Re “I Assume You Are a Teacher. That Figures.”
Attn.: Mr. Shane Ferguson
I read with interest Brad Hodge's response to your recent letter and now your response to his response. You thought that Mr. Hodge had so egregiously misrepresented the facts that you felt it necessary to take him to task for it, but really, for stating that the parcel tax was $95, not $96?
You correctly point out that the last raise (did you realize that it was only a 1 percent increase?) was paid to every employee in the District. But what you failed to point out was that the District administration gave themselves a “reclassification” prior to that. The “reclassification” resulted in salary increases of several thousand dollars per year for some administrators and presents an ongoing encumbrance of $250,000 per year to the general fund. I hardly think we are comparing apples to apples, and I believe that this is the administrative raise to which Mr. Hodge referred.
That being said, I think it is obvious that there is some inequity in play when the District prioritizes their spending, as well as their cutting practices.
I think that Mr. Hodge gave a perfectly reasonable example when he cited the financial impact of a 5 percent cut to a teacher who earns $50,000. In this example, the teacher would take a $2,500 annual pay cut, and regardless of how you couch it, that’s a sizeable amount.
Mr. Hodge correctly stated that the voters of our community would not approve a parcel tax in excess of $96 in order to help our schools. I would assume that based on their personal financial obligations, they felt that this was the maximum they could afford to pay. Yet, we now have members of the community, yourself included, that feel that for the sake of the students, every employee of the School District, regardless of their own financial situation — should be willing to take a pay cut in order to preserve the programs that are important to their children.
Let me address Mr. Ferguson’s generosity of spirit when he states that in this way, everyone would still have a job. As you are aware, Mr. Ferguson, the cost of everything, food, housing, health insurance, gas, utilities, anything you could name, is on the rise.
Because of this, it is not just important to have a job. It is important to have a job with which you can support yourself.
So when members of our community so cavalierly suggest that for the good of the students we should be willing to sacrifice our own family’s quality of life, I can only assume that they are much better off financially than we are.
Mr. Ferguson, you did, indeed, make the statement in your first letter to the Front Page Online that “It takes a village to raise a child.” The village can survive with a 5 percent cut. The child cannot.
If you are not a member of the village that would have to take the 5 percent pay cut, I find it rather insensitive that without knowing the particulars of anyone else’s finances, you would blithely state that the village could survive a 5 percent pay cut. I am sure that it is important to you to preserve the quality of your child’s education. But do you honestly think it’s fair for you to ask that in order for your child to retain art, music or physical education classes (programs that other school districts sacrificed years ago), employees of this district should have to make personal sacrifices when it comes to keeping a roof over their heads or food on the table for our own children?
Ms. Hamme, President, Assn. of Classified Employees, Culver City, may be contacted at antiquer01@aol.com
