Dist. 220 raises should reflect current times

I read with interest the March 19, 2009 Daily Herald account of District 220 considerations to reduce expenses. Any reduction in the expense structure for school operations is to be commended. Although some reductions in staff are being considered, will they be sufficient to lower total compensation cost, the single largest line item in the expense budget?

Since the union contract is currently being negotiated, what actions are being contemplated to reduce the rate of salary growth that recently has far outpaced current pay practices in America? Are any of the work rules being considered for change that would allow for greater productivity of the teaching staff? What benefits (noncash compensation) are being reviewed for adjustment to bring them in line with current practices?

I respectfully remind board members that you are the advocates for the taxpayers as well as the children. I trust that you will discharge your responsibilities such that the taxpayers and children of the district can embrace your decisions. The recent outrage in America demonstrated over the AIG bonus payments reflects just how sensitive excessive pay practices are viewed by Americans. Decisions made during these negotiations could affect the voters view of school board actions and requests in the future. For the sake of the children, a negative view would be tragic.

I am certain that if you look at the complete universe of comparables for salary and benefits (not just other school districts), you will find that the rate of growth of total compensation in America has slowed dramatically. As a taxpayer, I ask that you consider the same treatment for employees of the District. Please take a firm stand against positions the union may take that are not in line with current realities of total compensation practices and the distressed economy in America.

David W. Koester

Barrington