Lakota Cuts

Today's Journal...

Lakota proposes cutting 50 administrative jobs
District already has 
recommended more than 100 teaching job cuts

LIBERTY TWP. — In its final budget proposal to the Lakota Board of Education, district administrators are recommending eliminating 50 more jobs, including central office administrators, building administrators and instructional specialists in moves that would cut $3.5 million from the 2012-13 budget

In Monday night’s proposal, the senior jobs recommended for elimination include an assistant superintendent, assistant treasurer, curriculum director, two assistant elementary school principals and the two deans of students, one at each high school.

The deans would be replaced by an assistant principal, shared between the two high schools.

NOW WE'RE GETTING DOWN TO REAL SAVINGS. PROBABLY DIDN'T NEED THE ASSIST TO THE ASSIST HIGH PAYING POSITIONS IN THE FIRST PLACE. ASSIST. TREASURER? WHAT? ASSIST.ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS? WHY? WHY DO YOU NEED AN ASSIST. SUPER? TOO TOP HEAVY. BIG MONEY HERE FOLKS. SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE PLACE TO START. ARE THE ADMIN. CUTS IN PROPORTION TO THE TEACHER POPULATION CUTS? SHOULD BE.

chmoore1 wrote: VV: the article also included this: "The fourth proposal - focusing on administration, athletics and other operations - will be presented at 7 p.m. Feb.27, also at Lakota East."

It will be interesting to re-visit this after that date to discuss whether the severity of the admin. cuts matches those in the teaching ranks. Bet they keep alot of admin. positions that duplicate efforts. They like assistants to the assistants and creating Director positions to accomodate more top heavy worthless paper-shuffling jobs for their buds. JMO

Hell, rumor had it that Middletown had the football coach checking truancy to justify his job (before he left for Fairfield, that is) Situations like that, if true, do not endear the system to the taxpaying public.

chmoore1, are you connected with the schools? Your defense of the Midd. schools seems to suggest that. If so, it explains some of your responses to our stance on the other side of the fence here.

Today's Journal....

Lakota considers cutting 69 teachers
Plan to offset a projected $9M deficit for next school year

LIBERTY TWP. — Lakota Local School District administrators are proposing eliminating nearly 69 teaching positions for secondary grades in the latest round of budget cuts.

The cuts are being proposed to help offset a projected $9 million budget deficit for the 2012-13 academic year.

The plan would allow the district to cut the secondary payroll by about $4.3 million, according to district officials.

About 43 teaching positions — based on district seniority and certification — would be eliminated at the high schools with an anticipated savings of at least $2.7 million. About 26 positions would be cut at the junior high level for a savings of about $1.6 million.

ONCE AGAIN, WE HAVE PROPOSED CUTS ON THE TABLE, THIS TIME FROM THE LAKOTA SCHOOL DISTRICT. THE ARTICLE TELLS US THE CUTS WILL BE MADE IN THE TEACHER RANKS AND SAYS NOTHING ABOUT CUTS IN THE ADMINISTRATOR RANKS. NOW I'M NO FAN OF THE TEACHER'S UNION. TOO BIG FOR THEIR BRITCHES, BUT THIS SEEMS LIKE A RAW DEAL FOR THEM. WHILE THE TEACHERS MAKE A NICE SALARY, THE HIGHER SALARIES/BENNIES PACKAGES ARE IN THE ADMIN. POSITIONS. IF SO, AND IF THE NAME OF THE GAME IS TO CUT MONEY FROM THE BUDGET, WHY WOULDN'T YOU LOOK AT ADMIN. DUPLICATION OF JOB DUTIES SUCH AS ASSIST. DIRECTORS/MANAGERS/SUPERVISORS AND MULTI-LAYERED POSITIONS AND CUT THERE FIRST, NOT IN THE CLASSROOM? I BET IF WE TOOK A LOOK AT THE LAKOTA ORGANIZATION, WE COULD SEE MULTIPLE POSITIONS THAT COULD BE COMBINED INTO ONE. PROBABLY TRUE WITH ANY DISTRICT. IF YOU CUT A SIZABLE NUMBER OF PAPER-SHUFFLING, DIRECTOR OF THIS/DIRECTOR OF THAT ADMIN JOBS AND STARTED CONSOLIDATING JOB RESPONSIBILITIES, YOU MAY BE ABLE TO SAVE SOME TEACHING JOBS, ELIMINATING THE NEED TO CUT CLASS SIZE, BENEFITING THE KIDS IN A MORE EFFICIENT WAY. THIS SEEMS TO BE THE GAME WHEN DOWNSIZING IS PLAYED. CUT THE LITTLE GUYS AND LEAVE THE HIGHER SALARIED POSITIONS ALONE. DOESN'T MAKE SENSE OTHER THAN TO PROVE THE UPPER ECHELON PROTECTS THEIR OWN.