Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, May 9, 1995 TAG: 9505090089
SECTION: CURRENT PAGE: NRV-1 EDITION: NEW RIVER VALLEY
SOURCE: MELISSA DeVAUGHN STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
But in Montgomery County, teachers are calling it "Local Teacher Depreciation Day."
Teachers and other school employees are wearing black armbands, black ribbons and even black clothing today to show the county School Board their dismay over its May 2 decision to grant a 1.2 percent across-the-board salary increase.
The administration and the School Board had proposed a 4 percent salary increase in the original budget submitted to the county Board of Supervisors. The supervisors cut the schools' budget by $1.89 million.
Superintendent Herman Bartlett then proposed a revised budget to the School Board with a 2 percent salary increase, but the School Board decided on a budget that gave only a 1.2 percent raise and funded other priorities.
"What we're trying to do is make sure the public understands that we know it is our School Board that made this decision," said B.J. Mullins, president of the Montgomery County Education Association.
Mullins said the blame was also shared by the supervisors. "The facts are, there was money in the budget to provide a 4 percent increase if that was the priority of the [Board of Supervisors]."
After the supervisors' action, the School Board considered three budget alternatives at its May 2 meeting. The first was Bartlett's 2 percent proposal, a second offered a 1.2 percent salary increase, and a third suggested a 1.98 percent increase.
The School Board chose the second budget proposal, which fully funds new education initiatives, but also gives the lowest salary increase.
"The second plan was a plan that a school board member had suggested," Bartlett said Monday.
While Bartlett did not name that board member, the approved budget is similar to a memo sent to School Board members by Peggy Arrington of District G near Mount Tabor Road and North Main Street. Arrington proposed keeping 16 new teaching positions, fully funding two technology personnel and adding an assistant principal at Blacksburg Middle School. However, she did not suggest lowering the salary increase in the memo.
"My plan gave the 2 percent pay increase and was similar to plan number three," which gave a 1.98 percent increase, Arrington said.
In a budget work session April 25, School Board Chairman Roy Vickers asked to see how salaries would be affected if all of the proposed educational initiatives stayed intact, resulting in the 1.2 percent figure, but he did not advocate funding such a proposal.
Christiansburg board member David Moore was the first to support the plan, followed by Becky Raines of Elliston. Board members Dick Edwards, Barry Worth and Annette Perkins opposed the proposal all along and were the only three of the nine board members to vote against it after lengthy debate.
The School Board also voted at last week's meeting to ask the Board of Supervisors for an additional $951,000 to supplement employee salaries. The chances of that happening, said supervisors Chairman Larry Linkous, are "very slim.
"It's simply because the money is not available," Linkous said. "The decision, seems to me, has been made by the School Board. They set their priorities and they seemed to think they needed additional staff more than the raises. I don't see that it's a Board of Supervisors decision at this point."
Vickers was optimistic Monday afternoon.
"I believe that ... especially over the last two years, the School Board has strived to improve the relationship with the Board of Supervisors," he said. "I believe after you make deposits in that emotional bank you can make withdrawals."
Regardless of who voted for which budget, the result is 500 unhappy school employees - members of the MCEA, which makes up 80 percent of the school system's work force.
"On the part of our membership, there is a very strong reaction to this," Mullins, of the MCEA, said. "The actions that you will see [today] will come about as a need of our members to express our dismay over these cuts."
Bartlett said the protest has no place in the classroom.
"I don't think it's good," he said. "I think it involves students and I really think we should not let these things spew over into our classrooms," he said. "I'm saddened by that."
Bartlett said he is "disappointed on the one hand that we couldn't give the original 4 percent, but I'm certainly pleased that we can start to give focus and direction to the school division to the planning process" by addressing the goals set forth by the community-formed Focus 2006 group, which prioritized educational needs in the county.
Memo: ***CORRECTION***