Sneaky Trick
________________________________________________________________________
Who’s Hiding the Administrator Raises?
At the August 6, 2018 Great Falls Public School District’s school board meeting, the trustees decided to delay a scheduled vote on a listed action item which would give school administrators a blanket 2% raise. After receiving citizen push back, the meeting turned contentious with administrators and board members rallying together to chastise the public for suggesting that administrator salaries were already too high relative to the poor local economy and wages in Great Falls.
In what has become commonplace, Superintendent Lacey was quick to insult the average citizens of Great Falls who pay her salary by saying:
“Part of the reason why (the average income in Great Falls) is low is a lack of the will of so many people in our community to go out and earn a bachelor’s degree, let alone a master’s degree, let alone the plus-30 credits and the college time that these people have spent in classrooms learning to get better”.
Is Superintendent Lacey really that arrogant? Are the taxpayers and citizens of Great Falls lazy, unmotivated good-for-nothings?
Trustee Jeff Gray gave his explanation of why a significant number of taxpaying citizens of Great Falls have voiced objections to the benevolent administrator raise offering:
“This is a misdirected animosity in this community against one particular group of folks that works very hard. Maybe they don’t work any harder than a crossing guard. In perspective, maybe they work equally as hard and they deserve that two percent raise equally as much as the teacher’s aid does.”
“This is a misdirected animosity in this community against one particular group of folks that works very hard. Maybe they don’t work any harder than a crossing guard. In perspective, maybe they work equally as hard and they deserve that two percent raise equally as much as the teacher’s aid does.” – GFPS Trustee Jeff Gray
For your information, trustee Gray, crossing guards, teacher’s aids and lot of other district employees make only a small fraction of what $100K administrators make. Maybe we should demand merit-based compensation. Maybe district administrators should be paid commensurate with measurable student results, and not because of time spent, or degrees accumulated.
Interestingly, you won’t find the continued Agenda Action Item for administrators salary raise on Monday’s agenda. You might think that the issued died, but you would be wrong. It is hidden in the Budget Action Item VII.I. for Monday’s meeting. According to a text message to a concerned citizen from Board of Trustees Chairman Jan Cahill:
Interestingly, you won’t find the continued Agenda Action Item for administrators salary raise on Monday’s agenda. You might think that the issued died, but you would be wrong. It is hidden in the Budget Action Item VII.I. for Monday’s meeting.
“The recommended 2018-2019 budget (on the agenda Monday night) contains all raises (2%) mentioned last week (the August 6th meeting), including administrators. Teachers receive a 2% raise as part of their negotiated contract from last year.”
Call it a dirty trick, or a slight-of-hand, or just a plain old flimflam, but remember it next spring when the district asks for another tax increase under the guise of, “It’s for the Kids”.
You can express your opinion on the district’s trickery by emailing the school board trustees, you know, the ones who are suppose to represent us, at schoolboard@gfps.k12.mt.us
________________________________________________________________________
In the political world it’s called an earmark. Just as sneaky, backhanded and dirty.
I don’t have a problem increasing salaries for teachers, aides, etc. They should get a cost of living raise like everyone else who hasn’t received a bump in their income for awhile. BUT, earmarking another increase for Lacey and her admin is just plain wrong.