Theresa Crane Addresses the Taft City School District Board of Education on Volatile Labor Issues and Sensitive Budget Matters

By Theresa R. Crane

Remarks delivered to the Taft City School District Board of Education on the following item Theresa R. Crane had placed on the October 11, 2006 Agenda; Re: The Service Provided by the District's Contract Negotiator, Mr. Anthony V. Leonis and Discussion from the Board on the Criticism of the Acts and Omissions by the Negotiator and the Legislative Body.

Board President, Keith McElmurry: You have five minutes, Terri.

Theresa Crane: Thank you Keith. As this matter has been formally placed on the agenda, others may address the item also -- If I need to go over your five minute time limit, those in the audience may yield some of their time to me and I will finish my comments.

As much as I would like to be able to address you in a positive nature, this evening there is an urgent need for me to discuss with you the very troubling matters of the reported rudeness and disrespect that the district contract negotiator, Anthony Leonis, has demonstrated though out the negotiating process with our school employees.

The community has been made aware that Mr. Leonis has resorted to destructive name calling that has included terms such as, "moron" and "liar," when referring to district personnel. This form of disrespect is unacceptable. Those tactics only serve to alienate school employees and have absolutely no place in a professional setting. Every employee deserves civility; and I know our staff to be professionals that, even in spite of the conditions that have made the negotiating process very positional, our CSEA employees have maintained a professional politeness.

In addition, Mr. Leonis and the Taft City School District Classified School Employees Association were scheduled for a meeting last month. The employees were diligent in keeping the appointment, but the district negotiator: 1) Did not appear for the meeting 2) Did not send another negotiator in his place, and 3) Did not have the courtesy to inform the school employees that he was not going to appear. This lack of professionalism and courtesy is again, unacceptable.

It is noticed by our community that the morale of our district employees is very low at this time, and much of it can be attributed to the observable conditions that have been reported to this board on numerous occasions.

So my question is, "Why is this present board of trustees accepting the personal style of the negotiator that the employees have reported to you"? While you are thinking about that, I want to say a little more:

My criticism is that individually and collectively, you appear to be consenting to the degradation that the employees report, as the continuation of Mr. Leonis' contract results in the continuance of his rash behavior. I am calling for a long overdue evaluation of the services received from this present negotiator; and, if you find it in the better interest of the district to have a reassignment of labor specialists, then that it what should be done.

Now on the matter of the district budget: The board president has stated on more than one occasion this board has been "stealing money from Fund 20" or the Retiree Benefit Fund because HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS have been borrowed for expenditures, other than its categorized purpose, and the money has not been paid back. (For fiscal year ending 2006, the district reports an amount of $275,000 transferred out.) I understand why President McElmurry would characterize that as "stealing". As a candidate for this board, I want to receive a history of the amount of money begged, borrowed, or stolen...however you want to characterize it; your use of that money as you have approved the transfers from the Retiree Benefit fund for the past five or six years; and how much, exactly, the board has paid back?

At the last board meeting, Mr. Vaughn mentioned that this fund (Retiree Benefit Fund)is actually a unique fund to Taft City School District and that many other districts in the county do not have such a fund. How is it that other school districts are supporting the promised benefits to their retirees? (Note: The 2006 Fiscal Year ending balance of the "Retiree Benefit Fund" for the TCSD has a reported amount of just over $5,025,000.)

On another matter of the district's financial condition, an unusual explanation was received at last month's board meeting that the district does not have the money to offer a commensurate raise to all employees because it is faced with lower attendance figures, thus there will be lower revenue received from the state. Yet the money received from the state for the education of the students in a high enrollment year is obviously spent on the service of educating those students. If this district were teaching 200 fewer students this year, the district's delivery of service costs will be lessened as well, and that is never mentioned in your budget analysis. So I am suggesting that your budget explanation to use the cost of living adjustment to offset the decreased revenue for decreased attendance is really an unusual way to present a deficit when you should have a wash on the costs of educating "X" amount of students.

We have record number of employees resigning from this district for better wages and benefits. Tonight you will be hearing of three additional classified employee resignations. It is imperative that this board change their course of action and seek to retain their valued employees, who care for our students, so that our purchasing public can get a good return in student achievement for their financial commitment.

On September 13 I sent a letter to the superintendent requesting the following items to study:

• Annual District Budget covering 2002-2006
• Superintendent Contract(s) with salary agreement from 2000 to present (including agreement with Elk Hills School District)
• Student Enrollment figures from 2002 to present (including inter-district transfer numbers)
• Teacher statistics: number of fully qualified vs. under-qualified educators, salary schedule, and rate of attrition/non-reelect from 2000 to present
• TETA/TCSD contracts from 2000 to present (including current proposal/response)
• CSEA/TCSD contracts from 2000 to present (including current proposal/response)
• All other employee contracts from 2000 to present
• Actuarial Report/Assumptions(s) 1998 to present
• Architect Report and Letter(s) from 2002 to present
• $20,000,000 Bond Update

As the matter of my request to address the board regarding the service provided by the district's contract negotiator, Mr. Anthony Leonis, and request discussion from the board on the criticism and the acts and omissions by the negotiator and the legislative body has been formally placed on the agenda, you have the latitude to discuss the matters I have brought to your attention:

1. Why is this present board of trustees accepting the personal style of the negotiator that the employees have reported to you?

2. How much money has the board approved for transfer from the Retiree Benefit Fund over the past five years and how much has the board paid back?

3. How do you justify the inequitable salary adjustments in light of the district's received COLA even when you are delivering services to fewer and fewer students?

If you (TCSD Board of Trustees)are not able to establish a budget that is consistent with appropriate priorities, then will you please consider receiving service from a consultant with the California School Boards Association to find the money in your budget to properly compensate our school employees? I assure you, they can help you find the money.

Now we anticipate hearing from you. Thank you.

(Summarized comments prepared for the Taft City School District Board of Education.)