is the only bilingual Spanish-speaking teacher at the school, which has a substantial recent-immigrant population of Spanish speaking kids. She alone is routinely assigned these kids because she can communicate with them and their parents. She is a proven teacher. Why is she being riffed?
Riffed teachers have been informed that they will have to re-apply for any positions funding becomes available for, which means salaries are open for re-negotiation.
The Wagner Act of 1935 was passed with the intent of giving workers protections from arbitrary workplace power. Public employees were granted the right to unionize and to engage in collective bargaining in the 1950s for the same reasons.
The recession is given those who would like to wield arbitrary, prejudicial and self-interested power over workers free reign.
If workers do not unite and take a stand NOW we will return quickly to the 19th century workplace in which workers had absolutely no rights beyond the contracted wage, which often failed to provide basic subsistence.
IT IS TIME FOR TEACHERS IN ARIZONA, AND PARTICULARLY WITHIN THE CAVE CREEK SCHOOL DISTRICT, TO TAKE A UNIFIED STAND AGAINST ARBITRARY AND OPAQUE DECISION MAKING!!!!!
Since CCSOS has members, are you saying you speak for all the members? You should put your name and not the organization.
ReplyDeleteIn reference to Majia's blog: Facing budget cuts, Cave Creek Unified School District Administration decided without prior community consultation to cut one of its two middle-schools
ReplyDeleteUnless you were under a rock last year, there was a lot of notice that DAMS was being considered for closure. Although it was kept open for another year, there was no secret at the time that if funding for the district continued to erode, it would have to be put in play again.
Why DAMS? 2 reasons - the main one being a decline in enrollment. From what I understand, DAMS student population is declining at a rate faster than any other school in the district. The second does have to do with safety. The campus is in dire need of repairs (i.e. a skylight fell in the gym last year). But, there are no funds for the repairs.
While DAMS has many outstanding teachers and deserves recognition, the budget cuts are taking its toll on the school. I can sympathize with your being disheartened at the way that the teachers have been riffed. However, protecting seniority and tenure in districts does not protect children from having teachers who are complacent on the job.
I believe that the district intends to place as many teachers as possible if closure goes forward.
Re: the poorly timed academies. Timing is everything when it comes to perception. Regardless of funding (which I understand for CSHS Prep is from an anonymous source), I do agree that the timing is poor. It just plain looks bad, although I don't think the intent was to do anything ill willed against the kids.
In fall 2009 DAMS student population decline was due to the closure scare and the decline in number of teachers per student. Fall 2008 was a change in boundaries that can be traced back to what administration did with the addition of former Christopher Verde School District.
ReplyDeleteThe decline was projected before the closure scare. There might have been additional decline due to the closure scare.
ReplyDeleteChristopher Verde kids would be going to STMS anyway. How would that have led to a decline in DAMS kids in 2008? Yes, DAMS kids in proportion to STMS kids might go down as STMS population went up, but it wouldn't have made the number of kids at DAMS go down. Am I missing something?
Either way, it shows that the decision to close DAMS was not sprung on the community.
@April 15, 2010 10:51 AM wrote...
ReplyDelete"The decline was projected before the closure scare. There might have been additional decline due to the closure scare."
This is not accurate. The Fall 2007 demographic report projected 1% growth for Fall 2008, 3.5% growth for Fall 2009, and 4.7% growth for Fall 2010, and showed growth at every level, every year.
The district controls the school boundaries and it is its job to make sure that they are set to make the best use of the facilities. If enrollment is fading at a particular school, change the boundaries accordingly. Have they purposely not modified the boundaries to let enrollment at DAMS languish?
The change in boundaries was prior to 2009. Who are you quoting? Can't be the District, they don't answer any questions at Board meetings?
ReplyDeleteWasn't the change in boundaries in 2005?
ReplyDeleteYes as I recall there was a majour boundary change affecting a large part of the district back in 2005. -And there were also changes that occurred more recently around 2007 when the former Christopher Verde School District (Troon and Rio Verde) was added to CCUSD that may not have been as widely announced.
ReplyDeleteStill no responsibility for the quote? I think you are right about 2005 that affected the Middle School DAMS>
ReplyDelete