Kettering Schools has a 4.9 mill tax levy on the November 2 ballot. Last night, I attended a community meeting concerning the levy — held at J.E. Prass Elementary School — the last of nine meetings conducted by Superintendent Jim Schoenlein and Treasurer Steve Clark.

I videotaped the presentations, but they did not differ in substance from what I recorded from the first community meeting, held September 21, that I posted here.

During the discussion period, I emphasized that in my judgment the levy campaign’s false claim that teachers and administrators agreed to a “pay freeze” was causing a big erosion of public trust in Kettering School leadership, and that mistrust would lead to opposition to the levy. I repeated points I made in this post, and I reminded Dr. Schoenlein that he had used the term “pay freeze” four times in his article in the Blue Ribbon Report and that no where — on the district’s web-site or in any levy literature — had I found the term explained. (Since the meeting, I found this partial explanation, at a site hosted by the levy committee. But the explanation fails to tell the magnitude of the step increases — how many teachers or administrators generally receive “step” increases,  the dollar amount of a step increases, or the total cost of these increases. At this site I was surprised to see posted my you-tube of Dr. Schoenlein from the first community meeting.)

I pointed out that social security recipients have a real “pay freeze.” But, Kettering teachers and administrators have automatic “step” pay increases. Last year’s data indicated 65% of teachers got a longevity step increase and, that percentage is probably fairly consistent.  Teachers also may gain training step increases for acquiring additional graduate hours, but the number of teachers who qualify each year is not available.

I asked Mr. Clark how much the “step” increases for teachers cost for one year and his estimate was about $1 million. It is amazing that the district can claim that teachers will have a pay freeze and at the same time acknowledge that, regardless of such a freeze, pay increases for teachers will amount to $1 million.

I also asked Dr. Schoenlein to explain his comment in the Blue Ribbon Report that teachers had agreed to “pay more of their own health insurance.” As I explained — “Kettering Superintendent’s Claim About Teachers Paying More For Health Insurance Is Misleading” — and, in the meeting, Dr. Schoenlein explained a definition of “paying more” that a reader of the Blue Ribbon Report would not expect: receiving less money is equivalent to “paying more.”

After the meeting, I spoke briefly with Jim Brown, who, along with me, last year challenged the three incumbents running for reelection and who was elected, replacing Frank Maus. I hadn’t seen Jim since last year and I told him that I had to be frank with him, that I was disappointed that, as the newly elected board member, he hadn’t taken a stand against advertising a “pay freeze” — which, to me, seems a deliberate strategy to mislead the public. I later regretted speaking to him in such a manner. At this late date, what was the point? If I am to have any chance to be a positive influence on Kettering public education, as I spoke of last year, I need to generate positive rapport with school and community leaders who may be like minded.

I was really sort of flabbergasted last year, in the 6.9 mill renewal campaign, that the Kettering Board was so deliberate in their strategy of misinformation that I made a formal complaint to the Ohio Election Commission. The board’s willingness to mislead voters in order to pass a levy was what pushed me into seeking election to the board, and as I explain in this you-tube of my comments at the public forum in last year’s election, the effort to misrepresent caused me to lose trust in the leadership of Kettering Schools.

During the meeting, Ashley Webb, who was elected to the Kettering City Council last year in a very competitive race, indicated that he felt that there needs to be changes in policy in the school district to more align the compensation and benefits of the public employees to those of employees in the private sector. And, he seemed to agree with my point that a levy campaign of misinformation is inappropriate and unwise. But, he said, regardless, he hoped that citizens would support the levy. He said he was impressed with the action of cutting costs that resulted in reducing the levy by 2 mills, from 6.9 mills to 4.9 mills, after the May defeat.

One man asked if the benefit package received by administrators was different from that received by teachers. In response, both Dr. Schoenlein and Mr. Clark indicated that the benefit package of teachers and administrators in Kettering is about the same. The superintendent and the treasurer, evidently, both forgot. But I reminded them of the fact that in terms of retirement benefits there is a big difference. The State Teachers Retirement System (STRS) collects a huge amount of money — 24% of the gross salary of teachers and administrators. In Kettering, of this 24%, teachers pay 10%, but administrators pay nothing. An administrator making $100,000, in effect, has a $10,000 bonus.

Dr. Schoenlein’s response was that other districts also pay all of the administrators’ STRS amount.

It is hard to gauge, but I would guess if it was up to those in attendance last night, the 4.9 mill levy would probably pass by a small margin. But, I’m thinking, as I explain here, that when the general public votes on November 2, the levy will probably fail. Organized opposition is always bad news for school levies and, in my view, the Kettering board has needlessly given ammunition to the opposition.

In August, after I interviewed Dr. Schoenlein and wrote, Kettering Schools’ Reduced Tax Request — From 6.9 Mills To 4.9 Mills — Shows “Change Of Philosophy,” my thinking was in line with that expressed by Ashley Webb at this meeting, but, I’m sorry to say, this “pay freeze” claim has pushed me in the opposite direction.

Two articles in today’s DDN give support to the notion that the 4.9 mill Kettering School levy probably will be rejected by Kettering voters in this coming November 2 election.

The first is a letter on the editorial page written by a Kettering resident, Barb Patrick. The letter is entitled, “Teacher Salaries Continue To Rise.”

Ms Patrick asks:

“Why is there never any mention of teacher salaries and benefits, which continue to rise on an annual basis? …  When Kettering Superintendent Schoenlein talks of salary freezes, he never mentions the automatic annual step increases enjoyed by teachers — not exactly a “freeze.”

In the recent Blue Ribbon Report, Dr. Schoenlein, in his letter to residents, manages to use the term “pay freeze” four times:

1. Our Kettering teachers’ association voted to accept a pay freeze as a show of teamwork and understanding as we continue to work through difficult economic times here in our community, across the state and across the country,
2. In the midst of this great academic news, everyone in the Kettering Schools is being asked to do more with less, and our Kettering teachers have taken this theme a step further, agreeing to accept a pay freeze for the 2011-2012 school year after receiving the lowest raises in 25 years in both 2008-2009 and 2209-2010 school years. (1.5% and 1.5%)
3. Our Kettering teachers are highly trained professional educators who continue to produce great test scores in spite of budget cuts, staff reductions and rising class sizes. For them to take a pay freeze is monumental and speaks to their dedication to this school district and this community. No one could ask more of them.
4. The school system has now been recognized as one of the best in the state and the teachers and administrators have agreed to take a pay freeze. I hope the citizens of this great community will appreciate the hard work and the conscientious efforts of the school system to provide a top quality education at a fair and reasonable cost.

Schoenlein really overdoes it — The teachers’ action was “monumental” — “No one could ask more of them.”

The problem is, the correct term is “pay scale freeze.”  The scale was frozen but the pay is not frozen.  As Ms Patrick pointed out in her letter, the pay scale, through frozen, calls for regular “step increases.”

The pay scale gives 70% of the teachers a pretty nice raise, of between 3% to 8%.  The pay scale shows how teachers gain pay increases for longevity as well as for additional training.  The teachers agreed that for the school year 2011-12, this scale would have no additional across the board increases.  The 2009-10 year and the 2010-11 both had 1.5% across the board increases.  It’s fair to say that the pay scale was frozen for 2011-12, but, it’s just plain inaccurate to substitute the term “pay freeze” for the correct term — “pay scale freeze.”

Dangerously, it seems to me, the effort to gain revenue for Kettering correctly is being seen by citizens as a campaign to sell — based on exaggerated claims — not a campaign to educate.

The second article in the DDN is a front page article entitled “No raise likely for Social Security recipients,” and explains that for the second year in a row, there will be no Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) for Social Security.  Zero inflation, zero COLA.  I imagine the community, particularly in a time of economic recession, would support this COLA standard for teachers.  The community, I don’t think, is ready to describe the teachers’ approval of a pay scale freeze as, “monumental.”

There are many social security residents in Kettering, who are taking a real “pay freeze,” and this headline is a reminder that  passing new taxes in a time of recession would be a challenge under the best of circumstances.

If I were a board member, I would urge the superintendent to initiate quite a different strategy for the remainder of this levy campaign and to develop a presentation for the public that explains and justifies the teachers’ contract.  I would urge him to explain the logic of “step” increases, how the path of a teacher’s career has been established by contract by long tradition, how the contract shows an agreement and a path for a dedicated teacher to realize security and long term rewards. Kettering should be proud that it has policies that have always attracted and kept the best teachers, and the argument to the public should be that this system deserves support. But the argument should also encourage a general discussion about system structure and how the present system might be transformed to something much better.  At least, this is the type of forward looking discussion that a democratic school district should be having — particularly during a time of a publicly determined tax issue when the public is most likely to take a close look at their system of public education.

The controversy about the truthfulness of the claim of a teachers’ “pay freeze,” that Ms Patrick cites in her letter, undermines the confidence of the voters in the school district and helps motivate organized opposition to new taxes.  Controversy and organized opposition — combined with a tough economy that has caused a real “pay freeze” for the elderly — make me inclined to believe the Kettering levy likely will fail.

Happy Birthday, John Lennon.