Thomisms

1. Teacher salaries

If you went to the link Thom posted (thanks Thom), you will find that teachers are among the highest paid professions excluding managerial positions (company CEO's), doctors and lawyers. Here is a sampling.

Teacher hourly pay........34.69
Engineers.................37.28
Computer..................34.61
Architects................31.55
Accountants...............27.22
Firefighters..............20.36
Police Officers...........24.66

More interesting, this hourly rate results in an average teacher salary of $48,308. This is substantially below the Naperville average of $65,000 plus.

All of this demonstrating that teachers, in general, are paid in line with other professions and even more so in Naperville.

2. District balanced budget

They better have balanced budgets. They took anywhere from $12 million to $24 million more than they promised taxpayers in 2002. This is far more of a crime than Blago (he did not raise our taxes!!).

3. District 203 compares favorably to other District. Yes, like Stevenson high school where they are paying millions in bonuses and penalties to teachers.

Does Thom mean we are petty theives compared to them?

His numbers say it all--6% plus increases to returning teachers for at least 16 years--No wonder they are paid more than 30% above the average. Thom should take Orzag's place for Obama, he would fit right in.

What did Harold Washington call this? Oh yes, hocuspocusdominocus!!

I'm absolutely sure 204 administrators will find a way to grab that money for themselves rather than hiring teachers. They're a gang of thieves and I wonder if there is a way to bring them to court over wasting taxpayer money with that totally unnecessary Metea High School. They knew all along that school was not needed and they lied to the taxpayers with phony population studies.

I would love to see where canuhearmenow got the info that the governments listed teachers as the highest paying jobs per hour. I have not been able to find any document that can verify that.

I have found a couple lists of the highest paying jobs per hour, but teacher was not on them. ANd I hve not found anything released by teh government at this time. (Granted I only did a 5 minute search. But you would think that would show up in the first two pages of results somewhere.)

So let's see a source for that statement. Otherwise I will assume it came from some garbage email floating around that has no basis in truth.

With regard to the "average annual increase" of teacher salaries of 3.5% instead of 6% due to "turnover", it seems that we have taken the benefit of a changing workforce (retirees replaced by new hires) and given it to the teachers. Shouldn't that benefit have gone to the district, perhaps to provide additional training and support for the new teachers?

The "average annual increase" figure basically says that the entire teacher payroll went up 3.5%. This number doesn't really have any bearing on a discussion of individual salary increases.

In the past decade, we had a tax windfall that clearly wasn't destined to last forever. But instead of saving some for the future, we just spent it all and created a salary (and pension) obligation that is going to become more and more difficult to support.

A few thoughts on the last couple of posts;

The average annual increase in 203 teachers salaries over the last 10 years or so has been in the 3.5%-3.6% range. This is what it costs us in dollars and cents. This is lower than the average raise for incumbent teachers due to turnover. It is important to realize that this increase is about .3% more annually than what is called the Employment Cost index (ECI) that measures the average increase in wages nationally. So, the net effect is that 203 teachers are doing .3% better annually the national average.

I will also disagree with the following statement; the Fed gov issued the list of the highest paid occupations, per hour, and teachers led the list.

I will refer the interested reader to the National Compensation Survey: Occupational Wages in the United States, June 2006

Thom Higgins
QE203.org

We all (not just TH) need to quit treating teachers like a separate class.

They are workers, just like the rest of us. Regardless of the past, or their needs, or their union, they should suffer the same as all the rest of us in horrible economic times. They are no more special than you or me.

We are (have?) running out of money here in Naperville.

Our jobs have left (ayone looked at the employment figures at,say, Lu (Alcatel), Tellabsn, Nalco, etc., lately?)

Our homes are "underwater".

Our raises are non-existent to very, very low for the enbtire decade.

Yet, many oput here insist it is a good thing (no, many insist it is the righteous thing) that we have given teachers raises that approximate 3 times the inflation level for 15 years!!!!

The Fed gov issued the list of the highest paid occupations, per hour, and teachers led the list.

How can we continue to defend teachers as some sort of underclassed citizen when it is clear they now are the elite?

Please note this is not a condemnation of teachers, but a broader comment on the self-entitled attitude of their union and on our own bad judgement.

Are we all nuts?

Thom,

Thanks for your line item response.

Like all good things, there are declining marginal returns on education and government in general. This is known as dis-utility, like eating too many of your favorite candy then barfing.

Many, if not most people, recognize that we are now beyond receiving positive returns on bigger and more expensive government: and, that the USA is about to drop into a financial abyss possibly triggering Argentina or Weimar Germany like hyper-inflation.

IMHO, every level of government, and every citizen has a responsibility to leave a prosperous and functioning country to our children and grandchildren: unfortunately the situation is getting bleaker by the day.

When China turns off the credit, the USA hyper inflates, and the dollar collapses to near zero value, 2011 is the year that I am reading more often.

Regarding the salary analysis in this post:

By Thom Higgins on August 16, 2010 11:50 PM,

what is most interesting is the remarkable consistency of annual raises of approx. 6% each year over a 16 year time period. During the same 16 years, the Social Security Cost of Living Adjustment has averaged 2.8% with a much greater variation, including lows of 1.4 in 2002 and 1.2 in 1998, as well as highs of 5.8 in 2008 and 4.1 in 2005.

I disagree with the assumption that anyone, especially someone working for a nonprofit, is entitled to a raise more than double the cost of living increase year after year. (I am aware of the current contract but believe that this years 1% raise is in exchange for 3+% raises the other two years.) Teachers have a number of avenues available to them to increase their salaries, just like workers in private industry. They can take on additional responsibility (stipends, dept heads, administration) or pursue more training.

If we continue to pay out at a greater rate of increase than the rate at which our inflow is increasing, sooner or later we will run out of money. Just because it has happened to other districts earlier doesn't mean we can ignore basic math.

We have had a lot of school board members in 16 years and it clearly hasn't made much of a difference in salaries. Voting them out isn't the solution, we need to challenge union control of education.

Anonymous,

Thanks for the heads up on the link.

The link I referenced was for QE203’s analysis of the top Chicago area public school districts here. If you read it you will see just how well D203 compares to its peers on both the academic performance of its students and on a cost basis as well.

As to teachers salaries you can read our Overview of Teachers Salary Increases For Fiscal Years 2007-2010 to get a better idea of recent raises. A few comments on this subject;

Perhaps of greatest interest is the fact that, per the ISBE, the average teacher salary has increased over the long term at approx 3.62% per year. That has been the actual cost to us taxpayers for teachers raises. See analysis for explanation.

Regarding Dr. Leis and salary increases; from my research the increases negotiated during his tenure were smaller than previous contracts going back all the way to 1994 with the exception of one contract covering three years that was slightly lower. Over the long term (1994 to 2010) my best estimate is that the average annual increase for incumbent teachers was 6.4%, with contracts negotiated during Leis at 5.7% and contracts before him averaging 6.6%

If the above makes you unhappy realize that if you expect a teacher to receive only cost of living increases then you are in effect saying that you will only pay a starting salary wage adjusted for inflation, with no opportunity for any real salary increase over inflation.

Going forward in D203 we will see the average salary decrease, certainly for the 2010-2011 school year, and I will bet that, for the next two years, if there is an increase in average teacher salary, it will be less than 1%.

As to your comments regarding Central’s renovation, this is from the Build the Future website; The $87.7 million addition and renovation project at Naperville Central High School is the largest and most challenging of the projects. The work includes approximately 170,000 square feet of new construction and 370,000 square feet of renovation. It still has another years work to do, but is currently under budget in the $6-7 million range (my est) even with the strike and various upgrades.

Please remember that overwhelmingly, the commercial contractors building major projects such as this, be they public or private, are union shops. So, no, we are not paying more . Please also remember that school board member Terry Fielden (who is the chairman of the facilities sub committee) has 26 years experience in school construction management and has been invaluable to the district.

It is notable that D203 abated the first years payment for the referendum, ($3 million plus) and that the cost of the remaining payments have been reduced as well due to favorable financing and grants.

Lastly, with respect to property values, good school districts drive property values. If you are thinking of moving to a suburban community to raise your kids, homes in the 203 area are mighty enticing knowing that the district has a balanced budget and no program cutbacks to speak of.

Thom Higgins
QE203.org

By Anonymous on August 16, 2010 9:41 AM

Secondly, how many square feet are being built and at what cost? No one can answer the question on this blog. I can't shake the feeling that the cost is multiples of what a private enterprise would pay.
------------------------

You are exactly correct because of the prevailing wage act. Under the act, governmental bodies are locked into historic rates. They cannot take advantage of a down market.

Thom,

Your link is broken for the facts.

Secondly, how many square feet are being built and at what cost? No one can answer the question on this blog. I can't shake the feeling that the cost is multiples of what a private enterprise would pay.

The home owners in 203 are not a bottomless pit of tax revenue waiting to be pumped like an oil well. My taxes increased 100% in 10 years driven by the 203 district coming in at 70% of my tax bill. The homeowners were lied to in the referendum a few years ago; and Dr Leis waiting until the night before school was to begin to throw the homeowners under the buss with 7% per year compounding salary increases for the teachers was unconscionable.

As home values are deflating to 1999 pre- bubble levels, Naperville's high-tech, high-paying engineering jobs have been exported by the FEDs to China and India (thanks Judy); the teachers and administrators still feel the need to boost their incomes which are approximately double what each parent earns in the mostly two income households of Naperville. What the district needs is a 20-30% across the board reduction in expenses to 1999 levels to prevent a further erosion in property vales and to make our City attractive as a location for business with high paying jobs for our citizens.

The Free Traders and Progressives, which includes the NEA, need to be exposed for the self-serving, ideologically-driven looting machines that they are and driven from power at all levels of government.

Any answers?

Some other town is worse?

In 204 next election people have got to get their hed out of the sand and vote out the incumbents that threw away $150M on an unneeded 3rd high school to placate a few interests in the area. This HS built for 3000 will have less than 1750 in the fall ( by the SB's own numbers) and never exceed 2300. After closing the freshman center @ Waubonsie and the 1200 capacity there, what we have done is spend $150 for a TEMPORARY need for about 500 seats. All the scare tactics on split shifts and other nonsense were just that. The cannot deny it now, now blow smoke up anyones backside, the facts are what the facts are. In the process they added over $3M a year to the district in extra transportation costs because they cannot bus enough kids to that corner of the district to fill it. Already there are kids on the bus for 9 miles and the capacity on't pass 70%. Let's bus some of the kids from the SB members who protected their own areas and went along wit this nonsense there.

Expect another operating referendum ( but not until after the April election - you can count on that) - and significant tax increase starting in 2014 to pay for the debt that was refinanced to build this school.

203 on the other had it appears is managing it's monies well and this type of 'windfall' will only solidify their status.-- when they said they were coming in on budget there really were. In 204 after 2 years of having the newspapaer print the cost was $124M-( what the ref was for) they come out and say that at $145M they were under budget ? What ? Really --super secret budget that they denied all along until they had to file financial papers....204 leadership has failed us all...become educated in what happened here. Don't allow the same people to manage your tax dollars going forward.

Regular Guy,

School board membership is an unpaid position.

Regarding the financial condition of various districts; Compared to many districts, D203 is in very good financial shape. Many, if not most, are facing significant deficits. D203 had a balanced budget before the federal payment, but they also spend less than many comparable school districts so that helps a lot. Please see QE203's analysis here.

Thom Higgins
QE203.org

By A Regular Guy on August 13, 2010 2:30 PM

I live in 203 and it seems like the school board here is doing a pretty good job with finances.
------------------------------

I should hope so with all the surplus that they are pulling in after they ripped off the taxpayers on the last referendum.

Enough is Enough on August 13, 2010 1:56 PM
Since school budgets were balanced (at least in 203, 204 is a real cess pool), then these funds should be used for tax relief.
---------------------------------

Can't do it. Guidelines are that it has to be spent to hire teachers.

I didn't realize that the school board members got paid! How much are they paid? Do they also collect a pension from the district? How much are their golden parachute retirements? The public deserves to know this!!!

I live in 203 and it seems like the school board here is doing a pretty good job with finances. If I recall correctly, they just negotiated the teachers contract with only a very slight raise over three years. It also sounds like the construction projects are on or under budget, and are just about on time.

Since school budgets were balanced (at least in 203, 204 is a real cess pool), then these funds should be used for tax relief.

We have paid over $100 million based on a lie, how about at least $1 million back.

With out of site taxes, and a school board that doesn't know how to handle money, other than there golden parachute retirements and their own overpaid salaries, it is never going to happen.

The only possibly and I do mean possibility, is to vote all of the school board members out, put new blood in and hope that they are more responsible.

But remember it's all for the children.

Wake up people --------- it's not going to happen!! Where else can you have your children in school for 12 years and pay taxes all of your life and be forced out of your home when you retire because you can't afford the taxes !!

When the taxpayes hold the district and school board responsible for their actions, then and only then will be some ray of hope.

They should use the money to educate the kids on how much money they are going to have to pay back with interest on the loan from China and anyone else the FEDs are getting their vote buying money these days.

Aren't kids already loaded with more than $50K each in Federal debt plus there is the $100 Trillion in unfunded Federal obligations?

One heck of a math problem for kindergartners.