Pay freezes and superintendents....

I have nothing personal against Brian Coleman, the Cary District 26 superintendent.  I know that may be hard to believe as I publicly called for him to be fired at the Community Engagement Committee meeting last week.  I was a little emotional, I admit.  In fact, I almost came to tears talking about my 2nd grade son who doesn't like school.  The fact that there is no longer art, music or gym in the grade schools doesn't help his situation.  When it comes to my kids, I get a little more emotional than someone perhaps watching this debacle from the sideline.

At the last board meeting, a Cary resident stood up to publicly defend Brian Coleman, saying that he was disgusted by the anger directed at the superintendent.  No doubt, he was referring to me, among others, who have taken public swipes at the superintendent.  He talked about how Brian Coleman was an outstanding teacher for his daughter.  That may be true; I personally have no knowledge of Brian Coleman outside of his superintendency.  He may have been a fabulous teacher.  I don't know.

This is really not about Brian Coleman, however.  It is about the Board of Education and what they say and do.  This is about the inconsistencies in actions.

But let's be clear:  in this time of financial trouble, the Board of Education has been very generous to Brian Coleman.

This year, Brian Coleman's contract was renewed with the school board.  He will continue to be our superintendent until June, 2016.

According to reports, Brian Coleman "voluntarily" took a pay freeze for 2011-12.  Therefore, his base salary continues to be a little over $147,000.  With the other benefits he receives, his salary is boosted to $181,000 or so.

But is this really a pay freeze?

For the next four years of his tenure in District 26 beyond this school year, Brian Coleman's salary will be tied to the consumer price index.  This means that he could receive a boost next year.  Who knows?  The CPI for 2010 was 1.6%.  Which means that Brian Coleman would have received a 1.6% raise.  If the CPI for 2011 is 3.6%, that means the superintendent gets a 3.6% raise (If the CPI declines, does his salary decline, too?  We don't know, as the contract specifics were not made public).

Plus, according to his contract, he can get 4% extra each year if he completes some performance-based goals.

That means that Brian Coleman in actuality is eligible for close to $6000 in raises each year outside of CPI "adjustments." Even though he "voluntarily" contributes 10% to his board-paid health insurance, the superintendent can actually get pay raises each year.

Ooops.  Not actually a "freeze" is it?

The kicker is this: the teachers have offered a pay freeze as well.  In fact, they have offered a "hard freeze," meaning there is no increase based on CPI.  There is no step increase either.  (This was the situation with the offer made on August 9.  This may have changed, as the CEA has since offered another proposal.  But the details are not yet public.)

When the teachers offered that pay freeze, the board responded that a pay "freeze" is not a "cut."  They need cuts, they keep telling the teachers and the public.  Brian Coleman himself stated at a Finance Committee meeting in February, "We have to live within our budget." 

So why was a pseudo-freeze acceptable for Brian Coleman's contract?  After all, a "freeze is not a cut" they keep saying.  And as we have seen, Brian Coleman really isn't experiencing a pay freeze, after all.

There is no consistency on the part of the Board of Education.  The words and explanations that are offered by the board are not backed up by facts.

Nor are they backed up by actions.

And that is the problem.

The Rant: Will the Board Accept the New Offer to Sit Down?

As most of you have heard by now, the Cary Educational Association has submitted another offer to the Board of Education.  As was abundantly clear on Monday, the teachers are still willing to sit down at the table.  The problem:  Is the Board of Education willing?  I am not too sure.  That is why we need to keep up the pressure.

Here is another edition of The Rant.  In this episode:  viewer mail, pseudonyms and the Community Engagement Committee meeting.



Let the board know that you want them to sit back down and work it out with the teachers. Before it is too late.

Is District 26 serious about cutting (or does this philosophy only apply to teachers)?

Cary District 26 claims they do not have money.  They wanted the teachers to come up with $2 million in cuts.  And the teachers did that on August 9.  But still no deal.  The board refused to continue the negotiations and, instead, implemented their "last, best offer."

From the public opinion survey, it is clear that people think administration should endure cuts as well.  Since closing two schools, what has happened to the administrative center and those jobs there?  Let's look at the way things were in the Spring of 2009.  This was back when District 26 had six schools.  How many people were working in the Administrative office in 2009?  Twenty*  (Click on the link to see an archived page from 2009)

How many now? Nineteen

What's the difference?   Currently, Brian Coleman has one less administrative assistant. The Curriculum Coordinator position was removed as was the position of Accountant.  The Administrative Assistant to Curriculum and Special Education was moved to become Executive Administrative Assistant to the Director of Special Services.  However, three positions were added in this time:  Finance Coordinator, Payroll Clerk and receptionist in the Finance and Operations Office.

In addition, the board was able to hire 2 assistant principals for the Junior High, plus allocate $15,000 to buy 546 4-year-old used computers from another district.  Good deal on the computers, perhaps.  But should the district really be spending like this when they are in a "dire" financial situation?

Chris Jenner and Julie Jette voted against the hiring of the two administrators.  Jette thought it was more important to work on getting class sizes down.

Jenner voiced support for cutting administration.  "In the last six years our student population has gone down by 20 percent, at what point do you change the structure of the administration," he said after the vote.

Now, I may have said many things about Jenner on this site, but on this point, he was right.  The administration needs to be restructured so that less money is spent there.

It just doesn't seem like that is happening in a substantive way.

Especially since the teachers are still willing to negotiate.


* In 2009, the speech pathologist was listed on the Administration and staff support page.  She is still employed by the district and was never considered an administrator.