Let's begin by assuming the administration will explain the increase of the base salary from $152,000 to $182,000 as legitimate cost shifting. And let's assume there is no pension spiking happening here.
I have some questions I need to get answered. Since my time is limited to five minutes tonight I might not be able to get to them all. I know Mrs. Lara and many of the cabinet members will have read this. Maybe during one of their infamous clarifying questions they could address some of them for me.
I know the extension of the Superintendent's contract has a fiscal impact. Did our assistant superintendent of business provide a report to the board? If she did, where is it? It wasn't in my board packet and it is no where on line. If a report wasn't provided to the board, why not? Did the board make their decision not knowing the fiscal impact?
Why now, considering the financial environment we are in, is it appropriate to provide the Superintendent step increases? There was no step agreement in the previous contract.
Speaking of steps and assuming we will never see the assistant superintendent's fiscal impact report here are some numbers that might help parents understand exactly what is happening.
|Year||Salary||Raises||Total||BUSD STRS PMT (.08)|
3 year increased liability in raises - $14,032
3 year increase in retirement contribution- $9,127
(Previous contract's STIRS liability = $12,200/year)
Superintendents personal contribution NOW PAID BY THE DISTRICT = $9,127
Total STIRS liability increase - 9,127 X 2= $18, 254
Grand total of $32, 286 ($14,032 + $18, 254 ) increased liability over a 3 year period.
If my numbers are incorrect, I'd like to see our business department's analysis.