Things To Know About...





  • DISTRICT RESPONSES TO BTU PROPOSALS

    QUESTION: Has the District explored the BTU’s recommendation regarding reduction and/or transfers of one assistant principal per school?
    ANSWER:
    The District has reviewed this union recommendation and does not support the elimination of an Assistant Principal at each school location. Assistant principals are employed at two hundred thirty-six (236) locations across the District, with more than 150 locations employing only one AP. The Assistant Principal is the main administrative support for a school, which eliminates the need for central administration to perform these necessary functions. Additionally, this proposal does not eliminate salary and benefit costs, rather the only potential savings is the salary differential between the two positions. 

    QUESTION: Has the District reviewed the BTU’s proposal to reduce and transfer all certified non-classroom based staff to teaching positions?
    ANSWER:
    The cost savings for this proposal, as provided by the union, is $34 million. The District’s true savings has been and is estimated as significantly less. The transfer of these staff members into teaching positions would start with the reduction of their annual work calendars from 244 to 196 days. Superintendent Notter has already directed these adjustments be implemented for 100 employees, a measure which saved the District in excess of $1 million. The remaining staff who will be affected by this change is expected to net the District an additional $1.3 million in savings, for a total cost savings of over $2.3 million.

    QUESTION: Has the District reduced Out-of-County travel?
    ANSWER:
    The District’s travel budget for the 2009/10 school year is approximately $1.3 million less than the 2008/09 year expenses. This reduced budget not only includes Out-of-County travel, but also includes mileage reimbursement for employees who use their own vehicles to fulfill their job responsibilities. The District has further curtailed all non-essential travel from the 2009/10 budget and has generated a savings of approximately $1.5 million, but it is not possible to eliminate all travel expenses.