Northwest Indiana Discussion

Northwest Indiana's Leading Discussion Forum
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 12:09 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 178 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: S.D. 157 - Leave It Alone
PostPosted: Thu May 07, 2009 11:45 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 11:23 am
Posts: 1641
chugar52 wrote:
LoisLane wrote:
chugar52 wrote:
Lois Lane, were you at the meeting where the Business Manager of D157 gave the budget report? District 157 is working in the BLACK, not RED. I'm sure funnyman made a typo. As far as the taxes for River Oaks, it's the BUILDING that they get the property taxes from. If I move out of my house and it is empty, I still have to pay my property taxes. The same holds true for River Oaks. I guess you also don't realize that there are other businesses that have opened up in CC in new strip malls, so there is more property tax money. I hate to say it Lois, but you have NO idea how school finances work at all.

Right. So let's look at it in simpler terms. Say SEARS goes belly up. then MACY's, then JCPenneys. Now you say that neither store pays property taxes to S.D. 157. (Iknow better, because SEARS has a history of contesting their property taxes) So, now these stores have moved away, and are empty. Naturally the little stores in the mall pack up and move out too. So, who picks up the tab for the property taxes on an empty building? The building management? No. He has a lot of empty square footage, so he files bankruptcy. So, where do the 4% annual raises come from for poor S.D. 157? Looks like they use their line of credit. But, the banks aren't giving out any credit. Now what? Rub your magic lamp and come up with an answer. Remember, commercial foreclosures will not impact this country until this summer. I guess I have NO idea how school finances work. I do have a grasp on reality, though.


I guess you didn't read the whole article that was in the paper. District 157 has always been frugal for the most part, but they also have to remain competitive to keep good employees so they don't go someplace else.

Here is what you missed

D.157 business manager lauded

District 157 has received recognition status based on its latest financial profile.

Superintendent Michele Morris credited the achievement to the work of Business Manager Alicia Evans.

The annual profile offers a glimpse into a school district's financial health and the designation of financial recognition is the highest ranking.

The listing is compiled by the Illinois State Board of Education using five indicators of financial performance, from available cash to level of debt, and is based on an analysis of a districts' annual financial reports.

The district received the highest score possible in three of five areas, Morris said.

She said Evans considers the financial profile to be the adequate yearly progress report for a school district's business department.

"Kudos to your, Alicia Evans, for a job well done, and hats off to you for meeting your AYP," Morris said.

Soooo, I guess you'll just ignore my question, then.

_________________
My sole purpose in life is to be an example for others not to follow.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: S.D. 157 - Leave It Alone
PostPosted: Thu May 07, 2009 1:11 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 10:03 am
Posts: 50
The listing is compiled by the Illinois State Board of Education using five indicators of financial performance, from available cash to level of debt, and is based on an analysis of a districts' annual financial reports.

I did answer your question as far as I can tell. Next negotiations might be different if Sears, and all of the stores close as you say they will, but you have been wrong ever since you've been posting.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: S.D. 157 - Leave It Alone
PostPosted: Thu May 07, 2009 2:23 pm 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 11:23 am
Posts: 1641
chugar52 wrote:
The listing is compiled by the Illinois State Board of Education using five indicators of financial performance, from available cash to level of debt, and is based on an analysis of a districts' annual financial reports.

I did answer your question as far as I can tell. Next negotiations might be different if Sears, and all of the stores close as you say they will, but you have been wrong ever since you've been posting.

You didn't answer anything, you (as usual) only made excuses. Face it, this school board cannot negotiate a teacher's contract, because this school board is scared of the union. That's what it boils down to. Otherwise, anyone with any brains would have negotiated for one year at a time, until economic times improve. And any teachers would not leave, because they would have to start over, at an unfamiliar district. Spend, spend, spend, tax, tax, tax...

_________________
My sole purpose in life is to be an example for others not to follow.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: S.D. 157 - Leave It Alone
PostPosted: Thu May 07, 2009 3:12 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 10:03 am
Posts: 50
LoisLane wrote:
chugar52 wrote:
The listing is compiled by the Illinois State Board of Education using five indicators of financial performance, from available cash to level of debt, and is based on an analysis of a districts' annual financial reports.

I did answer your question as far as I can tell. Next negotiations might be different if Sears, and all of the stores close as you say they will, but you have been wrong ever since you've been posting.

You didn't answer anything, you (as usual) only made excuses. Face it, this school board cannot negotiate a teacher's contract, because this school board is scared of the union. That's what it boils down to. Otherwise, anyone with any brains would have negotiated for one year at a time, until economic times improve. And any teachers would not leave, because they would have to start over, at an unfamiliar district. Spend, spend, spend, tax, tax, tax...


I would like you to find ONE school district that negotiates a one year contract for teachers, especially after what the teachers had to endure when Rosemary Hendricks was there. They wanted some security and justifiably so. I know many people that are in unions other than teachers unions, and not one of them negotiates a one year contract. If you find the district with a one year contract, prove it and then maybe the board will try to negotiate that with the next contract which will be up in a little over 2 years. I would like the name of the district and I will personally do a FOIA on the contract just to make sure that it's a one year contract. Trying to find a school district with a one year contract should keep you busy for quite a long time. Lately I've seen in the paper teacher contracts that are 5 years long, so good luck.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: S.D. 157 - Leave It Alone
PostPosted: Thu May 07, 2009 4:26 pm 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 11:23 am
Posts: 1641
chugar52 wrote:
LoisLane wrote:
chugar52 wrote:
The listing is compiled by the Illinois State Board of Education using five indicators of financial performance, from available cash to level of debt, and is based on an analysis of a districts' annual financial reports.

I did answer your question as far as I can tell. Next negotiations might be different if Sears, and all of the stores close as you say they will, but you have been wrong ever since you've been posting.

You didn't answer anything, you (as usual) only made excuses. Face it, this school board cannot negotiate a teacher's contract, because this school board is scared of the union. That's what it boils down to. Otherwise, anyone with any brains would have negotiated for one year at a time, until economic times improve. And any teachers would not leave, because they would have to start over, at an unfamiliar district. Spend, spend, spend, tax, tax, tax...


I would like you to find ONE school district that negotiates a one year contract for teachers, especially after what the teachers had to endure when Rosemary Hendricks was there. They wanted some security and justifiably so. I know many people that are in unions other than teachers unions, and not one of them negotiates a one year contract. If you find the district with a one year contract, prove it and then maybe the board will try to negotiate that with the next contract which will be up in a little over 2 years. I would like the name of the district and I will personally do a FOIA on the contract just to make sure that it's a one year contract. Trying to find a school district with a one year contract should keep you busy for quite a long time. Lately I've seen in the paper teacher contracts that are 5 years long, so good luck.

:smt015

_________________
My sole purpose in life is to be an example for others not to follow.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: S.D. 157 - Leave It Alone
PostPosted: Thu May 07, 2009 8:40 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 10:03 pm
Posts: 48
Churgar52 and myself have answered many or your questions, you just don’t like the answers because you think you’re the only one that understands reality. The reality is for the most part, teacher’s unions as well as others will not accept a 1 year contract. A teacher union contract if very in depth that involves more than just compensation. In principle, I think you have good intensions as far as negotiation compensation on a annual bases, but there is no way anybody would entertain opening up the whole contract on a annual basis. But let’s just say a 3 year deal is agreed upon what includes opening up compensation on a annual basis, you would support lower the annual compensation based on the percentage of revenue that might go down because of issues you have previously mentions. But the downside to that is if for some reasons the revenues go up, and they have many times over the years, and the percentage is say 10% increase, the union will no doubt claim their cut of the 10% increase which for the most part would be extreme and scrutinized by the public including you. Now you can argue that a one year contract is only needed during the speculated downturn in the economy. But how do you think the unions would like it if the board only did one year contract during the bad time having the board cry about lowered and offering lower pay increases, but when the times get better the board attempts to negotiate a multiyear contract so the annual percentage pay raises are frozen. Attempting to structure a contract in this manner would create a very hostile environment.
Also, are board members scared of teachers unions, scared is not the correct word. Board members would be concerned about the public outcry that is typical when teacher’s unions strike. First and foremost, the board and administration is tasked to educate children keeping them in the classroom. Having teachers walk out on strike that would force the school to close down is a total disruption of the education process. Does the risk of a teachers strike bring some fear to the situation, yes, and it should, and this unfortunately does give the advantage to the teachers union. If a fair contract is not provided to teachers they will leave, the do not have to start all over again because other school systems do recognize the prior years of service and place that teacher at the proper level as to not affect their pay. There is no risk to the teacher to leave. As a matter of fact, they may improve their position because many schools in the Chicago area have a higher pay scale than D157. That too is also taken into consideration when compensation is negotiated during contract talks. Another point, the board will have to shell out more $$ to the board’s law firm if the teachers contract is negotiated on a annual basis. Seems there was much criticism towards the Mayor for the amount of money the City spends on legal fees. It is unwise to enter negotiations without legal advice and proper contract language.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: S.D. 157 - Leave It Alone
PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2009 7:08 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 11:23 am
Posts: 1641
funnyman wrote:
Churgar52 and myself have answered many or your questions, you just don’t like the answers because you think you’re the only one that understands reality. The reality is for the most part, teacher’s unions as well as others will not accept a 1 year contract. A teacher union contract if very in depth that involves more than just compensation. In principle, I think you have good intensions as far as negotiation compensation on a annual bases, but there is no way anybody would entertain opening up the whole contract on a annual basis. But let’s just say a 3 year deal is agreed upon what includes opening up compensation on a annual basis, you would support lower the annual compensation based on the percentage of revenue that might go down because of issues you have previously mentions. But the downside to that is if for some reasons the revenues go up, and they have many times over the years, and the percentage is say 10% increase, the union will no doubt claim their cut of the 10% increase which for the most part would be extreme and scrutinized by the public including you. Now you can argue that a one year contract is only needed during the speculated downturn in the economy. But how do you think the unions would like it if the board only did one year contract during the bad time having the board cry about lowered and offering lower pay increases, but when the times get better the board attempts to negotiate a multiyear contract so the annual percentage pay raises are frozen. Attempting to structure a contract in this manner would create a very hostile environment.
Also, are board members scared of teachers unions, scared is not the correct word. Board members would be concerned about the public outcry that is typical when teacher’s unions strike. First and foremost, the board and administration is tasked to educate children keeping them in the classroom. Having teachers walk out on strike that would force the school to close down is a total disruption of the education process. Does the risk of a teachers strike bring some fear to the situation, yes, and it should, and this unfortunately does give the advantage to the teachers union. If a fair contract is not provided to teachers they will leave, the do not have to start all over again because other school systems do recognize the prior years of service and place that teacher at the proper level as to not affect their pay. There is no risk to the teacher to leave. As a matter of fact, they may improve their position because many schools in the Chicago area have a higher pay scale than D157. That too is also taken into consideration when compensation is negotiated during contract talks. Another point, the board will have to shell out more $$ to the board’s law firm if the teachers contract is negotiated on a annual basis. Seems there was much criticism towards the Mayor for the amount of money the City spends on legal fees. It is unwise to enter negotiations without legal advice and proper contract language.

So, the teachers control the board. NOT the way it is supposed to be.

_________________
My sole purpose in life is to be an example for others not to follow.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: S.D. 157 - Leave It Alone
PostPosted: Mon May 11, 2009 3:43 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 10:03 pm
Posts: 48
Considering your comments Lois, I going to assume you have never been part of a union or on the management side of bargaining. All I’m trying to get across is that unions use the leverage of a strike to help influence contract language and almost always a teacher’s strike works against the board and almost in all cases, the strike threat is due to no agreement to compensation. During negotiations, the union asks for a very large raise, management proposes something very low, the final amount is negotiated to what is in the final language. Some people will think what they settle on is just right, others like you will think it’s high, others will think it’s not enough. Because compensation is negotiated does not mean the union controls the board. There is language in a union contract that management negotiates to have it written in for their benefit, and the only way for management to get their language in is to give something back to the teachers. I will also add that perhaps what you’re saying about River Oaks stores closing and the mall filing for bankruptcy could come true, but unless something officially happened in that order, a union will never bow down to hearsay. If the projections does not come true, the credibility of the board will be out the window making future negotiations difficult. Now what would be fair and doable language is, based on speculation, the union would agree to come back to the negotiation table if such an event would materialize but even that might be hard to sell.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: S.D. 157 - Leave It Alone
PostPosted: Mon May 11, 2009 4:52 pm 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 11:23 am
Posts: 1641
funnyman wrote:
Considering your comments Lois, I going to assume you have never been part of a union or on the management side of bargaining. All I’m trying to get across is that unions use the leverage of a strike to help influence contract language and almost always a teacher’s strike works against the board and almost in all cases, the strike threat is due to no agreement to compensation. During negotiations, the union asks for a very large raise, management proposes something very low, the final amount is negotiated to what is in the final language. Some people will think what they settle on is just right, others like you will think it’s high, others will think it’s not enough. Because compensation is negotiated does not mean the union controls the board. There is language in a union contract that management negotiates to have it written in for their benefit, and the only way for management to get their language in is to give something back to the teachers. I will also add that perhaps what you’re saying about River Oaks stores closing and the mall filing for bankruptcy could come true, but unless something officially happened in that order, a union will never bow down to hearsay. If the projections does not come true, the credibility of the board will be out the window making future negotiations difficult. Now what would be fair and doable language is, based on speculation, the union would agree to come back to the negotiation table if such an event would materialize but even that might be hard to sell.

I've been part of more negotiations than you can imagine. You and chugar52 BOTH sound like you are pro-union. Not knowing the particulars about the recent "settlement" between the school board and the teachers, I wish you good luck. Apparently the board is afraid of the union, and the union takes advantage of that fact. Enough said.

_________________
My sole purpose in life is to be an example for others not to follow.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: S.D. 157 - Leave It Alone
PostPosted: Tue May 12, 2009 11:09 am 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 10:03 am
Posts: 50
LoisLane wrote:
funnyman wrote:
Considering your comments Lois, I going to assume you have never been part of a union or on the management side of bargaining. All I’m trying to get across is that unions use the leverage of a strike to help influence contract language and almost always a teacher’s strike works against the board and almost in all cases, the strike threat is due to no agreement to compensation. During negotiations, the union asks for a very large raise, management proposes something very low, the final amount is negotiated to what is in the final language. Some people will think what they settle on is just right, others like you will think it’s high, others will think it’s not enough. Because compensation is negotiated does not mean the union controls the board. There is language in a union contract that management negotiates to have it written in for their benefit, and the only way for management to get their language in is to give something back to the teachers. I will also add that perhaps what you’re saying about River Oaks stores closing and the mall filing for bankruptcy could come true, but unless something officially happened in that order, a union will never bow down to hearsay. If the projections does not come true, the credibility of the board will be out the window making future negotiations difficult. Now what would be fair and doable language is, based on speculation, the union would agree to come back to the negotiation table if such an event would materialize but even that might be hard to sell.

I've been part of more negotiations than you can imagine. You and chugar52 BOTH sound like you are pro-union. Not knowing the particulars about the recent "settlement" between the school board and the teachers, I wish you good luck. Apparently the board is afraid of the union, and the union takes advantage of that fact. Enough said.


Neither funnyman nor myself are union, pro or otherwise, but we BOTH understand the give and take of negotiations. If you have been part of negotiations, you would know that both sides give. You have no idea what the teachers wanted and didn't get.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: S.D. 157 - Leave It Alone
PostPosted: Tue May 12, 2009 11:20 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 11:23 am
Posts: 1641
chugar52 wrote:
LoisLane wrote:
funnyman wrote:
Considering your comments Lois, I going to assume you have never been part of a union or on the management side of bargaining. All I’m trying to get across is that unions use the leverage of a strike to help influence contract language and almost always a teacher’s strike works against the board and almost in all cases, the strike threat is due to no agreement to compensation. During negotiations, the union asks for a very large raise, management proposes something very low, the final amount is negotiated to what is in the final language. Some people will think what they settle on is just right, others like you will think it’s high, others will think it’s not enough. Because compensation is negotiated does not mean the union controls the board. There is language in a union contract that management negotiates to have it written in for their benefit, and the only way for management to get their language in is to give something back to the teachers. I will also add that perhaps what you’re saying about River Oaks stores closing and the mall filing for bankruptcy could come true, but unless something officially happened in that order, a union will never bow down to hearsay. If the projections does not come true, the credibility of the board will be out the window making future negotiations difficult. Now what would be fair and doable language is, based on speculation, the union would agree to come back to the negotiation table if such an event would materialize but even that might be hard to sell.

I've been part of more negotiations than you can imagine. You and chugar52 BOTH sound like you are pro-union. Not knowing the particulars about the recent "settlement" between the school board and the teachers, I wish you good luck. Apparently the board is afraid of the union, and the union takes advantage of that fact. Enough said.


Neither funnyman nor myself are union, pro or otherwise, but we BOTH understand the give and take of negotiations. If you have been part of negotiations, you would know that both sides give. You have no idea what the teachers wanted and didn't get.

Well, from what I've seen, what the teachers didn't get, they can afford to buy on their own. S.D. 157 is among the poorest districts in the state, yet, they are one of the best paid.

_________________
My sole purpose in life is to be an example for others not to follow.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: S.D. 157 - Leave It Alone
PostPosted: Tue May 12, 2009 11:46 am 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 10:03 am
Posts: 50
[/quote]
Neither funnyman nor myself are union, pro or otherwise, but we BOTH understand the give and take of negotiations. If you have been part of negotiations, you would know that both sides give. You have no idea what the teachers wanted and didn't get.[/quote]
Well, from what I've seen, what the teachers didn't get, they can afford to buy on their own. S.D. 157 is among the poorest districts in the state, yet, they are one of the best paid.[/quote]

You really do not have a clue. You make statements without any backup information. What the teachers gave up is not necessarily monetary, first of all. As far as D157 being one of the poorest in the state, I would like you to show me where you get your information. We are not one of the wealthiest, because all of the Northern Suburbs are the wealthy districts, however, most of the surrounding districts, as well as districts down state are much poorer than D157. District 157 is STILL working in the black, unlike most of the surrounding districts. We are not the highest paying either, however, we are competitive and we have to be to attract and retain good teachers. We have already discussed that in length and it's like talking to a brick wall trying to explain something to you because you don't understand.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: S.D. 157 - Leave It Alone
PostPosted: Tue May 12, 2009 11:50 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 11:23 am
Posts: 1641
Do I have to do EVERYONE'S homework...
http://zipskinny.com/index.php?zip=60409

_________________
My sole purpose in life is to be an example for others not to follow.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: S.D. 157 - Leave It Alone
PostPosted: Tue May 12, 2009 12:17 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 10:03 am
Posts: 50
LoisLane wrote:
Do I have to do EVERYONE'S homework...
http://zipskinny.com/index.php?zip=60409


I see the demographics of Calumet City, I see the median income of residents in Calumet City, but I must be missing where it shows what the teachers make and how it compares to other districts. Keep in mind that teachers that have Masters or Masters plus extra hours earn more than teachers with a Bachelors. Also length of service play into the mix too.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: S.D. 157 - Leave It Alone
PostPosted: Thu Jun 11, 2009 10:09 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 11:23 am
Posts: 1641
Yes sireeee bob. This School Board really has a handle on the situation. Settle out of court? Let it go to court. Prove she is a leech on anyone who hires her. Grow a backbone.
The Times wrote:
Lawsuit may settle out of court

By Joan Carreon
Times Correspondent | Thursday, June 11, 2009
CALUMET CITY | A former Hoover-Schrum Elementary District 157 superintendent's lawsuit against the district may be settled out of court.

The District 157 School Board on Tuesday gave approval to a proposed settlement agreement with former Superintendent/CEO Rosemary Hendricks.

No further information was immediately available.

Details of how much may be paid to Hendricks are still being worked out by the attorneys involved in the case, district officials and board members say.

"It is considerably less than what the previous board wanted to give her (Hendricks)," said board Secretary Terri Morrison. She would not elaborate.

Lawyers for the board and Hendricks could not be reached for comment Wednesday. Board President Natalie Barnes declined comment.

Morrison tempered her approval of the proposed settlement by saying she did so "with huge regret."

Hendricks became the district's superintendent on July 1, 2006, but voluntarily resigned her position shortly after the April 2007 School Board election when voters chose three new board members and re-elected Morrison and Barnes.

After the new board took office, Hendricks was placed on paid administrative leave until her July 2007 resignation date.

Hendricks then filed a breach of contract lawsuit against the board in January 2008, maintaining she is due compensation from a severance agreement that was part of her resignation. The School Board had approved a $237,000 salary and annuity package for Hendricks, which the new board later rescinded.

"It saddens me to have to use money that is earmarked for the children's education to pay a person who caused so much turmoil in our district in the short time she was here," Morrison said.

Soon after Hendricks was hired, questions were raised about a potential conflict of interest because she is married to Al Hendricks, dean at the district's Schrum Memorial School.

There also were concerns about Rosemary Hendricks not having a properly registered certificate when she took the district's helm. She ultimately submitted the required paperwork needed for her certificate to be renewed and registered.

After Rosemary Hendricks left District 157, but before her resignation took effect in Calumet City, she became Bellwood Elementary District 88 superintendent and served in that capacity until her 2008 resignation.

Her current employment status is not known.

And then this is ALL TOO FAMILIAR...
Proviso Insider wrote:
Thursday, October 09, 2008
SD88 Superintendent Rosemary Hendricks Resigns, Interim Named...
According to David Pollard of the Proviso Herald, Bellwood SD88 has a new superintendent. Bellwood School District 88 named an interim superintendent Monday after accepting Superintendent Rosemary Hendricks' resignation.

The school board voted unanimously in accepting Hendricks' resignation. School board member Daphne Walker was absent.

Kyle R. Hastings, acting superintendent was named interim superintendent Monday. He will serve as interim superintendent until the search for a new superintendent is completed.

Hastings has served as acting superintendent since mid-August. Hendricks was on family medical leave since June.

Hendricks was supposed to return to work Sept. 22, but the School Board called a special meeting Sept. 19, the weekend before she was to return to work, and voted to put her on paid administrative leave.

Hendricks said she wishes the district well. She said her goal as superintendent was to do what was in the best interest of the children.

"Hopefully the board can come together and do what's best for the children," she said. "I wish them (the board) good luck and much success and I hope they find a superintendent who will meet their needs."

Prior to her resignation an investigation into Hendricks performance was being conducted by Arlington Heights-based law firm Hodges, Loizzi, Eisenhammer Rodick and Kohn. She was placed on paid administrative leave during the investigation.

When asked if the law firm's findings were the result of Hendricks' resignation School Board President Tommy Miller said the board accepted her resignation Oct. 6 and there is no longer an investigation. He would not elaborate as to what the firm was investigating, saying it was a personnel matter.

The school district has paid the law firm $18,000 since July when the investigation began.

Prior to the board's vote, Hastings was paid $744 a day to come into the office a few times a week to sign off on district materials. Now he will work full time and receive the equivalent of Hendricks' annual salary of $140,000, until the search for a new superintendent is completed. Hastings will be responsible for organizing the search of a new superintendent.

The board voted 4-2 in favor of making Hastings interim superintendent. Board members Althea Busby and Ronald Anderson voted against it. Board President Tommy Miller, Maria Casterjon, Yvette Ramirez and Marilyn Thurman voted in favor.

Busby said she voted against making Hastings interim superintendent because there are employees currently working in the school district with a superintendent certification who could step in. "We have people in the district who know the district and are not learning it," she said.

Hastings said he plans to bring the district into compliance with the Regional Office of Education in the areas of technology, finance and district policy and procedures.

Miller said the regional office did their audit of the district in 2007. "They found that there were things in the district that were in compliance and there were things that were not in compliance and we had to correct them," he said.

He said there policies and procedures in the district that were either outdated or needed to be revised. Miller said there are various deadlines to bring things into compliance, but he wants the superintendent to work toward compliance.

"All we have to do is show them that we are moving in the right direction to bring these things up to date," he said.

Hastings said as interim superintendent he hopes make improvements in the district.

"We're going to do a lot of great things this school year," he said. "We're going to bring the district into the new century. A lot of things will be new and improved."

So, Who's next?

_________________
My sole purpose in life is to be an example for others not to follow.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 178 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group