What The Recall Is Really About

By Jim Haslip
Tuesday, November 10, 2009

The “recallers” and I have been misrepresented by recent commentaries and letters. Forty registered voters wrote the following charges that were printed on the petition to recall the board:

• “you demonstrated a complete lack of fiscal responsibility, as evidenced by your approval of exorbitant salaries to administrative personnel and the perpetuation of unnecessary administrative positions while funds for instructional materials to be used for our schools are being cut due to the current economic crisis;

• “ you failed to act with transparency and failed to provide the public with clear and accurate information and you, in some instances, misled the public with respect to financial, academic, and administrative matters;

• “you failed to work with the public as your administrative policies require and you completely disregarded all of the input that the public has provided to you;

• “you failed to adequately and properly supervise administrative staff, including, but not limited to, the Superintendent;

• “you allowed the administration to grossly mismanage fundamental school programs, such as special education and vocational programs...”

The exorbitant salaries are well-documented. The highest superintendent salary for a district of our size or smaller was cited by district supporters as $160,000 in Kentfield (other districts cited are up to three times larger than ours). Gordon retired at $264,000. Haley is making $205,000 base salary. (The district claims he makes $189,000, an exorbitant amount for someone who was subject to an extremely rare “vote of no confidence” at his last district, but they fail to disclose another $16,000 that he receives “on payroll” for “expenses.”)

I estimate that if (former Superintendent Allan) Gordon had been paid at the same rate as the Kentfield superintendent, without his retirement gift (however “legal” it may be), the children of St. Helena would have had access to over $650,000 for supplies, materials, and programs that have been cut. This is what “exorbitant salaries” means. This is what “misleading the public” implies.

Research by many sources, including former trustee Bill Swanson, shows that we overspend on administration by no less that $900,000 year in and year out when compared to other districts of similar size and income. A former superintendent here publicly stated that when he was superintendent (and we had more students), he had four people in the district office and now there are many, many more. This is what “the perpetuation of unnecessary administrative positions” means.

Research shows that 14 programs have been reduced or eliminated in recent years. The last teacher with a Vocational Education credential was two years ago. I am happy that agricultural studies is doing well but what about all those other students that are not going to college? This is what “mismanagement of vocational education” means.

The district had spent under $30,000 a year on legal fees. It is over $700,000 over the last 3 years. Meanwhile, we continue to sue the County rather than cooperate with them on special education, vocational programs, group purchasing, and staff development. This is what “lack of fiscal responsibility” means. We blame this on the County and on a few special education parents when competent administrators have demonstrated elsewhere that cooperation is more fiscally responsible that confrontation.

The recall is not about my term on the board or a few “recallers.” It is about our children and how your tax dollars are spent. I did not leave the Board to run away. Rather I have chosen the side of our children. When the Recall vote is taken in February, please join us.

(Jim Haslip is a former trustee of the St. Helena Unified School District. He lives in St. Helena.)