[Vision2020] MSD Pay and Tenure--a reply

[Mike Curley]

Mr. Courtney wrote:
> The bottom line: backers of the levies have been screaming
> that MSD teachers are underpaid; and that we need to raise
> their salaries to benefit the kids. 

With regard to the most recent levy, with which I have a 
degree of familiarity, your statement is completely wrong. 
No one said anything about raising teacher salaries.  
There was NO money in the levy projected for teacher 
salary increases.  The increased funds were necessary to 
maintain programs at the various levels, elementary, 
junior high, and high school.  The prior levy (Nov. 2001) 
that was defeated DID include money projected for salary 
increases.  

The Board, at the urging of the then recently-appointed 
superintendent Candis Donicht, DID increase salaries by 
one-half percent last year in the face of the budget 
problems and state holdbacks.  I thought that violated a 
trust of the voters by spending money contrary to the 
"advertising", but that is certainly a personal opinion.  
Regardless of that, no one--the Board, members of the 
Citizens for Quality Education or any other person testified 
at the public hearings, suggested on this forum, or 
otherwise promoted the levy as a salary increase 
mechanism.

The school board has suggested a number of times that a 
levy be proposed strictly to fund salary increases.  The 
union has repeatedly rejected that idea.  By the way, 
negotiations are currently under way for next year's salary 
for teachers, administrators, and all staff.  Minutes of the 
discussions should be available at the district office.

Mike Curley