May 2, 2011 in News

Spokane Public Schools issues 238 layoff notices

Jody Lawrence-Turner The Spokesman-Review

Tags:Bob DouthittJenny RoseSpokane Education AssociationSpokane Public SchoolsStaci Vesneske

Meeting on May 6

Spokane Public Schools will hold a meeting on Friday for district personnel who received layoff notices. For more information call (509) 354-7285.

Spokane Public Schools administrators issued an unprecedented 238 layoff notices Tuesday in preparation for a “worst-case scenario” state budget.

On the list: 72 elementary school teachers, 42 high school and middle school teachers, 28 special-education teachers, 55 counselors, 10 speech language pathologists, six librarians, six psychologists, seven occupational therapists and physical therapists; and five specialty educators.The total number of layoff notices is the highest any current administrator could recall, said Staci Vesneske, assistant superintendent.

The district faces a budget shortfall between $9 million and $12 million. By union contract, the deadline for notifying certified employees of their employment status is May 15, so the district had to move forward with layoff notices even though the Washington legislature is still working on a final budget.

“I’m frustrated and, of course, disappointed,” said Jenny Rose, Spokane Education Association president, in reaction to the notifications. “Let’s just go to the bare basics, and do what’s best for the kids. If that means putting administrators back in the classrooms, then that’s what we should do.”

The district’s administration came up with two layoff lists, one based on temporarily increasing class sizes by up to three students, which the school board approved last week, and a second, larger list based on keeping current class sizes, Vesneske said.

A reduction of 150 positions would likely close the $12 million budget gap, school officials said. However, the district prefers to issue more notices than needed to give the board flexibility when it comes to deciding which positions to cut.

Bob Douthitt, a school board member, said the board wanted administrators to prepare two lists so that they would not “succumb to the temptation to not look very hard past non-class-increase cuts.”

Unlike previous years when federal money could be expected to fill some financial holes or there was an opportunity for additional money from the state, the district is facing a certain shortfall.

“It’s really impossible to know yet how many people I will be able to bring back,” Vesneske said. Some of that depends on what the board decides. “For example, if the board decided to eliminate half the counselors, many of them don’t have teaching certificates, so despite seniority there would be no position for them.”

Only 17 out of 72 counselors districtwide also have teaching certificates.

“When we issued the notifications, we also took into consideration the retirement notices we’ve already received,” Vesneske said.

In addition to certificated staff, other district employees will be cut.

“We don’t have any figures yet on how the central office will be impacted, but there will be reductions,” Vesneske said. “It will likely be full-time jobs and reduction in salary.”

Said Rose, “Who knows what the board will ultimately decide while, meanwhile people are in limbo? Why not cut curriculum? Cut some administration from the central office? Why don’t we stop adding anything until we can get what we have under control?”

54 comments on this story so far. Add yours!

PlanB on May 02 at 6:13 p.m.
And apparently Zero administrators?
oneanddone on May 02 at 6:29 p.m.
By contract teachers have to be notified before the previous school year ends. Administrators are at will employees and can be fired anytime. This sort of thing has happened before and is done to give districts maximum flexibility. It’s all happened before, in the mid 80’s.
DickAdams on May 02 at 6:40 p.m.
Digested food through the bull. Big piles.
eagleproducer on May 02 at 6:41 p.m.
Every one of the employee categories targeted for cuts are “certified” professionals. Where are the corresponding cuts for classified staff? Lunch lady and janitor guy raking in fifty grand with benefits need to be retired and those services contracted to the private sector. It’s time to get real about our schools and improve them during this process, not destroy them by eliminating the professionals who actually help your kids learn and work with them hours each school day.
Common_Sense on May 02 at 6:51 p.m.
Its about time the free ride for kids ends. They don’t pay taxes, they get this fancy “free education” and I’m sick ot it!
And they walk on my lawn!
Common_Sense on May 02 at 6:53 p.m.
Heh, eagleproducer wants illegals cleaning the schools.
PlanB on May 02 at 6:57 p.m.
Oneand, thanks for the clarification.
eagleproducer on May 02 at 7:15 p.m.
Common_Sense: Riiiiiiiiiiiiight. That’s exactly what I wrote. Low skilled labor should be compensated for what it is, otherwise there is absolutely no incentive to improve one’s future by investing in training/education.
spokaneboy on May 02 at 7:22 p.m.
Gotta love the free ride, and the kids that walk on your lawn.
westerly on May 02 at 7:26 p.m.
Here is the gravy:
http://wwwb.thenewstribune.com/databases/school_pay/index.php
Loudin on May 02 at 7:47 p.m.
Does anybody know when this nation turned into such a bunch of whining, anti-tax crybabies? I mean, we have some of the lowest taxes of any first world nation…yet grown men tear up and scream like toddlers when you suggest that some taxes are well spent (der…education?).
Here’s a note for you anti-Socialist types: Better educated children end up with higher paying jobs, which means they pay more in taxes, which means you get more money from Socialist Security (you know, our national Ponzi scheme). If you are an old fart on the SS/Medicare dole, you might want to cram a sock in your mouth and quit your anti-tax whining: It benefits you to have people working to pay your welfare. And in case you have fooled yourself into thinking that Social Security isn’t Socialism…Social Security is a transfer of wealth from one group (workers) to another (retired layabouts).
So suck it! Kids need to be well educated…and if you have to pay a bit more to accomplish that goal, so be it. All you’re going to do w/your money is blow it on Walmart crap anyway…right? Stupid leaches…
Common_Sense on May 02 at 7:56 p.m.
eagleproducer, many companies subcontract out their janitorial needs. Many of these companies hire latinos, now whether these latinos are illegal or not, I’ll leave that for you to figure out.
What do you have against hard working Americans that have to clean up after your snot nosed little brats? I thought 50k a year was poverty? Seems 50k is severe poverty for small business owners but it is extremely outrageously wealthy for a person who sweats for a living.
Shazamm on May 02 at 8:04 p.m.
What about all those teaching coaches? You know, the ones who “teach the teachers to teach” after the teachers have gone to college for five, or six, or seven years and have 200+ university credits? Also, what about sports, sports travel, coaches, etc.? Or are football, gymnastics, and golf sacred constitutional rights for the rich kids?
Oh, and by the way Loudin, last I looked, I have been paying into Social Security for years. If I just happen to get the opportunity to draw some out I would hardly call that a transfer of wealth.
reallyok on May 02 at 8:09 p.m.
@eagleproducer, I don’t know what universe you live in that school custodians or lunch ladies make $50,000 a year, but it’s not the same one we live in. Lunch ladies make minimum wage, and custodians make pretty ok money… but not $50,000 a year.
myhumbleopinion on May 02 at 8:09 p.m.
eagleproducer: not sure where you get your salary figures. There are a wide variety of classified staff who have been the casualties of the last few years of budget cuts (this is not the first year of cuts, just the worst). Districts have been cutting classified staff in order to balance budgets, it is now spreading to certificated staff. Also, there aren’t many classified employees making your stated $50,000 salary. Some of the higher paying maintenance jobs may, but these do require skills and are not manned by those unskilled laborers you speak of. Most classified staff are working in the trenches with students and barely making above minimum wage. They do it because they are dedicated to your kids, not because they can’t do anything else. Come work my job for a day and then tell me I dont earn my pay (defintely not anywhere close to $50,000!) or should be outsourced! Oh wait, you can’t, you’re not qualified!
eagleproducer on May 02 at 8:17 p.m.
Do I really need to post the salary schedule that demonstrate the high end for a custodian/lunch lady is 52,000.00? I’ve posted it before to bulwark my claims.
Myhumbleopinion: I hold two B.A. degrees, an M.F.A. and an M.Ed., in addition to holding regular and vocational certification in several states. I do just fine in my classrooms without an I.A. The teachers who can’t need to find something else to do. Believe me, I’m qualified enough and experienced enough to know where the fat is in education. Do you care to list the credentials required of a classified instructional assistant?
I didn’t think so.
eagleproducer on May 02 at 8:19 p.m.
I forgot to mention National Board Certification. My bad.
Common_Sense on May 02 at 8:21 p.m.
Oh good lord, another hawken/daisy who claims to have every academic degree known to man but has little common sense and I’m sure you will provide your transcripts to verify your education, correct eagleproducer?
opiemuyo on May 02 at 8:37 p.m.
Reason # 852 why I am grateful for parochial schools. Quarter of the money, twice the education. If we had vouchers in this state the public school system would collapse in less than 20 years. No wonder the NEA is opposed to the notion.
LeftofCenterWA on May 02 at 8:49 p.m.
Reduce Administration and Increase the employee benefit contribution, and we can keep our teachers in the classroom.
eagleproducer on May 02 at 9:04 p.m.
My vitae is well known on here, common_sense. You are just late to the party.
william1977 on May 02 at 9:04 p.m.
Eliminate 52 $100k plus administration positions. They are so not needed. Seriously…what does a principal making $110k a year really actually “do”? An “assistant elementary principal” making $101k per year?? Or a superintendent that makes $220k?
Really? Get real. Cut from the top- not the teachers. Who can’t see a solution here….and it is like this in each district across this state. Figure it out.
eagleproducer on May 02 at 9:15 p.m.
http://www.salaries.wa.gov/documents/SchoolSuptsvsSPI2008.pdf
Notice that several district superintendents make more than the governor, including district 81 chief, Nancy Sowell. There are dozens of superintendents that make more than their boss, the State Superintendent of Public Instruction. How can a boss make less than his workers?
I wonder if I am the only one who detects the not so thinly veiled racism in the posts about latinos and illegal immigrants. If schools can be kept clean and maintained for half the cost, why isn’t that being discussed? If kids can be fed for less money and get better food choices, why isn’t that being discussed? We never had “instructional aids” when I was a student in public schools and the schools were performing better. We didn’t have several secretaries and this was before computers automated so many of their functions. The fat has been growing exponentially in education over the last few decades and most of it could disappear overnight without impacting a single student.
eagleproducer on May 02 at 9:20 p.m.
opie: Parochial schools across the nation spend almost the same amount per student as public schools. Non-religion affiliated private schools spend more than double per student.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/30/AR2009083002335.html
As well, parochial schools and other private schools get to pick their students. They aren’t mandated by law to provide learning opportunities to whoever walks through their doors. Private school students have parents and families who are much more invested in their children’s education and life. Apples and oranges.
eagleproducer on May 02 at 9:26 p.m.
Administrators are not “at will” employees. They have an association that bargains for their contracts that includes salaries and benefits. Here is their most recent agreement with District 81.
http://www.spokaneschools.org/174420121684251340/lib/174420121684251340/_files/Principals.pdf
misjustice on May 02 at 10:15 p.m.
What’s sad is we pay the executives of Avista millions & millions of dollars in bonuses each & every year for keeping our lights on & the gas flowing. Yet we can’t keep teachers in the schools?
Something wrong with this picture!!!!!
Common_Sense on May 02 at 10:40 p.m.
Well eagleproducer, I guess you’re just smarter than everyone else.
Little man syndrome?
I don’t know who you are, nor do I care. You are an insulting and insignificant little pest.
I work for a living, you should try it before putting us blue collar folks down. Arrogant jerk.
reallyok on May 02 at 11:01 p.m.
I have worked as a classified instructional assistant, though we were called paraeducators in the district I worked in. We had to have a two year degree, most of us had a BA. I worked with autistic kids and knew more about autism than most of the certificated staff. I also had to teach reading, spelling and math to kids with IEPs. I made $12,000 a year, 30 hours a week during the school year, and spent many hours at the school working that I didn’t get paid for. And I had to deal with teachers who treated me like garbage because I wasn’t a “real” teacher. The kitchen supervisor made a little more than I did, the lunch ladies made minimum wage, part time. Custodians made more than me, but not that much.
I know that teachers are overworked and underpaid for the amount of education they have, and that they have to keep getting credits to stay certificated, and that they don’t actually get the whole summer off. But, trying to blame the budget problems in the schools on janitors and lunch ladies is just dumb.
Auko on May 03 at 12:02 a.m.
I have two sisters who work in two of the Valley school districts. Each of them are in a classified position and neither one makes anywhere near the $50,000 figure that this eagleproducer person keeps throwing around. Get off your soapbox…
Dazzeetrader11 on May 03 at 1:02 a.m.
Eagle’s a bit dim and a perpetual blowhard! lolol. he’s never posted his “vitae”. Not here anyway.
leftofCenter is pretty close to what needs to be done. We must invest in the children NOT the WEA types. Admin in District 81 eats up a full 50% of the budget in Spokane. Times for some readjustment on that figure. It’s pretty big.
Parochial school kids don’t cost as much due to absense of unions. Further though, they have fewer students so the ratio is very good for individual and group learning. I support one such school in the Spokane region. It’s fun and the results are gratifying. Not much in Admin costs. Most of the money goes to teaching directly. It’s a model the local public schools should look at.
snorman46 on May 03 at 6:37 a.m.
The cuts need to start in the downtown office. There are already enough kids who slip through the cracks because they don’t have anyone at home that cares.
It is absolutely ridiulous that they will be cutting 55 of 72 counselor positions. Let me guess the ones they will be keeping are the ones already downtown in their own office?
There are many places to make cuts and I suspect they don’t need to have their own personal secretary.
Is the Super and her staff willing to take a cut in pay to keep some jobs. Maybe they need to have them pay more for their benefits.
I know where were the biggest savings would be.. Get rid of the WASL/HSPE (they thought changing the name was clever)
Then all those people that have to grade the tests and determine a score are not needed. I bet that would save millions.
opiemuyo on May 03 at 7:52 a.m.
Eagle, please don’t believe every thing you read on teh interwebs. I am on the School Advisory Council, at my child’s parochial school. I am privy to the budget numbers. My statement stands. One quarter.
westerly on May 03 at 8:18 a.m.
Spokesman Roloff makes $103,000 a year plus $26,000 in other benefits…
http://wwwb.thenewstribune.com/databases/school_pay/index.php?names=roloff&schools=&districts=Spokane&sort=&job_title=
westerly on May 03 at 8:22 a.m.
Veneske makes $140,000 a year plus $20,000 in benefits
http://wwwb.thenewstribune.com/databases/school_pay/index.php?names=roloff&schools=&districts=Spokane&sort=&job_title=
Common_Sense on May 03 at 8:35 a.m.
I thought leaders, CEO types need to be compensated much higher than the minions or they’ll go elsewhere. We’re told executive and administration costs need to stay high in the free market to encourage innovation, why is public education different? Are we settling for less for our kids or are we having double standards?
westerly on May 03 at 8:37 a.m.
Nancy Stowell makes $222,000 a year and another $36,000 a year in benefits.
http://wwwb.thenewstribune.com/databases/school_pay/index.php?names=&schools=&districts=Spokane&sort=job_title&job_title=Superintendent
Common_Sense on May 03 at 8:40 a.m.
Westerly, so you’re saying they’re underpaid?
westerly on May 03 at 9:06 a.m.
No, overpaid for this regions poverty, the Puget sound area is much higher in comp. But that region makes twice as much as the poor folk in Spokane and hence the higher comp..Spokane can’t afford these high comps with Spokane’s super low wages and very low property taxes….. just doesn’t pencil out. You can’t pay Seattle wages to Spokane District 81 employees..the tax base here isn’t viable..
Arizonian on May 03 at 9:10 a.m.
I totally agree with William1977. Just like the private sector (but not quite as extreme) there is way to much money flowing to the top. While teachers are putting in 50+ hour weeks to maybe make $40,000, there are well over 100 administrators in the Spokane District making over $100,000. Principals making $110,000 and superintendents making over $175,000? That’s about as much as what the Governor makes. Now multiply those numbers by all the administrators across the state and it’s no wonder there is a huge deficit problem. I’m all for public education (not everyone can afford private schools) but it seems that the disparity of income between teachers and administrators is way too large. It’s sad that ultimately in the end, our children are the ones that lose out the most. We will pay dearly for it in other ways with a dumbed down society in the future.
Our country spends over $700 billion a year on defense. Maybe the “sacred cow” ought to be looked at a little more closely. One fighter jet could probably pay for a lot of teacher salaries.
Common_Sense on May 03 at 9:17 a.m.
Arizonian, I agree but wouldn’t the same standard apply to private sector?
drewzus on May 03 at 9:28 a.m.
Opie—I am sure that your parochial school also does not have to bus students to school or educate special-needs students (in fact, your school likely does not enroll a substantial number of special education students). Your number of free/reduced-lunch students is probably non-existent and your school also probably requires a substantial amount of volunteerism from parents, which offsets some of the money your school would have to spend without that free labor (nearly all parochial schools in our area do this).
It’s easy to gloat about the educational value of a school when the parents are middle- to upper-class and are involved in the school culture. Of course that school will yield great test scores.
ManleyPointer on May 03 at 9:30 a.m.
Two points:
loudin argues that tax revenue directed to education is “well-spent”? Really? Public education in this country is a JOKE!! What this country needs is a free market in education, NOT a government monopoly, so that our children are stuck riding an educational Amtrak.
Which brings me to Point #2: it is absolutely stunning (and utterly indefensible) that we pay our administrators so freaking much money!!! A vision-impaired person can clearly see that this is an area of tremendous resource drain/waste, and if we’re going to start cutting education budgets, we need to start here.
><(((*> on May 03 at 9:47 a.m.
the private sector is not the cure of a institution of society.
if you think corruption, waste and mistreatment of constituent groups ends when the government steps out and corporations step in, then you are sadly naive.
ManleyPointer on May 03 at 9:56 a.m.
phantom, what are you talking about when you refer to “a [sic] institution of society”? And how does a social function achieve this status, in your mind? And if you think I’M naive to think that the private sector would more efficiently and effectively educate our kids, what does that make you? How’s that public educational system workin’ for you, phantom?
><(((*> on May 03 at 10:00 a.m.
okay. you’re correct. the first and most important goal of business would be to educate effectively.
that explains why so many companies have been such great stewards of the environment, been icons of safety, and protectors of the greater good.
dollars be damned!
ManleyPointer on May 03 at 11:21 a.m.
People who get all sarcastic and self-righteous about the evils of “companies” and “corporations” and “business” when making their economic arguments exhibit a real lack of understanding of free market concepts. It’s knee-jerk 60’s stuff, and it is incompatible with thoughtful discussion.
Common_Sense on May 03 at 1:46 p.m.
ManlyPointer, I think it is you who lacks understanding. Privatizing education would not be less expensive and if it were, the talent pool would be a joke.
ManleyPointer on May 03 at 3:32 p.m.
First of all, I didn’t say it would necessarily be less expensive, just better. Second of all, I have no idea what “talent pool” you are talking about. There is not necessarily any lack of teaching talent in this country; it only needs to be properly utilized.
><(((*> on May 03 at 4:10 p.m.
“People who get all sarcastic and self-righteous about the evils of “companies” and “corporations” and “business” when making their economic arguments exhibit a real lack of understanding of free market concepts”
anyone with a brain can look around and see what kind of action corporations take.
we have businesses. to make money. not to build and protect the common good.
it’s a really simple concept.
ManleyPointer on May 03 at 4:39 p.m.
Too simple for me, I guess. How you can argue that a healthy and vibrant economy does NOT contribute to the public good, I have no idea.
“Corporations” are not real, phantom, they are legal constructs. They can’t be “evil” or “good”. The people who run them may be evil, or good, but that doesn’t seem to be your thrust. You talk about “corporations” like they’re some kind of malevolent beings, stalking about like roaring lions, seeking whom they might devour. It’s almost like you FEAR them, phantom, and if that’s the case, just tell yourself: “They are not real. They are not real.”
If bad people are breaking the law, arrest and imprison them.
Common_Sense on May 03 at 8:49 p.m.
A) I do not want some corporation deciding that my kids should learn about their idea of the “greatest” political figures of all time (Bush, Reagan, etc.).
B) I do not want some corporation teaching my child creationism as the source of human life.
c) I do not want some corporation running education where executives earn millions and teachers earn $20k/yr.
><(((*> on May 04 at 8:27 a.m.
You talk about “corporations” like they’re some kind of malevolent beings, stalking about like roaring lions, seeking whom they might devour.
AKA, a hostile take over.
;P
my4boysmom on May 04 at 8:31 a.m.
a) the admistration/districts need to take the same cut in pay and perhaps even layoff a few asst. principals across the board. They get paid too much when they have such a budget issue.
b) education in this country is a joke and this is why I homeschool. I took my kids out of the ps after one of them was assaulted in school and told to keep it quiet and the other one couldn’t read in the 3rd grade because they couldn’t use a program to teach him until the 5th grade. He reads now because I purchased a program for his special needs myself that cost me $100. He is dyslexic. Yes, I read to him at home and questioned them at every turn only to be stonewalled. They are both flourishing.
c) I’m not sure that the money they have is always spent effectively and I believe there is a lot of waste. Corps look at things differently so a private sector rather than government run school would likely be financially more effective with better results and they will get rid of ineffective personnel. Bad teachers are protected by the union and even good teachers are protected by the unions. The principals really have no voice for a lot of things regarding teachers. My son’s IEP was violated and no one did anything. The teacher basically didn’t follow it and refused to follow it. He could file a lawsuit for it and it cost him his graduation. He didn’t deserve what happened to him. I really don’t think people understand how schools are really run. If a parent has a voice in the private sector and they do then teachers and administrators do their jobs better, the very jobs they are receiving a paycheck for. Doesn’t one get fired usually for not doing their job? BTW we have teachers in our family. I have had to educate them on what it is like to have a Special Education child because they really don’t get it.
><(((*> on May 04 at 9:14 a.m.
“financially more effective with better results”
better financial results for shareholders, #1.
more effective at teaching? debatable.
are students from ITT Tech more qualified than students from MIT?