The Big Day is Almost Here

Well, the big day is almost here and the Times has once again missed the real story.  In Saturday’s story Teachers Approve Contract it was reported that the Sartell-St. Stephens teachers union had approved a settlement that would cost the district an additional 11.5% in their budget over the next two years (5.75% per year).  Everything sounds well and good until you turn to the second page of the article.

Budget Cuts Should Not be Required….We hope? 

Importantly we hear a school board member quoted as saying …..the contract should not require the district to make budget reductions to pay for it”.  This is amazing that this board member reports that he doesn’t think the union deal will require cuts to the budget and programming, but that it is apparently a possibility.  Let that sink in—The district could and may have settled a contract that could result in a need for budget reductions.  In other words a contract that, in order to support union negotiated wage and benefit increases, could require cutting teachers and or programs.   

This is exactly the problem the BoardWatcher has been talking about with regard to Sauk Rapids-Rice.   The districts bend to union demands, knowing that in the end they can beg taxpayers and the State to pick up the slack for their poor negotiations.  Apparently union negotiators care so much about our kids that they would actually negotiate increases in salaries and benefits that could jeopardize the district’s budget and programming. 

We predict the next levy request in this area will be coming up in Sartell to cover looks like an unsustainable situation.  Get ready Sartell.  You’re It.

Sauk Rapids and St. Cloud Negotiations on Hold 

And guess what?  Just as the BoardWatcher pointed out, the SRR salary negotiations are on hold until after the levy question.  The times reports:  “St. Cloud and Sauk Rapids Rice have both had teacher negotiations on hold while administrators and school staff and supporters concentrate on getting voters to approve property tax referendums Tuesday.”  Or as we put it previously…….The full court press is on.

Lets review.   The BoardWatcher has repeatedly pointed out that with or without passage of the $2.8M levy the current escalating labor costs (teachers, Paraprofessionals and unlicensed staff) are unsustainable.  Costs are escalating at 5% and revenues are increasing at just 1.5%.  It is a simple mathematical fact that this is unsustainable. 

We believe that, passage of the levy without freezing the existing 5% labor-escalation rates will leave us $5.6M out of pocket, cutting teachers and deficit spending within two years.  With or without the levy the current cost escalation rates are unsustainable for even 2 years.

Now the Times has confirmed our worst fears, that union contracts will not be settled until after the levy question Tuesday.  Sartell has now given away a nearly 6% per year increase, nearly double the rate of inflation.  Is there any chance that our SRR union caretakers will put the “children” first and go for less.  If the levy is passed we can bank on our union guard dogs to go for an even bigger, yet more unsustainable, grab for the chips.  Under this scenario the levy could get out-stripped within less than two years.  Taxpayers should be asking the district how long the levy will provide a solution.  As one commenter put it “….not long”.

Two Options:

 1)  Simply vote no and send a strong message to the State, the District and the Union that we are unwilling to pick up the slack for their obligations.   Given that we will again likely be cutting teachers and programs within at most two years it would be better to simple face this reality now and start solving the real problems.  State funding and strangling union contracts.  Voting for the levy will simply reinforce the current incentives and status quo that have lead to districts allowing bloated costs and the state refusing to pay for it.  The unions and the State have drawn a line in the sand for a tug-o-war and our kids are the rope.  We need to say enough.

2)  As a compromise position we have also recommended a yes vote with the following commitment from the district.  The district would negotiate a salary freeze that would last the lesser of three years or until the State funding formula is “fixed”.   Further district programs and labor costs would need to be sustainably aligned.  Our position cannot be made sustainable, even in the short term without cost reductions other than cutting teacher.  Why do we cut teachers and provide raises to the remaining staff as if all were well.  This illustrates the true strangle hold union contracts have on our district’s ability to manage labor and costs. 

Our plan would allow the district to put more teachers in the class rooms and replenish the savings account.  If the State funding formula is reformed in less than three years the salary freeze would be lifted and the district would be in sound position.  If the State funding formula is not reformed the salary freeze would still be lifted at the end of three years and the district would have more teachers, a replenished savings account and could sustain another 2 years without cuts or deficit spending.  At the end of the day this approach would provide a sustainable position with increasing teacher numbers for thje next 5 to 6 years. 

Unfortunatly as we all know, no such idea has been put forth publicly by the district or union negotiators.  We fully expect the district to maintain the unsustainable status quo position.

See you at the polls….