2 Pro-Bonders Fall!!

[shermdog]

[quote name="mat" post="1018825" timestamp="1308246095"]
[quote author=shermdog link=topic=84302.msg1018814#msg1018814 date=1308240915]


I have a feeling that Smitty is in Austin working to "fix the budget".  I just got this email from a teacher organization, and if it passes you will not need to worry about passing a bond.  There will not be anyone to teach the kids.

Here is a synopsis of the bills:

Here is how [b]Senate Bill 8[/b] would hurt teachers and public schools:

    Cuts teacher salaries in two ways:

    Allows districts to order furloughs of teachers and administrators for as many as six non-instructional days and reduce salaries accordingly.

    Permanently repeals the 2009 salary floor for returning teachers. This would allow districts to reduce pay for all teachers.

    Freezes the state minimum salary schedule at 2010-11 levels.

    Changes the deadline for notification of contract non-renewal from the 45th day before the end of instruction to the last day on which spring standardized tests can be administered. The same change applies to notification of termination of probationary teachers. This would give laid-off teachers less time to find jobs for the next school year.

    Allows school districts to declare financial emergencies for purposes of imposing reductions in force at any time and eliminates seniority as a factor in determining dismissals when RIFs are implemented.

    Repeals a terminated teacher’s right to a hearing before an independent hearing officer.

    Adds another provision for districts to seek a waiver from the 22-1 class size cap for K-4.

[b]And then HB 17:[/b]

House Bill 17 by Rep. Bill Callegari of Houston, which also is on Thursday’s House calendar, would repeal the state minimum salary schedule for teachers, counselors, nurses and librarians. This would allow districts to set their own pay levels for all teachers, as long as they are paid $27,320.


Read into that that a 20 year teacher could be paid $27,320.  WOW!

Is that responsible?

As I can see it, Smitty and the legislature is against [b]KIDS, TEACHERS[/b] and [b]SCHOOLS.[/b]

Perception is reality.  I feel sorry for the students and residents of Nederland with people like this fighting against you.  To me the CARE stance is one of irresponsibility and selfishness.  The kids you educate today, are being prepared for jobs that do not even exist yet. 

It makes me mad, when someone who has already reaped the benefits of an education, refuses to pay it forward and educate the next generation.



 
[/quote]

It's disturbing to know some of the Bills/ideas that are floating around but it is too soon to get worked up about the details because not all of it has a chance to pass. At least I hope not.
[/quote]

On the floor today.  Smitty must be dancing a jig.

[PoppaBearstarr]

[quote name="shermdog" post="1018814" timestamp="1308240915"]


I have a feeling that Smitty is in Austin working to "fix the budget".  I just got this email from a teacher organization, and if it passes you will not need to worry about passing a bond.  There will not be anyone to teach the kids.

Here is a synopsis of the bills:

Here is how [b]Senate Bill 8[/b] would hurt teachers and public schools:

   Cuts teacher salaries in two ways:

   Allows districts to order furloughs of teachers and administrators for as many as six non-instructional days and reduce salaries accordingly.

   Permanently repeals the 2009 salary floor for returning teachers. This would allow districts to reduce pay for all teachers.

   Freezes the state minimum salary schedule at 2010-11 levels.

   Changes the deadline for notification of contract non-renewal from the 45th day before the end of instruction to the last day on which spring standardized tests can be administered. The same change applies to notification of termination of probationary teachers. This would give laid-off teachers less time to find jobs for the next school year.

   Allows school districts to declare financial emergencies for purposes of imposing reductions in force at any time and eliminates seniority as a factor in determining dismissals when RIFs are implemented.

   Repeals a terminated teacher’s right to a hearing before an independent hearing officer.

   Adds another provision for districts to seek a waiver from the 22-1 class size cap for K-4.

[b]And then HB 17:[/b]

House Bill 17 by Rep. Bill Callegari of Houston, which also is on Thursday’s House calendar, would repeal the state minimum salary schedule for teachers, counselors, nurses and librarians. This would allow districts to set their own pay levels for all teachers, as long as they are paid $27,320.


Read into that that a 20 year teacher could be paid $27,320.  WOW!

Is that responsible?

As I can see it, Smitty and the legislature is against [b]KIDS, TEACHERS[/b] and [b]SCHOOLS.[/b]

Perception is reality.  I feel sorry for the students and residents of Nederland with people like this fighting against you.  To me the CARE stance is one of irresponsibility and selfishness.  The kids you educate today, are being prepared for jobs that do not even exist yet.  

[b][size=16pt]It makes me mad, when someone who has already reaped the benefits of an education, refuses to pay it forward and educate the next generation.[/size][/b]



 
[/quote]


SO TRUE..... But are you sure he actually finished his education..

[smitty]

Email from a teacher's organization?!  Well -- I guess this won't be slanted in one direction!!  Unbiased, huh?  LOL!!   Give me an independent study of it and we'll talk.   ;)


[quote name="shermdog" post="1018814" timestamp="1308240915"]


I have a feeling that Smitty is in Austin working to "fix the budget".  I just got this email from a teacher organization, and if it passes you will not need to worry about passing a bond.  There will not be anyone to teach the kids.

Here is a synopsis of the bills:

Here is how [b]Senate Bill 8[/b] would hurt teachers and public schools:

   Cuts teacher salaries in two ways:

   Allows districts to order furloughs of teachers and administrators for as many as six non-instructional days and reduce salaries accordingly.

   Permanently repeals the 2009 salary floor for returning teachers. This would allow districts to reduce pay for all teachers.

   Freezes the state minimum salary schedule at 2010-11 levels.

   Changes the deadline for notification of contract non-renewal from the 45th day before the end of instruction to the last day on which spring standardized tests can be administered. The same change applies to notification of termination of probationary teachers. This would give laid-off teachers less time to find jobs for the next school year.

   Allows school districts to declare financial emergencies for purposes of imposing reductions in force at any time and eliminates seniority as a factor in determining dismissals when RIFs are implemented.

   Repeals a terminated teacher’s right to a hearing before an independent hearing officer.

   Adds another provision for districts to seek a waiver from the 22-1 class size cap for K-4.

[b]And then HB 17:[/b]

House Bill 17 by Rep. Bill Callegari of Houston, which also is on Thursday’s House calendar, would repeal the state minimum salary schedule for teachers, counselors, nurses and librarians. This would allow districts to set their own pay levels for all teachers, as long as they are paid $27,320.


Read into that that a 20 year teacher could be paid $27,320.  WOW!

Is that responsible?

As I can see it, Smitty and the legislature is against [b]KIDS, TEACHERS[/b] and [b]SCHOOLS.[/b]

Perception is reality.  I feel sorry for the students and residents of Nederland with people like this fighting against you.  To me the CARE stance is one of irresponsibility and selfishness.  The kids you educate today, are being prepared for jobs that do not even exist yet.  

It makes me mad, when someone who has already reaped the benefits of an education, refuses to pay it forward and educate the next generation.



 
[/quote]

[smitty]

But MY beliefs are consistent with the majority (75-77% if I recall right) that opposed the first bond issue.  Now, for those here:  Gotta wonder how many are employed by the NISD?    ???

[quote name="The-NHS" post="1018804" timestamp="1308238688"]
[quote author=smitty link=topic=84302.msg1018712#msg1018712 date=1308178573]
When a bond passes you have no choice but to pay the tax.  A true believer would figure what his portion would have been and send that amount.  But since you haven't that means you are really not that concerned.  That's the reason you have no answers but to raise everyone's taxes.  Pass the bond and I'll pay the taxes.  Wow! That's brilliant!!   ;)


[quote author=The-NHS link=topic=84302.msg1018544#msg1018544 date=1308096299]
[quote author=smitty link=topic=84302.msg1018542#msg1018542 date=1308095773]
You, like many, are missing the point.  If it's such a critical need and you are truly concerned then you would do YOUR part by sending your part of the bond money.  Talking the talk but not walking the walk!      ::)
[/quote]

Lol...this is the worst you have yet to reply with. Sending one check in doesn't solve anything. Typical small minded thinking you are repeatedly guilty of. Like I said I will gladly send a check when the bond is passed.
[/quote]
[/quote]

[i]"A true believer would figure what his portion would have been and send that amount."[/i] - This isn't church smitty. I don't tithe to the city of nederland because I believe in building new schools. I've stated my "portion" and said twice I will be happy to pay it once the bond is passed.

Your beliefs differ from everyone else on this thread because you propose cuts to the athletic budget....which has nothing to do with a bond. So right off the bat your argument doesn't even match your thread title. You propose cuts to extra-curriculars to only maintain facilities. Everyone else on this thread IS NOT TALKING ABOUT MAINTAINING. Lets repeat that. Everyone else on this thread IS NOT TALKING ABOUT MAINTAINING. If I spray perfume on a turd...it will still smell...and look...like a turd. They are talking about building new facilities (schools) for our students through a bond. I realize your reply will ultimately suck in nature but once again I eagerly await it.

It has already been said that spending has been reduced in various departments and that we have not had to let any teachers go. Maybe with this reduced spending we can hire a maintenance worker to please your soul. Please reply with a relevant and intelligent post and not JUST a question.
[/quote]

[smitty]

throwing money at something doesn't solve the problem either.  But that's what prevails here.  Just trying to get people to think here that there may be a different way.  But hardly any good suggestions yet from the pro-bonders.  But that's what forums are for.  To discuss solutions.


[quote name="mat" post="1018761" timestamp="1308227960"]
Smitty, your view of education is skewed. It’s not all about reduced spending. Sadly, districts have had to become competitive for student enrollment for operating funds. Anything they can do to attract and maintain enrollment and attendance is necessary to just to maintain state funding. Cutting many of the programs you propose will result in a loss of enrollment which results in a lack of funds. It’s counter productive. Kinda like McDonalds cutting fries from the menu to reducing costs.
[/quote]

[PN-G bamatex]

[quote name="smitty" post="1018896" timestamp="1308268153"]
But MY beliefs are consistent with the majority (75-77% if I recall right) that opposed the first bond issue.  Now, for those here:  Gotta wonder how many are employed by the NISD?    ???

[quote author=The-NHS link=topic=84302.msg1018804#msg1018804 date=1308238688]
[quote author=smitty link=topic=84302.msg1018712#msg1018712 date=1308178573]
When a bond passes you have no choice but to pay the tax.  A true believer would figure what his portion would have been and send that amount.  But since you haven't that means you are really not that concerned.  That's the reason you have no answers but to raise everyone's taxes.  Pass the bond and I'll pay the taxes.  Wow! That's brilliant!!   ;)


[quote author=The-NHS link=topic=84302.msg1018544#msg1018544 date=1308096299]
[quote author=smitty link=topic=84302.msg1018542#msg1018542 date=1308095773]
You, like many, are missing the point.  If it's such a critical need and you are truly concerned then you would do YOUR part by sending your part of the bond money.  Talking the talk but not walking the walk!      ::)
[/quote]

Lol...this is the worst you have yet to reply with. Sending one check in doesn't solve anything. Typical small minded thinking you are repeatedly guilty of. Like I said I will gladly send a check when the bond is passed.
[/quote]
[/quote]

[i]"A true believer would figure what his portion would have been and send that amount."[/i] - This isn't church smitty. I don't tithe to the city of nederland because I believe in building new schools. I've stated my "portion" and said twice I will be happy to pay it once the bond is passed.

Your beliefs differ from everyone else on this thread because you propose cuts to the athletic budget....which has nothing to do with a bond. So right off the bat your argument doesn't even match your thread title. You propose cuts to extra-curriculars to only maintain facilities. Everyone else on this thread IS NOT TALKING ABOUT MAINTAINING. Lets repeat that. Everyone else on this thread IS NOT TALKING ABOUT MAINTAINING. If I spray perfume on a turd...it will still smell...and look...like a turd. They are talking about building new facilities (schools) for our students through a bond. I realize your reply will ultimately suck in nature but once again I eagerly await it.

It has already been said that spending has been reduced in various departments and that we have not had to let any teachers go. Maybe with this reduced spending we can hire a maintenance worker to please your soul. Please reply with a relevant and intelligent post and not JUST a question.
[/quote]
[/quote]

Ah, but are you sure they opposed the bond on the same grounds as you? Perhaps they were opposed to the bond based on the renovations as the stadium (I recall a great deal of controversy surrounding that particular part of the bond) and not the repairs to the schools.

[dawgnut]

Enlighten us smitty you are always talking about other ways to handle the school finance situation, give us one alternative that has been tried in the USA that has worked successfully in a school district as large or larger than NISD. You always talk about the pro-bond folks coming up with a solution, let's hear one from you. But I forget, you only have questions not answers.

[mat]

[quote name="smitty" post="1018897" timestamp="1308268329"]
throwing money at something doesn't solve the problem either.  But that's what prevails here.  Just trying to get people to think here that there may be a different way.  But hardly any good suggestions yet from the pro-bonders.  But that's what forums are for.  To discuss solutions.


[quote author=mat link=topic=84302.msg1018761#msg1018761 date=1308227960]
Smitty, your view of education is skewed. It’s not all about reduced spending. Sadly, districts have had to become competitive for student enrollment for operating funds. Anything they can do to attract and maintain enrollment and attendance is necessary to just to maintain state funding. Cutting many of the programs you propose will result in a loss of enrollment which results in a lack of funds. It’s counter productive. Kinda like McDonalds cutting fries from the menu to reducing costs.
[/quote]
[/quote]

I can offer you several bond options with supportive reasoning but I am certain you would not acknowledge any of it so I’m not going to waste my time.

You do have a point though. You weren’t the lone opposition during the last bond. There were a lot of Nederland folk that weren’t on board.

[smitty]

No problem;  You start with looking at extra-curricular activities.  Cut/eliminate where you can.  Cut salary's of administrators.  Cut administration positions if possible.  Here's a novel approach:  Eliminate all full-time people in the maintenance department.  Contract out as needed.  This way we don't have to pay for retirement and other benefits.  Bet you never thought of that one!  Business' are contracting out all the time.  So why not NISD?  Now your turn!!  

[quote name="dawgnut" post="1018916" timestamp="1308274032"]
Enlighten us smitty you are always talking about other ways to handle the school finance situation, give us one alternative that has been tried in the USA that has worked successfully in a school district as large or larger than NISD. You always talk about the pro-bond folks coming up with a solution, let's hear one from you. But I forget, you only have questions not answers.
[/quote]

[smitty]

Before you raise taxes, you cut first!  Give me some cuts then I'll listen to any thing you got to say about bonds!


[quote name="mat" post="1018918" timestamp="1308274884"]
[quote author=smitty link=topic=84302.msg1018897#msg1018897 date=1308268329]
throwing money at something doesn't solve the problem either.  But that's what prevails here.  Just trying to get people to think here that there may be a different way.  But hardly any good suggestions yet from the pro-bonders.  But that's what forums are for.  To discuss solutions.


[quote author=mat link=topic=84302.msg1018761#msg1018761 date=1308227960]
Smitty, your view of education is skewed. It’s not all about reduced spending. Sadly, districts have had to become competitive for student enrollment for operating funds. Anything they can do to attract and maintain enrollment and attendance is necessary to just to maintain state funding. Cutting many of the programs you propose will result in a loss of enrollment which results in a lack of funds. It’s counter productive. Kinda like McDonalds cutting fries from the menu to reducing costs.
[/quote]
[/quote]

I can offer you several bond options with supportive reasoning but I am certain you would not acknowledge any of it so I’m not going to waste my time.

You do have a point though. You weren’t the lone opposition during the last bond. There were a lot of Nederland folk that weren’t on board.

[/quote]

[outanup]

Contracting out Maintenance? Do you realize what it would cost if contractors were called out whenever a ballast went out, or a convection oven went out in the cafeteria? Or better yet call out a local plumber everytime the sewer backs up, or someone smells gas. Im sure it would be much cheaper for a liscensed AC company to repair 500 window units than to have one AC man do it.LOL!!!

[mat]

[quote name="smitty" post="1018928" timestamp="1308276300"]
Before you raise taxes, you cut first!  Give me some cuts then I'll listen to any thing you got to say about bonds!


[quote author=mat link=topic=84302.msg1018918#msg1018918 date=1308274884]
[quote author=smitty link=topic=84302.msg1018897#msg1018897 date=1308268329]
throwing money at something doesn't solve the problem either.  But that's what prevails here.  Just trying to get people to think here that there may be a different way.  But hardly any good suggestions yet from the pro-bonders.  But that's what forums are for.  To discuss solutions.


[quote author=mat link=topic=84302.msg1018761#msg1018761 date=1308227960]
Smitty, your view of education is skewed. It’s not all about reduced spending. Sadly, districts have had to become competitive for student enrollment for operating funds. Anything they can do to attract and maintain enrollment and attendance is necessary to just to maintain state funding. Cutting many of the programs you propose will result in a loss of enrollment which results in a lack of funds. It’s counter productive. Kinda like McDonalds cutting fries from the menu to reducing costs.
[/quote]
[/quote]

I can offer you several bond options with supportive reasoning but I am certain you would not acknowledge any of it so I’m not going to waste my time.

You do have a point though. You weren’t the lone opposition during the last bond. There were a lot of Nederland folk that weren’t on board.

[/quote]
[/quote]

Smitty, please pay attention. NISD has already made budget reductions in the last few years. Once they know how much the state funding will get cut they will make additonal reductions accordingly. They are like all the other districts. There funding is not clear.

[Guest Penny]

Smitty is right on about contracting some maintenance activities, he is right, that is a lower cost way to maintain facilities.  He's right about the reduced overhead that you experience when you don't have full time personnel on the books.  That is not a popular position, but it is a fact.  However, Smitty, we can make these cuts, contract maintenance, have parents drive their kids to sporting events to avoid fuel, reduce administrators salaries, eliminate administration through retirements and attrition, which essentially comes down to have other people step up and take on more leadership and responsibility, which can happen actually with improved results.  Smitty, I have personally implemented and seen positive results from the very actions you are discussing.  But at the same time, I've also had to make multi-million dollar decisions over maintaining with cost, or replacing with capital, critical facilities for the long term good of an objective.  You cannot sway my opinion here.  I know where you are coming from, I've navigated this maze many times before.  I'm sorry, you can nitpick the semantics and the minute details of what is going on and at times, you are right, but the bottom line is the long term need and the big picture, REQUIRES a bond to reduce the cost of running this school district.  When it is said that a bond will reduce taxes, that is the point, paying for old broken facilities versus addressing them with a financed long term solution, is the most financially prudent decision.  A bond WILL REDUCE COSTS, which EQUATES to LOWER TAXES.... that's right Smitty, LOWER TAXES.  This isn't ignorant kids WANTING things, this is the decision of professionals who have analyzed the situation.  Can we make cuts, ABSOLUTELY, will it address the problem, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO.  The question is, do you want to address the issue, or make a point about how you personally think things should be done, at the expense of ELIMINATING this community.  I'm hearing your points, and yes, people in authority should listen to the ideas you have, but ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY, what you are suggesting, while at the heart good ideas, they WILL NOT address the LONG TERM needs of this community.  This is not up for discussion.  If the people of this community fall for the propoganda that killed the first bond, then we deserve to be buried with other short sighted failures from history.  There will be no upgrades of our sports or extra-cirricular facilities in the next bond.  It will be about building new schools.  Any upgrades to sporting facilities should be separately voted upon.  

[smitty]

Good post!!


[quote name="Penny" post="1018945" timestamp="1308279649"]
Smitty is right on about contracting some maintenance activities, he is right, that is a lower cost way to maintain facilities.  He's right about the reduced overhead that you experience when you don't have full time personnel on the books.  That is not a popular position, but it is a fact.  However, Smitty, we can make these cuts, contract maintenance, have parents drive their kids to sporting events to avoid fuel, reduce administrators salaries, eliminate administration through retirements and attrition, which essentially comes down to have other people step up and take on more leadership and responsibility, which can happen actually with improved results.  Smitty, I have personally implemented and seen positive results from the very actions you are discussing.  But at the same time, I've also had to make multi-million dollar decisions over maintaining with cost, or replacing with capital, critical facilities for the long term good of an objective.  You cannot sway my opinion here.  I know where you are coming from, I've navigated this maze many times before.  I'm sorry, you can nitpick the semantics and the minute details of what is going on and at times, you are right, but the bottom line is the long term need and the big picture, REQUIRES a bond to reduce the cost of running this school district.  When it is said that a bond will reduce taxes, that is the point, paying for old broken facilities versus addressing them with a financed long term solution, is the most financially prudent decision.  A bond WILL REDUCE COSTS, which EQUATES to LOWER TAXES.... that's right Smitty, LOWER TAXES.  This isn't ignorant kids WANTING things, this is the decision of professionals who have analyzed the situation.  Can we make cuts, ABSOLUTELY, will it address the problem, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO.  The question is, do you want to address the issue, or make a point about how you personally think things should be done, at the expense of ELIMINATING this community.  I'm hearing your points, and yes, people in authority should listen to the ideas you have, but ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY, what you are suggesting, while at the heart good ideas, they WILL NOT address the LONG TERM needs of this community.  This is not up for discussion.  If the people of this community fall for the propoganda that killed the first bond, then we deserve to be buried with other short sighted failures from history.  There will be no upgrades of our sports or extra-cirricular facilities in the next bond.  It will be about building new schools.  Any upgrades to sporting facilities should be separately voted upon.  
[/quote]

[smitty]

PS - How much do "free" lunches cost the school district?  There are ALWAYS areas of cutting that can be discussed!!


[quote name="dawgnut" post="1018916" timestamp="1308274032"]
Enlighten us smitty you are always talking about other ways to handle the school finance situation, give us one alternative that has been tried in the USA that has worked successfully in a school district as large or larger than NISD. You always talk about the pro-bond folks coming up with a solution, let's hear one from you. But I forget, you only have questions not answers.
[/quote]

[Guest Penny]

Few solutions have ever been met without COMPROMISE.  Our community has to come together on common ground and agree on what's best for all of us.  I REFUSE to believe that we are so separated that a constructive pathforward can't be agreed to.  There's too much at stake here.  I strongly believe that we must invest right now, but I agree that we must also conserve and look to reduce costs where we can.  It is happening as the many posts have stated, and where it has happened, it should continue and we should look for more ways to be more efficient.  What happens in industry cannot be ignored in education.  America is still around because we are the MOST PRODUCTIVE country in the world.  When we cease to be, we will go by the wayside.  Reduce as much spending as possible, seek input from industry that has been successful at reducing costs... but at the end of the day, we still need to invest in our future.  And that means building new schools, which in the long run WILL reduce our TAXES and the cost of owning property in Nederland.  I think Smitty knows this, I think CARE knows this, it's not a secret, we need to come together and root out the folks who DO NOT have our communities best interest in mind.  The right people in charge and the opposite view need to sit at a table and hash this out, get it done.

[mat]

[quote name="smitty" post="1018956" timestamp="1308283002"]
PS - How much do "free" lunches cost the school district?  There are ALWAYS areas of cutting that can be discussed!!


[quote author=dawgnut link=topic=84302.msg1018916#msg1018916 date=1308274032]
Enlighten us smitty you are always talking about other ways to handle the school finance situation, give us one alternative that has been tried in the USA that has worked successfully in a school district as large or larger than NISD. You always talk about the pro-bond folks coming up with a solution, let's hear one from you. But I forget, you only have questions not answers.
[/quote]
[/quote]

Nothing. Free lunches are not funded by districts.

[mat]

[quote name="Penny" post="1018945" timestamp="1308279649"]
Smitty is right on about contracting some maintenance activities, he is right, that is a lower cost way to maintain facilities.  He's right about the reduced overhead that you experience when you don't have full time personnel on the books.  That is not a popular position, but it is a fact.  However, Smitty, we can make these cuts, contract maintenance, have parents drive their kids to sporting events to avoid fuel, reduce administrators salaries, eliminate administration through retirements and attrition, which essentially comes down to have other people step up and take on more leadership and responsibility, which can happen actually with improved results.  Smitty, I have personally implemented and seen positive results from the very actions you are discussing.  But at the same time, I've also had to make multi-million dollar decisions over maintaining with cost, or replacing with capital, critical facilities for the long term good of an objective.  You cannot sway my opinion here.  I know where you are coming from, I've navigated this maze many times before.  I'm sorry, you can nitpick the semantics and the minute details of what is going on and at times, you are right, but the bottom line is the long term need and the big picture, REQUIRES a bond to reduce the cost of running this school district.  When it is said that a bond will reduce taxes, that is the point, paying for old broken facilities versus addressing them with a financed long term solution, is the most financially prudent decision.  A bond WILL REDUCE COSTS, which EQUATES to LOWER TAXES.... that's right Smitty, LOWER TAXES.  This isn't ignorant kids WANTING things, this is the decision of professionals who have analyzed the situation.  Can we make cuts, ABSOLUTELY, will it address the problem, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO.  The question is, do you want to address the issue, or make a point about how you personally think things should be done, at the expense of ELIMINATING this community.  I'm hearing your points, and yes, people in authority should listen to the ideas you have, but ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY, what you are suggesting, while at the heart good ideas, they WILL NOT address the LONG TERM needs of this community.  This is not up for discussion.  If the people of this community fall for the propoganda that killed the first bond, then we deserve to be buried with other short sighted failures from history.  There will be no upgrades of our sports or extra-cirricular facilities in the next bond.  It will be about building new schools.  Any upgrades to sporting facilities should be separately voted upon.  
[/quote]

In almost all cases it is not cheaper to contract out maintenance if a district’s maintenance department is run correctly and the department has the budget and support of the district. I can give plenty of info to support my opinion if needed. However, in some cases it could but more economical to contract some services such as food service or transportation.

[Guest The-NHS]

[quote name="Penny" post="1018964" timestamp="1308285202"]
Few solutions have ever been met without COMPROMISE.  Our community has to come together on common ground and agree on what's best for all of us.  I REFUSE to believe that we are so separated that a constructive pathforward can't be agreed to.  There's too much at stake here.  I strongly believe that we must invest right now, but I agree that we must also conserve and look to reduce costs where we can.  It is happening as the many posts have stated, and where it has happened, it should continue and we should look for more ways to be more efficient.  What happens in industry cannot be ignored in education.  America is still around because we are the MOST PRODUCTIVE country in the world.  When we cease to be, we will go by the wayside.  Reduce as much spending as possible, seek input from industry that has been successful at reducing costs... but at the end of the day, we still need to invest in our future.  And that means building new schools, which in the long run WILL reduce our TAXES and the cost of owning property in Nederland.  I think Smitty knows this, I think CARE knows this, it's not a secret, we need to come together and root out the folks who DO NOT have our communities best interest in mind.  The right people in charge and the opposite view need to sit at a table and hash this out, get it done.
[/quote]

Thank you for finally building the bridge to the moon. Smitty now understands we aren't trying to maintain.

Smitty, I don't think anyone is trying to argue with the fact that you want to cut wasteful spending. Hell, isn't that what everyone is currently trying to do? Multiple points have been presented to you. Multiple spending cuts have been presented to you. Even the fact that your taxes would reduce has been presented to you.

[shermdog]

[quote name="smitty" post="1018893" timestamp="1308267979"]
Email from a teacher's organization?!  Well -- I guess this won't be slanted in one direction!!  Unbiased, huh?  LOL!!   Give me an independent study of it and we'll talk.   ;)


[quote author=shermdog link=topic=84302.msg1018814#msg1018814 date=1308240915]


I have a feeling that Smitty is in Austin working to "fix the budget".  I just got this email from a teacher organization, and if it passes you will not need to worry about passing a bond.  There will not be anyone to teach the kids.

Here is a synopsis of the bills:

Here is how [b]Senate Bill 8[/b] would hurt teachers and public schools:

   Cuts teacher salaries in two ways:

   Allows districts to order furloughs of teachers and administrators for as many as six non-instructional days and reduce salaries accordingly.

   Permanently repeals the 2009 salary floor for returning teachers. This would allow districts to reduce pay for all teachers.

   Freezes the state minimum salary schedule at 2010-11 levels.

   Changes the deadline for notification of contract non-renewal from the 45th day before the end of instruction to the last day on which spring standardized tests can be administered. The same change applies to notification of termination of probationary teachers. This would give laid-off teachers less time to find jobs for the next school year.

   Allows school districts to declare financial emergencies for purposes of imposing reductions in force at any time and eliminates seniority as a factor in determining dismissals when RIFs are implemented.

   Repeals a terminated teacher’s right to a hearing before an independent hearing officer.

   Adds another provision for districts to seek a waiver from the 22-1 class size cap for K-4.

[b]And then HB 17:[/b]

House Bill 17 by Rep. Bill Callegari of Houston, which also is on Thursday’s House calendar, would repeal the state minimum salary schedule for teachers, counselors, nurses and librarians. This would allow districts to set their own pay levels for all teachers, as long as they are paid $27,320.


Read into that that a 20 year teacher could be paid $27,320.  WOW!

Is that responsible?

As I can see it, Smitty and the legislature is against [b]KIDS, TEACHERS[/b] and [b]SCHOOLS.[/b]

Perception is reality.  I feel sorry for the students and residents of Nederland with people like this fighting against you.  To me the CARE stance is one of irresponsibility and selfishness.  The kids you educate today, are being prepared for jobs that do not even exist yet.  

It makes me mad, when someone who has already reaped the benefits of an education, refuses to pay it forward and educate the next generation.



 
[/quote]
[/quote]

Wow!

So I belong to an organization that gives me information about pending legislation and how it affects me and so I am biased.

You belong to a group which provides information to people about issues and you are not biased? 

Talk about sanctimonious, pompous and arrogant!

I hope the students of Nederland can get the facilities they need.

[smitty]

I didn't say you were biased.  I said the organization that sent you that was.  There's legislation, that no doubt has to be done, but will be stated as bad from this organization because it goes against them.   Therefore a biased opinion!


[quote name="shermdog" post="1019190" timestamp="1308366232"]
[quote author=smitty link=topic=84302.msg1018893#msg1018893 date=1308267979]
Email from a teacher's organization?!  Well -- I guess this won't be slanted in one direction!!  Unbiased, huh?  LOL!!   Give me an independent study of it and we'll talk.   ;)


[quote author=shermdog link=topic=84302.msg1018814#msg1018814 date=1308240915]


I have a feeling that Smitty is in Austin working to "fix the budget".  I just got this email from a teacher organization, and if it passes you will not need to worry about passing a bond.  There will not be anyone to teach the kids.

Here is a synopsis of the bills:

Here is how [b]Senate Bill 8[/b] would hurt teachers and public schools:

   Cuts teacher salaries in two ways:

   Allows districts to order furloughs of teachers and administrators for as many as six non-instructional days and reduce salaries accordingly.

   Permanently repeals the 2009 salary floor for returning teachers. This would allow districts to reduce pay for all teachers.

   Freezes the state minimum salary schedule at 2010-11 levels.

   Changes the deadline for notification of contract non-renewal from the 45th day before the end of instruction to the last day on which spring standardized tests can be administered. The same change applies to notification of termination of probationary teachers. This would give laid-off teachers less time to find jobs for the next school year.

   Allows school districts to declare financial emergencies for purposes of imposing reductions in force at any time and eliminates seniority as a factor in determining dismissals when RIFs are implemented.

   Repeals a terminated teacher’s right to a hearing before an independent hearing officer.

   Adds another provision for districts to seek a waiver from the 22-1 class size cap for K-4.

[b]And then HB 17:[/b]

House Bill 17 by Rep. Bill Callegari of Houston, which also is on Thursday’s House calendar, would repeal the state minimum salary schedule for teachers, counselors, nurses and librarians. This would allow districts to set their own pay levels for all teachers, as long as they are paid $27,320.


Read into that that a 20 year teacher could be paid $27,320.  WOW!

Is that responsible?

As I can see it, Smitty and the legislature is against [b]KIDS, TEACHERS[/b] and [b]SCHOOLS.[/b]

Perception is reality.  I feel sorry for the students and residents of Nederland with people like this fighting against you.  To me the CARE stance is one of irresponsibility and selfishness.  The kids you educate today, are being prepared for jobs that do not even exist yet.  

It makes me mad, when someone who has already reaped the benefits of an education, refuses to pay it forward and educate the next generation.



 
[/quote]
[/quote]

Wow!

So I belong to an organization that gives me information about pending legislation and how it affects me and so I am biased.

You belong to a group which provides information to people about issues and you are not biased?  

Talk about sanctimonious, pompous and arrogant!

I hope the students of Nederland can get the facilities they need.



[/quote]

[smitty]

You can have in-house contractors that are there if/when needed.  But we wouldn't have to pay for benefits.  It's done were I work. 


[quote name="mat" post="1018982" timestamp="1308314652"]
[quote author=Penny link=topic=84302.msg1018945#msg1018945 date=1308279649]
Smitty is right on about contracting some maintenance activities, he is right, that is a lower cost way to maintain facilities.  He's right about the reduced overhead that you experience when you don't have full time personnel on the books.  That is not a popular position, but it is a fact.  However, Smitty, we can make these cuts, contract maintenance, have parents drive their kids to sporting events to avoid fuel, reduce administrators salaries, eliminate administration through retirements and attrition, which essentially comes down to have other people step up and take on more leadership and responsibility, which can happen actually with improved results.  Smitty, I have personally implemented and seen positive results from the very actions you are discussing.  But at the same time, I've also had to make multi-million dollar decisions over maintaining with cost, or replacing with capital, critical facilities for the long term good of an objective.  You cannot sway my opinion here.  I know where you are coming from, I've navigated this maze many times before.  I'm sorry, you can nitpick the semantics and the minute details of what is going on and at times, you are right, but the bottom line is the long term need and the big picture, REQUIRES a bond to reduce the cost of running this school district.  When it is said that a bond will reduce taxes, that is the point, paying for old broken facilities versus addressing them with a financed long term solution, is the most financially prudent decision.  A bond WILL REDUCE COSTS, which EQUATES to LOWER TAXES.... that's right Smitty, LOWER TAXES.  This isn't ignorant kids WANTING things, this is the decision of professionals who have analyzed the situation.  Can we make cuts, ABSOLUTELY, will it address the problem, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO.  The question is, do you want to address the issue, or make a point about how you personally think things should be done, at the expense of ELIMINATING this community.  I'm hearing your points, and yes, people in authority should listen to the ideas you have, but ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY, what you are suggesting, while at the heart good ideas, they WILL NOT address the LONG TERM needs of this community.  This is not up for discussion.  If the people of this community fall for the propoganda that killed the first bond, then we deserve to be buried with other short sighted failures from history.  There will be no upgrades of our sports or extra-cirricular facilities in the next bond.  It will be about building new schools.  Any upgrades to sporting facilities should be separately voted upon.  
[/quote]

In almost all cases it is not cheaper to contract out maintenance if a district’s maintenance department is run correctly and the department has the budget and support of the district. I can give plenty of info to support my opinion if needed. However, in some cases it could but more economical to contract some services such as food service or transportation.
[/quote]

[smitty]

Ol' James went silent on me.  Hummm!


[quote name="smitty" post="1018713" timestamp="1308178908"]
I've already stated a few.  I can, and will, name some more.  I just first need to know the diversity of thought from the pro-bonders.  All I'm getting so far is one trick pony's.  But I need to from you.  In this financial crisis, do you support touching extra-curricular activities? 


[quote author=James Mosley link=topic=84302.msg1018533#msg1018533 date=1308092957]
Smitty
Can you give me, or us, 5 things you would cut that would solve all of Nederlands problems? Cut's that would put Nederland in a class by itself as a district leader. Simple 5
Waiting!!!!!!!
[/quote]
[/quote]

[mat]

[quote name="smitty" post="1019203" timestamp="1308394826"]
You can have in-house contractors that are there if/when needed.  But we wouldn't have to pay for benefits.  It's done were I work. 


[quote author=mat link=topic=84302.msg1018982#msg1018982 date=1308314652]
[quote author=Penny link=topic=84302.msg1018945#msg1018945 date=1308279649]
Smitty is right on about contracting some maintenance activities, he is right, that is a lower cost way to maintain facilities.  He's right about the reduced overhead that you experience when you don't have full time personnel on the books.  That is not a popular position, but it is a fact.  However, Smitty, we can make these cuts, contract maintenance, have parents drive their kids to sporting events to avoid fuel, reduce administrators salaries, eliminate administration through retirements and attrition, which essentially comes down to have other people step up and take on more leadership and responsibility, which can happen actually with improved results.  Smitty, I have personally implemented and seen positive results from the very actions you are discussing.  But at the same time, I've also had to make multi-million dollar decisions over maintaining with cost, or replacing with capital, critical facilities for the long term good of an objective.  You cannot sway my opinion here.  I know where you are coming from, I've navigated this maze many times before.  I'm sorry, you can nitpick the semantics and the minute details of what is going on and at times, you are right, but the bottom line is the long term need and the big picture, REQUIRES a bond to reduce the cost of running this school district.  When it is said that a bond will reduce taxes, that is the point, paying for old broken facilities versus addressing them with a financed long term solution, is the most financially prudent decision.  A bond WILL REDUCE COSTS, which EQUATES to LOWER TAXES.... that's right Smitty, LOWER TAXES.  This isn't ignorant kids WANTING things, this is the decision of professionals who have analyzed the situation.  Can we make cuts, ABSOLUTELY, will it address the problem, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO.  The question is, do you want to address the issue, or make a point about how you personally think things should be done, at the expense of ELIMINATING this community.  I'm hearing your points, and yes, people in authority should listen to the ideas you have, but ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY, what you are suggesting, while at the heart good ideas, they WILL NOT address the LONG TERM needs of this community.  This is not up for discussion.  If the people of this community fall for the propoganda that killed the first bond, then we deserve to be buried with other short sighted failures from history.  There will be no upgrades of our sports or extra-cirricular facilities in the next bond.  It will be about building new schools.  Any upgrades to sporting facilities should be separately voted upon.  
[/quote]

In almost all cases it is not cheaper to contract out maintenance if a district’s maintenance department is run correctly and the department has the budget and support of the district. I can give plenty of info to support my opinion if needed. However, in some cases it could but more economical to contract some services such as food service or transportation.
[/quote]
[/quote]
There’s a lot more to consider when maintaining a school district than maintaining a plant or any other type facility.

[smitty]

I'm not sure i understand the difference.  But i am willing to listen to what you think they are.


[quote name="mat" post="1019292" timestamp="1308416320"]
[quote author=smitty link=topic=84302.msg1019203#msg1019203 date=1308394826]
You can have in-house contractors that are there if/when needed.  But we wouldn't have to pay for benefits.  It's done were I work. 


[quote author=mat link=topic=84302.msg1018982#msg1018982 date=1308314652]
[quote author=Penny link=topic=84302.msg1018945#msg1018945 date=1308279649]
Smitty is right on about contracting some maintenance activities, he is right, that is a lower cost way to maintain facilities.  He's right about the reduced overhead that you experience when you don't have full time personnel on the books.  That is not a popular position, but it is a fact.  However, Smitty, we can make these cuts, contract maintenance, have parents drive their kids to sporting events to avoid fuel, reduce administrators salaries, eliminate administration through retirements and attrition, which essentially comes down to have other people step up and take on more leadership and responsibility, which can happen actually with improved results.  Smitty, I have personally implemented and seen positive results from the very actions you are discussing.  But at the same time, I've also had to make multi-million dollar decisions over maintaining with cost, or replacing with capital, critical facilities for the long term good of an objective.  You cannot sway my opinion here.  I know where you are coming from, I've navigated this maze many times before.  I'm sorry, you can nitpick the semantics and the minute details of what is going on and at times, you are right, but the bottom line is the long term need and the big picture, REQUIRES a bond to reduce the cost of running this school district.  When it is said that a bond will reduce taxes, that is the point, paying for old broken facilities versus addressing them with a financed long term solution, is the most financially prudent decision.  A bond WILL REDUCE COSTS, which EQUATES to LOWER TAXES.... that's right Smitty, LOWER TAXES.  This isn't ignorant kids WANTING things, this is the decision of professionals who have analyzed the situation.  Can we make cuts, ABSOLUTELY, will it address the problem, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO.  The question is, do you want to address the issue, or make a point about how you personally think things should be done, at the expense of ELIMINATING this community.  I'm hearing your points, and yes, people in authority should listen to the ideas you have, but ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY, what you are suggesting, while at the heart good ideas, they WILL NOT address the LONG TERM needs of this community.  This is not up for discussion.  If the people of this community fall for the propoganda that killed the first bond, then we deserve to be buried with other short sighted failures from history.  There will be no upgrades of our sports or extra-cirricular facilities in the next bond.  It will be about building new schools.  Any upgrades to sporting facilities should be separately voted upon.  
[/quote]

In almost all cases it is not cheaper to contract out maintenance if a district’s maintenance department is run correctly and the department has the budget and support of the district. I can give plenty of info to support my opinion if needed. However, in some cases it could but more economical to contract some services such as food service or transportation.
[/quote]
[/quote]
There’s a lot more to consider when maintaining a school district than maintaining a plant or any other type facility.
[/quote]