Didn't we just give these people a big pile of money?

Let's make sure we continue to cut everything while an ever greater percentage of the budget goes to senior teachers, as it has for decades. It is for the children you know.

It's a very bad idea to cut out the pool. If it's losing money, let's think of ideas for it to make more money.

Mike, I don't think the teachers are making 150K a year, and I don't think we have "...a couple hundred employees" that are administrators. What do people have against teachers making a living wage?

Teachers don't make 150k a year, and if we cut more teachers class sizes get even bigger and that only hurts the kids. They already have 35 kids in one classroom. If you actually think what we need is less teachers you are terribly wrong!

Hello Stephanie. I have nothing against teachers making a living wage. Newer teachers actually do not. But senior teachers and administrators cost the district 150K, or very close to that, on a regular basis. On wages of 100K, the district is required to contribute about 30K to their pension, by law, as passed via corrupt campaign contributions, the districts are not allowed to bargain on this subject. Benefits can cost more than 20K / year. Between senior teachers and the ever expanding (over the last 40 years) number of administrators, there are many. Everything else has been cut. And you will notice that while the teacher's union is quick to point out "give backs", they never want to show what the contract is. It is often, in many districts, very difficult to find. There is no where left to cut, it is the children or community that suffers to protect undefendable compensation and costs of a small number of people. I no longer am tolerant of the "it is for the children" response from the union, as it is not nor has ever been. Check out the percentage of budget that goes to senior individuals. It has grown every year and consumes the Brighton budget as it does almost all school districts. It is a scandal, which is why they wish to keep the actual pay and other costs so difficult to find. If not, they would publish so the public could decide. If you side with the costs of senior folks, you can only be classified as anti-child. Sorry.

How can you say quality teachers aren't an important part of our kids education, Mike?

How odd, I made no comment on that. Of course quality teachers are very, very important. Indeed, many of the best teachers are much lower in seniority. My point is that between senior teachers and bloated, high cost, administrators, the budget has very little left for anything else. This has been a trend in Brighton, like almost all other districts, for years. But the cuts always hit the children or community to protect a couple of hundred people. It is Brighton's version of the 1%. Tell me when you last read an article about "give backs" that articulated the costs of these folks. It is a scandal and everyone must suffer to protect very high compensation rates for a few. Just the facts.

It’s incredulous to see how our Brighton School Board operates. It’s bordering on illegal! The district is a “deficit district” yet the board voted to proceed with the construction of the Scranton field amenities, press box, P.A., outdoor restrooms, extra tennis courts, all of which were never voted on, nor approved, by the public. The bond covers construction costs but thousands of dollars for the operation and maintenance of these amenities will draw from the general fund, the fund in deficit, FOREVER. This is the same fund used to buy textbooks, determine class size, pay for busses, provide digital databases researched and ordered by media specialists, etc.
Board members Conley and Fiani voted against approval of the Scranton project as proposed but were overridden. After the projects approval, and committing the general fund money for its operation and maintenance, the board spent hours discussing the elimination of school nurse and police officer liaison, privatizing secretaries, custodial and maintenance staff. They asked for a list of faculty and staff showing wages to see where cuts can be made to provide the most savings. How could they approve spending general fund monies for sports and frivolous field amenities used by only a fraction of students and cut money for people and programs that impact the education of ALL kids? Our school board is fiscally irresponsible, especially in light of declining enrollment and fewer tax dollars!
Brenda Goebbel

As a science teacher with a masters plus 30 hours of education and over 20 years experience, I could make much more in the private sector than my <$85,000 a year as a teacher. Maybe that's why the demand for my services is projected to grow, that and because many young people are discouraged from entering the field by the negative, hostile, and irrational feelings expressed by many in the public who only know half the story.

I don't know how long you have lived here. Brighton had a most excellent facility for plays and the such. But 15 years ago, or so, Pinckney built a "performing arts center". So what did Brighton do? Tear down a beautiful and quite new facility and build something grander than those hicks in Pinckney. And what happened next? NO ONE could afford the usage fees, including the high school's drama department. That was eventually resolved, but you points are similar to this travesty. Brighton's problems are similar to most other districts. A handful of ego driven parents that are more concerned with show and senior staff members comsuming most of the budget. Very simple to fix, but when board elections are dominated by teacher's union money, and those who care about show and not the kids you get................Brighton School District.

The state of Michigan is failing our students. This district is poorly funded. We are not in this situation because of over paid employees. Our superintendent and finance director are incredible, they have found all the areas they could to cut. We need to figure out how to let the state take the blame for this mess, that is where it belongs. The employees and administration has done their share. Before this Board starts hacking away at what makes us a stellar district we need to stick together as a community and say "ENOUGH!!" to the state. They cannot continue to cut funding to our schools. Yes we need to work within a budget, but give our admin a budget to work with, not $7000 a student....and not one with looming cuts to future funding.

A tripling of real student spending, over the last 40 years, is insufficient? Will it end with a quadrupling? Is it more? Should we add more administrators? Could we get some idea of what is enough, as for 40 years the funding has increased without pause and still the district is BROKE.

Mike - did you miss the memo that the governor took a portion of the per pupil funding back after the school year had already started and the districts already had budgets in place. Also, can you define real pupil spending?

Real student spending would be operational costs, adjusted for inflation. Certainly many school systems have played with these numbers (I cannot specifically speak to Brighton on this subject) calling some historic operational costs capital expenditures either via a change in measurement or to obscure the never ending operational spending. Indeed, the state is pretty poor, as are many states. Without a doubt surprise funding reductions are always difficult (as they are for taxpayers relative to their incomes). But after 40 years of never ending increases, it is a bit disingenuous to reflect on that as the only problem. The points I have made are valid and once again I would suggest that if there is a need for additional funding that the school system lay it all out for the people, showing how the bulk of the budget is devoted to a couple of hundred staff members. Did you miss the legislation that mandates pension contributions and the percentage, now at about 30% of salaries. Total corruption at the state level, totally funded by teacher's unions. Collective bargaining should go both ways, but for state employees and relative to teacher's contracts, the bargaining has been between two intertwined parties with the taxpayers decidedly NOT represented. Lay it out for the taxpayers, FULLY disclosing where the spending actually is going. Do you think that we should cut more while contributing 30K+ / senior teacher to their pensions? When do the kids get their turn?

All about interesting opinions, but thought it’d be helpful to add a few less interesting, but important facts to this conversation. Nearly 3/4 of the district's funding is collected and distributed by the state per 1994's Prop A, so inevitably the district's financial condition is directly tied to school aid decisions made by the Legislature. Local taxpayers cover capital like the recently passed bond, but that is a different conversation from the operating deficit.

In terms of nominal dollars, BAS' state foundation allowance has increased from $6,856 in FY 04 to $6,995 in FY 13 according to the Senate Fiscal Agency— 2% over 9 years. That seems pretty tight. But real dollars is probably a better measure b/c it considers the costs of everything we buy. If we increased that same FY 04 allowance at the rate of inflation using Detroit's Consumer Price Index (and energy & health care have far outpaced CPI), BAS' state allowance would be $7,994 today. That'd be roughly $6.7 million more in state aid based on last year's enrollment. Seems to put that $500k deficit into perspective, as well as the impressive work of the district’s leaders.

Sure Mike, state politics created a pro-collective bargaining environment in years past, but hard to make that case today. Politics has also played into legislative decisions to squeeze school aid and force districts, including BAS, into a constant state of financial crisis.

I recognize that it's easier to get the talking points from our favorite commentators, but a few sources below where more facts can be found: http://www.senate.michigan.gov/sfa/Departments/DataCharts/DCk12_StateFundingVsDetroitCPI.pdf
http://www.senate.michigan.gov/sfa/Departments/DataCharts/DCk12_FoundationHistory.pdf

No excuses… it’s been a tough few years for MI budgets, households and governments, but let’s aim our frustrations in the right direction, and be willing to give some credit where it’s due.

I do question the priorities here.

If there is a huge deficit, remind me why a new field is even necessary? It's not. The BHS track and field/football field was basically new-looking fifteen years ago, and many school do not get new fields. Laying down a new layer of track, I understand. Patching it. Understood. New seed on the field. Fine. Huge, brand-spanking new field right now? Ridiculous.

I understand wanting things, but if it's still working, slap some paint on the announcer's box, clean the bleachers, put down good seed on the field, and leave it alone. For now. It's not a priority. The pool is an absolute must. A new pool is not needed. If anything, a temporary idea for Lindbom could include transferring senior students/those who can drive there for classes. Make it a temporary senior high (junior/senior). Get some of the crowds out of BHS.

Brighton is too obsessed with brand-new. You cannot have it all. First things first. You want to retain good teachers, you don't cut pay/benefits. Not now. You can teach a kid in a hut. Literally. Good teachers who are well-paid make all the difference. I've been to BHS and all you need is to maintain right now. Stop upgrading. Use what you have. The only upgrades should be books/minor technology, i.e. computer upgrades.

Pretty sure the teachers backed the bond and helped get it passed - the bond is not the problem and that money can't be used to help the deficit. I'm all for paying teachers accordingly but the facilities need upgrades - a fresh coat of paint will no longer do. I'm afraid our problem lies in the Board that was elected - please don't drive Dr, Gray and the progress we have made away.

Of course the teachers backed the bond, they always support further funding. And indeed bond money is not to be used for operational activities. Which brings us back to how Brighton closes their operating deficit. More cuts on the kids and community or addressing the one area of the budget that has been protected but also comprises the majority of the expenses. The progress made to date has almost all been impactful to the kids and community. Many of us do not consider that progress.

I would agree that more cuts to kids are irresponsible - what are you doing, besides this forum, to have your points heard - I feel that many of the things you are saying should be looked at and considered, you obviously are well informed and it would be nice if all sides were taken into account instead of this turning into such a for/against argument. Can we at least agree that the youth on the current board may be stirring the pot in directions that are not necessary nor are they productive?

A fair comment. I know that several years ago anyone who spoke up at meetings was demeaned for not having all the information, which of course was not available to the public. I have not returned to watch the show. The problem is obvious and has been for many years. But the money for school board elections comes from teacher's unions and in almost every district, they essentially control the board. The latest super signed a new contract, completely ignoring the issue, within a month or so of his arrival. It was such an obvious sign of his loyalties. There is such great fear of speaking of teacher comp, specifically senior teacher's comp, as all want to believe that we have great teachers. Indeed, we have many great teachers but the fact remains that we cannot pay the compensation as we do today and a large part of it (pensions) is dictated by corrupt state legislation. I will make it a point to attend a board meeting. Unless the board raises the specific issue I have mentioned, it will be clear that there is no intention of attacking the problem but only imparting pain on the community. It is very cut and dried despite all the attempts to deflect from the issue. Thanks for your comment.

I agree that the issue will more than likely not be addressed unless they are forced to do it (and appreciate you frustration with attending Board meetings) - perhaps a well thought out letter to the Argus and the School Board and attendance at Board meeting would at least put it out there for others to ponder - I know there are many people right now rallying to start attending meetings and become more informed - they are truly concerned and afraid to let status quo continue. We need new answers!

I only receive the argus on Sundays. It is stunningly one sided and the editor is not only a moron, but incapable most times of conveying a lucid thought. The next board meeting is March 11. If not out of town, I intend to be there. Maybe there will be a miracle and I will be pleasantly surprised.

I personally believe that having folks who have never been teachers on the board to be a sometimes dangerous thing. I understand wanting a balance. However, sometimes non-teachers can be fully out-of-touch and even envious, perhaps, of the benefits that teachers receive.

Also, why are there not term limits on board members?

It is not a good idea to have people who are extremely politically-driven on the board. It's more important to have people on the board who are less interested in winning an argument and more interested in the well-being of the community and the kids.

Hello Kate, I am not meaning to call you out, but can you provide some description of extremely politically driven? Thanks.

I don't mind at all. The GOP?

Who would the GOP be? The corrupt leadership of the Washington GOP? Do you find that preferable to the corrupt leadership of the Washington dems? 10s of millions of us have no party. And might you provide an example of a position you consider extreme at a local level?

Mike, if you've spent a decent of amount of time in Brighton and are aware of the activities of the board and who has been on the board, for the past several years, you'll know where political leanings lie.

I cannot claim to have a comprehensive knowledge of board activities. And I really cannot determine where their political leanings lie. I do know that the obvious issue, relative to the budget, has not been addressed at all. The balancing of the budget has been born by the children and the community. What political party would choose to protect a couple of hundred staff members over the children and the community?

Sadly, political leanings do come into play, even when it comes the children. And, in an increasingly diverse community, it's important to have a board that is as open-minded as possible.

I can tell that we're probably not on the same side of the coin on this issue, but I understand that you're frustrated, too. I'd implore anyone, regardless of party affiliation, to attend board meetings and become more aware of the issues/what goes on at board meetings/speak your opinions. That's why they're made public.

Interesting. My position is that the people are in near total agreement on every basic issue, other than abortion. The politicians desire to keep everyone believing we are divided so they can continue their corrupt behavior. It prevents any discussion of policy and keeps people arguing about divisive issues which are generally small, specific topics, and while important to many, not meaningful in basic policy discussions. There are so many examples of this from both established parties and their leadership. For instance, do you know anyone who would allow children to starve? I don't, yet we hear leaders make this claim about 10s of millions of Americans on a regular basis. Conversely, do you know anyone who hates America? Once again, we are told there are 10s of millions of Americans who hate America. I could go one, there is a long list, but I suspect that at a basic issue level, we are very much in agreement and would be surprised that discussions along these lines would match that agreement. And for clarification, I have no party leanings, as both parties, at least at a national level, are corrupt to the core. Some might call me conservative in many ways, but then the politicians also use many labels to keep us apart as well. Thanks again.

I respect what you're saying. However, you mentioned in your previous comment:

'I cannot claim to have a comprehensive knowledge of board activities. And I really cannot determine where their political leanings lie.'

You went on to state that they agree on every issue but abortion, to your knowledge. If you can't determine their political leanings, it would be difficult to know their stance on that issue. Therefore, I deduce that there is an apparent political stance among members, and that is being reflected in the decision-making process. If you Google some of the members, you will also learn what parties some of them are affiliated with, some more... extreme than others.

And I think the extreme nature/closed-mindedness of some board members can be toxic to an environment like a school board. It becomes a battle of wills, pro-union vs. GOP, duking it out at the expense of the teacher and the kids. Ultimately, I will tell you, the GOP wants the teachers to lose their pensions, period. Anyone is fooling themselves if they think otherwise.

I think we are both in agreement that the most important people at stake here are the children. I just hope that adults involved can keep them the central focus without any other agenda muddying the waters. Have a good week, Mike, it was nice picking your brain, and sharing some ideas.

With regard to teacher's unions, many would phrase your "pro-union vs. GOP" as anti-child vs. everyone else.

The 'many' people phrasing it that way would obviously not be using their intellect, if that was the case, as many 'pro-union' folks are teachers. Unless, of course, you're accusing teachers of being 'anti-child'.

Odd, bold statement.

Again, the people who think that teachers need their compensation cut are usually the people that have little/no respect for what teachers do each day. It comes down to sheer envy, often, of the benefits that teachers have from educating the masses.

I have a feeling that any of the folks on the board would be pretty peeved if their pensions were threatened.

I can get on board with minimizing renovations and cutting corners in other ways. Teacher pay is the least of the district's 'problems'. Pay = the solution to educating kids well. Unless they'd like to cut pay (pay freeze is understandable, in a pinch) or even worse, get rid of benefits like pensions--watch the good teachers jump ship, watch the school district tank due to lack of quality education, and then watch property values tank as well. Yes, let's punish the teachers.

The logic is lacking. Badly.

All of the teachers that I've known live fairly modestly. Comfortably, as they should for the work that they do, but no one is living large, that I know of. This myth that teachers are rolling in dough, and really just have a grand old time being 'wealthy' is rather hilarious. If they're lucky they gain tenure and they're able to put some money away, feed their families, and have a nice life.

Stop perpetuating the myth that teachers are 'ballers', as the kids say. From what some board members and community followers would have you believe, they can afford golden toilet seats. Don't believe the hype.