Administrators say no to ponying up for cuts

By Emily Richmond

Tuesday, Nov. 18, 2008 | 2 a.m.

Searching for ways to cut $120 million from the School District’s upcoming budgets, Superintendent Walt Rulffes went to the administrators union with two requests.

Each year, hundreds of administrators receive a “step” increase to their salaries. Would the union agree to spread next year’s increases over two years, a move that would save $3.2 million?

Rulffes also wondered whether they would be willing to take a day off without pay. If all 1,300 administrators did so, another $564,000 could be trimmed.

The union’s leadership rejected both requests at a meeting last week, said Stephen Augspurger, executive director of the Clark County Association of School Administrators.

Rulffes said he made similar requests to the teachers and support staff unions recently but has not received responses.

“We understand the dilemma the superintendent is facing,” Augspurger said Monday, “but we have contracts that were negotiated in good faith, and we would expect the district to honor that.”

One unavoidable aspect of Rulffes’ dilemma is that 86 percent of the district’s $2.1 billion operating budget is salaries and benefits. That makes cutting costs, without layoffs or steeply reducing services, particularly tricky.

Yet even during a massive budget crisis, employee contracts must be honored, according to Bill Hoffman, senior legal counsel for the district. Contracts can be reopened for revision only with the agreement of both parties.

Within the district’s control are cuts to programs and services. Some of the items being considered include sports, extracurricular activities and proficiency test tutoring. Rulffes has reduced central office budgets by 12 percent and individual campuses have been told to submit revised budgets trimmed by 3.5 percent.

Rulffes said he had hoped the administrators union would come forward with a proposal of its own “to help mitigate the horrible impact of the funding cuts, and perhaps they still will.”

Public employees, including the district’s teachers, administrators and support staff, were awarded a 2 percent cost-of-living pay increase in 2007 and another 4 percent this year.

The superintendent’s proposal to the administrators was arguably small potatoes, given the size of the budget shortfall, but it would have helped protect programs that benefit students, he said.

“There are mechanisms in place for dealing with budget shortfalls,” Augspurger said. “We do not believe it’s appropriate to go back to employees and ask them to accept any loss in pay.”

The focus, he said, should be on eliminating all “nonessential programs.”

Carole Vilardo, president of the conservative Nevada Taxpayers Association, said she wasn’t surprised the union refused to delay the raises. At the same time, it was a missed opportunity to gain public sympathy, which schools will need in the coming months, she said.

Even if it were just one “furlough” day, it would be a way of acknowledging “that everybody is facing tough economic times,” Vilardo said. “It’s extremely unfortunate that hard of a line has been taken by the union.”

The hard line could lead to layoffs in their ranks. Rulffes has already announced plans to cut 261 administrative positions. More are a strong possibility unless the district can find other ways to trim costs.

Although the superintendent made similar requests to teachers and support staff, Rulffes believed he had his best shot at persuading administrators to make voluntary concessions because they work year-round and could more easily give up a day’s pay.

John Jasonek, executive director of the Clark County Education Association, declined to discuss the request to the teachers union, saying it was a conversation more appropriate for the contract negotiations table.

Sources told the Sun the union can be expected to resist any attempt to reduce teacher pay.

In prior interviews, Jasonek has said it was premature to start assembling lists of what the district is willing to give up. Doing so only provides ammunition to lawmakers who will try and use the budget crisis as an excuse to shortchange schools during the upcoming legislative session, he said.

Yet Vilardo said she senses a different mood among public employees than in prior economic downturns, specifically 1969-70 and 1979-1983.

“Back then, people seemed to be willing to make personal concessions so that you wouldn’t have outright layoffs,” Vilardo said. “Everyone was willing to contribute what they could.”