It was stated in the May paper that in order to balance the school budget, one of the cuts that had to be made was in the operations/maintenance dept., resulting in a savings of $134,000. This affected 7 full-time employees, 5 of which were custodians that were cut to part-time and loss of benefits. Now you might say only 5, but they were head of households with families to support and after putting in 10 plus years will have to make a big adjustment in their living or look elsewhere. They provided your children with a clean, safe environment and are expected to do the same job with less hours and realizing their hard work and commitment doesn’t matter anymore. They also agreed not to take a pay raise for the last year and this year just to hang on. Can the administration say the same? It also stated $40,651 was taken out of a surplus in the operating/maintenance fund for upgrades in technology for the middle school. If there was a surplus why did cuts need to be made?
Also a H.S. asst. principal/athletic director was cut for a savings of $62,400, but then in the July paper another athletic director, only one position was hired at what cost and was that the only replacement? Then $163,000 was used from the capital expenditure fund to put in a new phone system REALLY? Leaving only $20,000,000 hope there won’t be any big expense coming up where you would have to ask for a millage vote.
Finally in the August paper there were several new hires approved, one of them being an academic intervention position, what does that entail and where is the money coming from for these positions? It seems you only have to balance the budget at one point and then you start spending again.
A concerned tax payer