News-Record.com

Look at my older posts, we can blame it on the principals, it’s their fault that people are losing their jobs, not the administration or the School Board. Who is in charge, who is responsible, certainly not the Board or Mo. Will someone find me a spine I can use, maybe a few hundred jobs can be spared if I only had a spine. Has no one figured out yet how many employees we will lose this way? What I want to know, why are Principals being forced to cut staff without any Board input or discussion? What Board Members were informed of this policy of stealth staffing reductions? There might be a way to prevent this or do it better, alas the Board will be informed of what the Board has decided to do by staff when they feel it is too late for the Board to object.

If only 3 employees are lost at each school, 300 people will lose their jobs! When principals are told they can only use 50% of their discretionary staffing funds then they are precluded from hiring desperately needed resources. The great thing is we are suggesting ONLY 90 to the Press. By the time all other factors are considered, 400 to 500 positions may be in jeopardy. But then again I’m just a CPA dumb enough to be on this ship. Thank goodness the rest of the Board knows and trusts staff better than I do.

I believe that we could reshuffle the deck, opt to forgo weighted student allocations for 2 years and utilize Federal Title 1 grants to effectively increase funding at impacted schools and preserve already overcrowded classrooms throughout the district. Just a naïve attempt to look at the problem better. Maybe if there was teamwork we could solve this problem.

Mr Garth.

Theres your problem.
You are still trying.

The "Head Shed"will protect the "Head Shed"

You know that from business also.
Once you mess with the head shed the question becomes why did we need them any way.

"It was revealed today that board members will meet with Green behind closed doors on Friday and Monday to discuss the budget"
"Closed Doors"
Obviously this is part of the "be more responsive" reorganization.

News & Record - does this comply with Open Meeting Law????

see http://guilfordschoolwatch.blogspot.com/2009/
04/confirmed-teachers-on-chopping-block.html

It is interesting that the budget hasn't been approved by BOE and yet cuts are being made already.. seems alittle like the cart before the horse. For instance, what if the BOE decided that media assistances are essential to eduaction.. then they can vote to leave those positions, or am I wrong? I remember many discussions about social workers, teachers assistants, nurses, cirriculum facilitators,etc. I realize that there is a fine line between notifying too early and being blindsided if you are in those positions. Is it up the Staff and Mo to make all these decisions without input from BOE? GCBoard of Commissions have asked all depts not to have an increase, and we know there will be state cuts; but no one knows how much. It seems we are planning for the worse case and implementing those changes now.

Go Debora:

If we make the principals cut their budgets, assign staffing and make cuts prior to budget time, then give Board no choice at last minute but to accept the already in place as inevitable, then we have Mo’s budget. What happened to open and transparent? Same thing last year so I am not ready to roast Mo, but at some point he must take responsibility. Someone is running things, I hope Mo decides to be that person soon.

I have given 2 chances for change, I still believe it might be possible that Mo and Nora are not fully in charge yet, but if they are letting those puppet master run things for them, be aware, someone gave me the keys to the skeleton closet before they left town with knives in their back. I’m willing to give one more chance, yes this was just a shot across the bow. Remember, I’m a true passive aggressive and am willing to back down if we are willing to become open and transparent. Otherwise…

Garth,

Once again its seems that you are the only Board member with BALLS!

Thank god we the people have you on the board!

Perhaps the cuts are being made prematurely now so Mo has mo money for his regionalization plan.. That way he can say it didn't "cost" anything. Well Mo,not money maybe, just a few jobs at the front lines in the trenches.

Garth.

Dont EVER back down. this County needs you!

Just a couple of FYI’s on Tuesday Board Meeting:
How many caught the Media Assistants cut, 46 of the 63 are media assistants, 17 are other (most likely teaching) positions that principals have used to reduce already huge class sizes in some schools, other schools have class sizes that are absurdly small.

Also of interest, how much of cuts mad at central office were actually costs that were 1 time like the 1 million plus cost to rent Eastern Village, sadly when the tire meets the road these were not even cuts by the administration, they were 1 time expenses that they are now moving towards regionalization at the cost of teachers and classroom supplies that are desperately needed in our overcrowded schools.

Real cuts, they are media assistant, technology and discretionary funds that many principals use for teachers. Our schools are getting shaft while administration is doing the budget 2 step presenting numbers in the least usable format for the public to understand.

The real truth points a path of deception that may lead to the County Commissioners doorstep. I am told we are hiring yet another staff for our diversity office, cost, at least 1 more teaching position sacrificed. Based on preliminary budget numbers we are paying almost 9,000 a year to educate a child in this county, of that an outrageous amount goes to admin and support and that does not include cost of buildings.

typo / mad=made, sorry, need sleep

Garh,
"of that an outrageous amount goes to admin and support and that does not include cost of buildings"

That is an interesting comment.

Grier ( the wizard ) was on record saying our ratio of Studentss per Administrator was the best in NC. He claimed 200 percent better than the state average. This was a quote from Dr. Wizard. Just ask Oz. She provided the numbers. The Board never questioned what he said.
No one was willing to say. "Liar Liar paints on fire"

He used the quote to justify a previous budget.

Nobody questions.

The Madhof of Quilford had spoken.

We deserve what we get. More Diversity.

What I read is that the budget for 08/09 is the same as last year but we have less teachers.

duhhhhhhh?

Am I missing something?

the link online for the budget is just the powerpoint. Where is the meat? Where are the teacher allotments, the student guesstamation -which is really important this year since GCS is holding 1/2 of that amount.

Nora Carr was asked to put the new calendar online where parents could find it... no link on front page. Nothing under public comments.. where do they put these things. How about a big square... Community input needed and then
list things that are out there. Okay, click calenders and I still don't see anything about the proposed calendars... is it just me?

I was amused at the back and forth between Paul Daniels and Sharon Ozmont about cuts vs redirected funds. Thinking back to when my father cut my allowance for misdeeds, I guess it was a cut for me and a redirection of funds for him. When is a cut an actual loss of total funds and when is a cut merely a redirection of funds from one use to another?

It would seem that if, for instance, one had a $20 Coca-Cola fund and were told to cut that by $10, then only a total of $10 would be available. In GCS, however, $15 would still be available--$10 in the Coca Cola fund and $5 in the Pepsi fund; however, it would still count as a $10 cut.

I like it so much I'm tempted to see if the IRS will let me use the same sort of sleight of hand with my taxes next year.

I'm thinking not unless I can have someone from the GCS central office to argue my case for me.

Also, last night Alan Duncan made a comment to Mo that by the board approving the personnel report that the regional superintendents had been approved. The personnel report online is dated April 3 and has NOTHING regarding any of these positions.

I guess the board got to see a "special" copy that the public doesn't get to view.

Couple of follow up comments.
1. Garth – isn’t it 64 media assistant POSITIONS being cut but only 46 people are in those jobs?

2. Anonymous at 12:17 – I think you’ve misunderstood. What Green is proposing the school board ask the county for ($175 million approx.) is what the county gave in this school year.

3. Debora – good question and one I want to know the answer to as well. Expect to see it in print soon.

4. Anonymous at 3:02 – You’re absolutely right. GCS has a very bad habit of withholding info from the online agenda until the meeting begins and there is no excuse for it. I was told by Chief of Staff Nora Carr that the list of names was faxed Tuesday morning. I sure didn’t see it and that doesn’t explain why it wasn’t put online.

Mr. Ewing:

You need to get the GCS definition of transparency, I suspect. Then you would understand.

About special edition of personnel report...oops one Board member didn't get it either, me, I was quite shocked to find I had voted on something I didn't have an addendum to! I am sure I am just an oversight. I will revise my vote as NO, darn, have to remember to ask for addendums now.

Bryan, these are allotment positions that principals have traded for real teachers. Darlene is right, why cut technos when we need it more than ever? They do much more than coach middle schoolers how to pass test. We could cut our media relations group, it is already one our best oxymorons.