In most years when school districts hand out pink slips to dozens of teachers, informing them that their services will not be required the coming fall, it’s not much more than a fire drill. A short time later, they are told that their jobs are safe, because the state budget has sorted itself out or cuts have been made elsewhere in the district’s budget. This could be the year, though, when it’s no false alarm.
The Santa Barbara School Districts’ board on Tuesday night, March 10, agreed to distribute the layoff notices to more than 40 elementary school teachers. It also agreed to eliminate almost 25 secondary school teaching positions, though that number includes mere reductions in some teachers’ hours, amounting to the equivalent of 25 full-time jobs. Additionally, all 122 temporary teachers are getting notices releasing them from duty at the end of this school year, bringing the total of teacher layoffs to roughly 190. Temporary teachers get pink slips every spring because they work on year-to-year contracts. This year, however, those teachers must entertain more doubt about whether they will be hired back for fall, and less hope of advancing to probationary and then permanent status.
The board was tasked by its staff with cutting $3 million from the operating budgets of the two combined districts-elementary and secondary-in order to ensure that its large but fast-diminishing reserve balance is still at the legal minimum and also will stabilize by the end of the next two years. It is unlikely to do all that by cutting teachers-whose cost to the district is about $85,000 each-but the layoff notices preserve the district’s “flexibility,” said Eric Smith, district business director. The board starts cutting in earnest in mid-April when, he said, staff will provide them with expense reductions options.
As it stands now, the elementary district’s savings would likely come from increasing class sizes in kindergarten through third grades, which presently contain an average of 20 children. Also at risk are the 20-student English and math classes in ninth grade. Furthermore, the elementary district enrollment has decreased. This resulted in part from the district purging transfer students to enable it to finance itself solely with basic aid, which means its income will no longer be dependent on the number of students who attend each day.
Lane Wheeler, president of the Santa Barbara Teachers Association, said he hoped teachers would retain their jobs, though he was less optimistic about that notion this year. Among other things, the nation’s economic troubles reduced teacher attrition, which normally decreases the teaching staff naturally. Last year there were 42 retirees, he said-this year, only six. Likewise, fewer teachers will likely be taking leaves of absence, which means fewer jobs for the temporary teachers. Nor are teachers transferring to other districts, because there are virtually no jobs anywhere in the state.
Parent Ken Rotman spoke to the board about the undervaluation of the temporary teaching staff, which includes every job description from classroom teachers to counselors to coaches. Rotman, a volunteer coach for the Santa Barbara High School mock trial team, noted that there was no such club at SBHS until temporary teacher Mike Moyer was hired two years ago. Moyer’s team came within a mere three points this year of beating the champion Dos Pueblos High School team. It is one of the school’s precious few extracurricular offerings of an intellectual nature, said Rotman, and if Moyer left, his loss would impoverish the school, he said. (Rotman listened enviously to a DP student that very evening cite the accomplishments of, among others, his school’s engineering team, robotics team, and debate team-none of which SBHS has.)
There are still several unknowns in the schools’ budget, including the effect of the federal stimulus package and results of the May 19 special statewide election requiring a two-thirds majority to implement some of the items within the current state budget. Also, the districts have not yet determined exactly how income from the parcel taxes Santa Barbara voters recently approved will be used to support class size reductions and extracurricular programs including math, art, Spanish, and music.
In the meantime, Kristine Robertson, director of personnel, grim-facedly told the board that she and a colleague would be personally visiting campuses for the remainder of the week to deliver the pink slips and talk to teachers. Wheeler said union reps would also be “ministering to our members,” while the California Teachers Association has organized teachers to wear pink on Friday, March 13, to call attention to the potential layoffs.
CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story incorrectly identified Mike Moyer as Mike Boyer.



Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
Comments
Share Article
Myspace





Previous Month



Comments
The actual teachers (the ones in the classroom), the policemen, the firemen should all be secure in their jobs if they are doing them well. There is plenty of bloat in the "upper management" and superfluous "specialists" and that is where the cuts should come.
rileyoconner (anonymous profile)
March 12, 2009 at 4:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I remember back in the 80's it was said that the money raised by the California Lottery would help our schools; as Riley points out, the teachers are still lacking security. Where does all the money spent on education go?
billclausen (anonymous profile)
March 12, 2009 at 8:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Normal Crazy. Firing teachers so they hire more administrative people or pay for more studies to figure out what is wrong or quote how to solve it. Let face it.
Government job is to hire more paper pushers than doers because then us public will agree to more taxes so we can hire a few more doers so they can get more paper pushers.
The school board just approval hiring three additional administrators directors. Now the new top director will get a salary of $120k to 150k.
Now that doesn't count the overhead and they needing rent office space and equip it, plus I imagine they each will get at least one secretary, car. I bet the other two directors salary is higher than teachers too.
I wouldn't be surprised if the full cost of hiring these three new administrators when you consider all the hidden cost like office space, benefits, travel experiences, exceeds three quarters of a million dollars. A program that already has a big staff.
These new 3 staff jobs are to figure out why the head of special ed stay around for only a year. Now, this is on top of the board already paying a consultant to solve the problem. I bet the real reason behind the Head Special Ed is around only a year is that he took the position as a stepping stone to get the experience so he could get the position he really wanted at another school district.
I know papers have a tough times these days. So they don't have money to pay for the reporters to investigate the whole story behind the events, like the real full costs, not just news flash story. Like, I bet if we compared the classroom teacher to other staff ratio in education today compared to 1960, we would discover the schools are way more top heavy with non-teacher positions.
I challenge the teachers if you really want to keep your jobs to go after the administrators to lay off the same number of administrators based on their cost as they do teachers. So, if there is 2 non-teacher jobs for every teacher, then they must lay off the same percentage of administrative jobs at every level, not just the low level administrative whom probably do a bit more of the work.
Heck, if you really want to do a great job, then get the ratio of administrative jobs in line with the levels in private enterprise. But it appears your union so far doesn't want to rock that boat.
Unfortunately, the government is built on the principal of spending all the money they can. They never save in the boom years of ecomony. If they have money left in their department at the end of the year, they scamble to find ways to spend it so they can ask for more the next. Hire extra people, buy stuff they really don't need ... And they do that regularly. If you don't believe, go work for the government.
Maybe one day we will train the government to operate differently than it does. But as long as the majority goes along, it will be more of the same. Enjoy.
ralph (anonymous profile)
March 13, 2009 at 8:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)
They should get rid of the U.S. Department of Education before laying off teachers. Bush doubled the size of that agency, I don't know why people want to spend so much at the Federal level when it could be spent locally with more oversight.
loonpt (anonymous profile)
March 13, 2009 at 8:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Ralph writes: "The school board just approval hiring three additional administrators directors. Now the new top director will get a salary of $120k to 150k"
I remember a few years ago Debbie Flores switching jobs within the school system and going from a $130k salary to $150k..
Ralphs also writes: "I challenge the teachers if you really want to keep your jobs to go after the administrators to lay off the same number of administrators based on their cost as they do teachers."
I agree. Why are the teachers so afraid to do this?
We know education is a good thing, and I'm all for spending money on it, but it sure gets tedious when all we keep seeing is that despite the taxes and bond measures that pass for education, the money never seems to go where it's needed. The ploy of course is that any expenditure for "the children" is sacred and as such people get so emotionally wrapped up in this that they do not dare question where the money actually goes. It's along the same lines as people who give to televangelists who really think the money goes to do God's work.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
March 14, 2009 at 2:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)