Central School Board Votes to Receive Compensation Beginning This Friday

By Dave Freneaux

    On Wednesday, July 6th, Dr. Jim Gardner, President of the Central Community School Board, at the request of Central Speaks, provided a copy of a Resolution seeking to pay School Board Members $800 per month beginning immediately.  That information was published in last week’s edition of Central Speaks.  On Monday night, July 11th, in the face of many objections by the public, the School Board voted 6-1 to begin paying each School Board Member $650 per month and the President of the Board $750 per month.  Prior to this action, all School Board Members served for no compensation.  The video of this School Board meeting can be seen on-line at CentralSpeaks.com by selecting the CentralSpeaksTV icon at the top of any page.

    Although the initial resolution called for the Board to be paid the maximum allowable by law, which is $800 per month for each of the six regular Board Members and $900 per month for the Board President,  the Resolution was changed to the lower amount before the vote.  There was much public comment on the issue, all of which can be seen online at CentralSpeaks.com.

   Nine Central Citizens spoke against the resolution:  Jon Simmons, one of the pioneers of the creation of the Central School System, Gerry Edgens, a candidate for School Board in 2010, Dr. Keith Holmes, a member of the School Board’s Finance Committee since its inception, Wayne Leader, Chairman of the Central City Services Selection Committee and Transition Team, Mike Mannino, a candidate for City Council in 2010, Tiffany Whitehead, a teacher in the Central School System, Dave Freneaux, editor of Central Speaks, Rodney Bonvillian, Chairman of Central’s Planning & Zoning Commission, and Stafford Palombo.

    Each of those speaking against the Resolution stated that they objected to the concept of sitting elected officials voting to increase their own compensation.  The speakers generally had no objection to the School Board implementing pay for the next elected School Board, but pointed out that this Board ran for these positions knowing that these were unpaid positions.  In addition, several speakers raised objections that this matter was not referred to the Finance or Personnel Committees for consideration prior to coming to the Board for a vote.  It has been the practice of this School Board to first refer matters to the appropriate committee for discussion and approval before being heard by the full Board.  Several speakers, including Dr. Keith Holmes and Jon Simmons, requested that the matter be deferred to the appropriate committees so that the public would have ample opportunity to give input and so that the financial impact of this decision could be considered by the Finance Committee.  The Board did not agree to send the mater to committee.

    Another major objection raised by several of the speakers was that the Central School System has unfunded retirement liabilities its first four years of about $6 million, but has only generated $2 million in excess funds over those four years, $4 million short of funding those retirement liabilities.  At the June 22nd School Board meeting Dr. Holmes had asked that the School Board be very aware of this growing debt and that the Board formulate a plan to fund these liabilities.  An additional objection came from several speakers citing that teachers in the Central School System were having to absorb additional insurance costs and that there had been no cost of living raises for teachers in the last several years.

    Speaking in favor of the Resolution were Central citizens R.J. Saucier, a member of the City Services Committees, and Linda Summers.  These speaking in favor, as well as virtually all of those speaking against the Resolution, recognized that Central’s School Board Members are quality citizens of this city and that they have worked hard to ensure that the Central Community School System is one of the best in the state.  Many of those speaking against the Resolution stated that their objection was not about these School Board Members, but about the concept of elected officials voting for their own pay increases and the lack of sending this issue to committee and seeking more public input.