BURTON SCHOOL BOARD ADOPTS TAX RATE, TALKS PAY RAISES

  

The Burton School Board set the proposed tax rate and discussed employee pay raises at its meeting Monday.

The board established a rate of $1.04 per $100 valuation, 13 cents less than last year’s rate of $1.17 per $100. The rate is made up of 97 cents for maintenance and operations (M&O), and 7.49 cents for debt services (I&S).

Last year’s M&O rate was $1.04 per $100, while the I&S rate was 13 cents per $100.

Superintendent Dr. Edna Kennedy said the M&O rate decrease was one mandated by the state with House Bill 3 in the past legislative session. She said the I&S rate was lowered due to higher property values.

Washington County Chief Appraiser Willy Dilworth presented the average value of a homestead in Burton compared to last year, which he said has increased roughly 10 percent. The average market value of a residence last year was $168,942, compared to this year at $185,278.  Dilworth said, if a taxpayer’s home sits at average value, that person’s taxes will go down roughly $9.50.

Dilworth said one thing to note in the rise in property values is the increase in mineral values, which have gone up about $220 million from last year. He said he does not expect to see that kind of increase in value in the future.

The board also went over staff pay raises, which were not finalized at Monday’s meeting. Dr. Kennedy said, as per House Bill 3, 30 percent of the total gain for average daily attendance was to go to teacher salary increases in every district.  That value came out to $142,000 for Burton ISD, which is planning to take 75 percent of that to give to teachers and 25 percent for other staff.

The district’s compensation plan calls for a bigger pay raise for medium and higher level teachers than younger teachers. For example, projected numbers show a new teacher in the district would receive $39,000 salary this year, a $1,000 raise over last year.  Meanwhile, a teacher with 25 years’ experience would receive $57,130, a raise of $3,420.

Dr. Kennedy said she believes this is a fair compensation plan to offer for teachers, and that this gets the district to where it needs to be with state-required teacher salaries. She said, when looking at calculations for the future, she would like to get the district to where it can use a percentage midpoint to avoid having to calculate differences in salaries.

However, board members were undecided on how to approach raises for other district staff, including para-professionals, maintenance, and bus drivers.

With roughly $35,000 available for raises for 25 employees in this category, the district initially presented a blanket $1,400 raise for each employee. Some board members argued this raise would not be fair to new teachers.  They also said there would be staff working a small amount of hours per week and getting the same raise as staff with longer work weeks.

The board decided to move forward with the teacher pay raise numbers, but hold off on approving the raises for other staff until it could figure out a step system to award more experienced personnel.

The board will further discuss the budget and tax rate next Monday at 5:30 p.m., in the Burton ISD Administration Office.

What’s your Reaction?
+1
0
+1
0
+1
0

4 Comments

  1. Correction from earlier submission,

    Under the current teacher pay raise plan, Burton ISD teacher salaries will not compete with the starting salaries of all neighboring schools starting salary of $41-42,000. The young teachers will interview with Brenham, RTC, Lexington, Caldwell, Giddings and other schools in the area. They will go where the money is for $2,000 to $3,000 a year. That leaves Burton ISD left with the leftovers. When competing for math, science, foreign language and other hard to find certifications there will be little chance to compete.

    The Administration evidently decided on the teacher pay raise separately from the pay raise for “other” staff. At present, the $1,000 pay raise for teachers with 0-8 years experience is less than the $1,400 raise planned for all “other” employees. How can you defend that?

    The teacher pay raise is painstakingly broken down by years of service. It appears not much consideration was given “other” staff as all are given the same amount. Why wasn’t the same procedure used in both cases? All teachers get the same raise or “other” staff be awarded based on years of experience. The Administration should be able to justify their decision-making to the Board and all employees. I am not saying one method is better than the other, but the method should be applied fairly, equitably and consistently to ALL valued employees.

    Another complication occurs when considering “other” staff. Most of them are based on an hourly rate. But the complication arises when bus drivers are included. To be considered full time employees (so they qualify for full benefits), bus drivers must work 20 hours or more a week. That is two hours per route. In those two hours the bus driver is expected to complete their preliminary walk around inspection before starting the route, complete the route, and upon parking the bus, complete a walk through to be sure all the children are off the bus. They would then perform another visual inspection in the two hours. They do that two times a day for four hours a day for 180 days is 720 hours. If you give them a $1400 raise it comes to about $1.90 an hour.

    Another employee works eight hours a day for 180 days for a total of 1440 hours. That is less than a dollar an hour raise. That raise is not the same is it? The complication is that all those twenty five “other” employees are hired at an hourly rate and they do not all work the same hours in a day.

    There are some bus drivers that drive only once a day, two hours a day. They are part time employees, are you going to give them a $1400?

    You also have the issue that was created last year by the Board’s actions that remains unresolved. A coach drives a route. Does the coach/bus driver get the teacher pay raise AND the bus driver raise? By all rights they should. They are performing both duties. The coach did not get the raise. So the effect was the coach was doing the same job for less than the other bus driver. That was not fair.

    Things like that affect morale because one employee believes they are performing a vital service to the district, but is not receiving the same benefits or pay.

    What is the adjustment for a part time employee?

    I recommend the Board ask the Administration to do some research and make a recommendation based on sound business practices.

    Sent from my iPad

    Jim Palmer

  2. This pay raise plan seems to reward tenure versus production. I would hope the goal would be production and not just filling a seat over time.

    1. Onlooker,
      You are exactly right. I don’t believe they are not looking at overall production and who is better qualified. It seems they just want to take care of those “good old boys” that stick with them because they have nowhere else to go and they basically run the school or are in that click that does.

    2. Onlooker,
      That’s exactly what it looks like they’re doing. Taking care of those that stay there because no one else would put up with the things they do. That district will always take care of those who follow “the good old boy” way! Believe me, there are a lot of new staff that are there that are a huge asset to the district compared to most of those that have been there over the years. Let’s reward those that will continue to “sweep everything under the rug “ and not those that are bringing great things to the district. The district still filled the Chemistry and Physics position with a teacher who isn’t certified to teach those classes. Those poor students who are wanting to major in anything Science. They will have to work extremely hard to keep up in college. This district never ceases to amaze me and others with their decisions. Reward those who are truly educating the students!!!!

Back to top button