By Starla Pointer • Staff Writer • 

McMinnville school district begins budget process

Only online subscribers may access this article.

One-day subscriptions available for just $2. Subscribe online by clicking here.

Already a subscriber, please .

Comments

Jim

Typical of our district. Cut 14 to 20 teachers and 1/2 an administration position. The usual approach in this district don't cut the fat but cut the people that teach kids. I'm sorry but it doesn't add up for me.

Don Dix

Jim -- Government is quite adept at missing the fat. Look at the feds ... all fat, very little muscle.

From the article --'And she noted that rising PERS pension program costs — about $1.2 million more for McMinnville school next year' -- How many positions would that effectively eliminate? Why does that statement have no play in your assessment?

McMinnville pays over $90K to put a teacher in a classroom. Maybe it would be helpful if the PERS, salaries, and benefit costs were stated on a per student basis (like the funding from the state).

Jim

Don another interesting thing to know is what our administrators make compared to other districts in the state of similar size. I know most of the coaches make about half of what the Salem coaches make in their respective sports. Some how I bet the administrators don't make half of what the Salem schools make. Maybe the administration should have to fund raise for their assistants like the coaches do.

kona

Jim, specifically what administrative positions would you want cut?

Jim

Kona I know to many people at the district to get involved in specifics but do know when there's not enough money I want teachers doing their jobs and trim from the people that.dont have day to day interaction with the students.

kona

It will be interesting to hear the ridiculous demands the union will bring to the table. They always start with demands so unacceptable so when they reach the compromise phase they are still ridiculously in their favor. These are professional negotiators that have sucked Oregon into the tenuous economic position Oregon always finds itself. Shame on the school boards across the state for the last 30 years for yielding to this consistent pressure.

kona

Jim, Teachers have shot themselves in the feet in Oregon. Oregon has among the highest compensated teachers of all states in both salaries (12th highest) and benefits . It is the primary reason for the large class sizes in Oregon. The cuts in teacher jobs in Oregon is totally self inflicted.

This coming from a state (Oregon) that is one of the poorer states in the lower half of per capita income. Also from a state with a very poor reputation for educational results.

Sal Peralta

Kona - We are also at the bottom in student-teacher ratio and instructional hours. A student who goes from k-12 in Washington will graduate with 1 more year of instructional time than a student from Oregon.

Until they can slow the rate of growth of labor costs for public employees, they will always be chasing new funding to maintain the current service level.

Don Dix

Sal -- Your assessment fails to include one other ingredient -- the Courtneys, Koteks, and Browns who's doctrines dominate the legislature.

When the OEA sends a request for increased funding, the Ds in the legislature will be on board before the ink is dry. And if the union writes and submits one of those thinly-veiled tax measures designed to swell union coffers (and nothing more), like M97, the Ds always run interference and distract attention from the real intent.

When a voting representative of the government has made their choice based on who submitted any proposal at any time, the system isn't about what's best for Oregon. It's about enriching the public unions (and members) by keeping the most loyal reps (Ds) in office to protect the status quo.

Back in the day, it was believed that a rectal injection was a cure-all for many internal issues. Oregon needs that injection to expel the contents of a union-complicit legislature and administration -- 'a free-flowing political enema'!

Sal Peralta

Don - The public wants us to control costs and for large corporations to pay their fair share. The public employee unions dominate Democratic policy with respect to budgeting and payroll in this state are part of the problem. So are the large corporations that dominate Republican policy with respect to revenue. Both parties give undue deference to state agencies and to lobbyists for business and industry, all of it to the detriment of the public interest.

Sal Peralta

Pretending that the sole problem with the revenue situation in the state is the public employee unions and not the large corporations who have gone from paying 24 percent of state tax revenues in the 1970s to less than 4 percent today is to be seeing the problem through a highly skewed partisan lens that is really no different in character than what you are accusing the Democrats of.

kona

Sal,I have never known of a business who didn't pass increased taxes to the consumer. It is just a "back-door" sales tax that is collected by the business for the state. When you add up the terrible spending decisions made by our leaders in our state government, the amount is very serious. Our state government has been derelict in spending. Revenue increases is being outspent by very poor management.

"Companies that are taxed are likely to pass at least half of the extra cost on to their customers, said John Tapogna, president of Portland-based economic consulting firm EcoNorthwest. These costs can compound as the same product is taxed multiple times at different points in production. In the end, the customer is likely stuck paying much of those add-ons."

kona

Sal, do you have a link for that 4 percent? Even the very progressive OCPP has higher estimates.

"In the mid-1970s, corporations contributed about 18.5 percent of all income taxes paid in Oregon. Today, the corporate share of has shrunk to just 6.7 percent." (April 2017)

kona

Sal, one other question.

You said, "The public wants us to control costs and for large corporations to pay their fair share." What is the "fair share" of taxes for large corporations? And who decides this "fair share"? It is not like large corporations are flocking to Oregon to do business. We have among the lowest ranked (10th from the bottom) Fortune 500 or Fortune 1000 companies of all states. Where is the rule or data that suggests "fair share" is a valid argument? Do we raise the "fair share" so consumers in Oregon pay higher consumption costs? Oregon is in the lower half of per capita income now ... do we make it more difficult for these people to consume?

Web Design & Web Development by LVSYS