Montrose Education Assoc. questions district’s distress

BY STACI WILSON

The Montrose Board of Education and the district’s education association came face-to-face for the first time Monday since the MEA announced plans of a work stoppage on March 29.

The district is looking into borrowing money in order to keep its doors open for the remainder of the year.

Business manager Michelle Lusk said that although 45 percent of the funding was released in December, the district is owed about $4 million in basic education funding from the state.

Lusk said Montrose Area could run out of cash by the end of April. Even with using the remainder of the district’s fund balance, there would still be about a $200,000 deficit, she said.

The district is in the process of exploring the options of taking out the tax revenue anticipation note, but Lusk warned, that the district would be responsible for the legal or interest fees and that the state funding could not be used to pay those.

She also noted that, by law, the district would be required to pay back a TRAN by June 30, or file for an extension.
Lusk said the three bankers she had spoken with were not surprised the district would need a loan and they were also working with other school districts in the area.

Superintendent Carol Boyce said some districts were considering closing their doors before the end of the school year. “Everybody is headed to new ground here,” she said.

MEA President Teri Evans questioned the district’s fiscal report saying that at the February meeting, the business office reported the district was in “good shape.”

Evans continued, “Let it be known that she didn’t say ‘good shape until May,’ she didn’t say ‘in good shape for the short-term;’ and she certainly didn’t frame her comment by saying ‘in good shape as long as we receive state funding.’”

Evans said she visited the superintendent’s office the day after the February board meeting. “At no time during our conversation did you lead me to believe that the District was going to be in financial distress,” Evans said.

But, the MEA president said on Feb. 29, a message was posted on the district website stating that it would be necessary to borrow funds or face a shut down.

“Could someone please enlighten the MEA how on February 8, our District is on solid financial ground and a mere 21 days later, the District declares the proverbial sky is falling?” Evans asked.

She also said the staff felt it should have been notified instead of having to learn of the district finance woes on the school website. “Wouldn’t it be prudent and politic to inform the employees of the District that they may have to endure payless paydays and a possible shutdown?” she queried.

Evans said MEA had no knowledge of the district’s “financial crisis” when the strike notice was issued but said the association’s contract proposal would save the district money.

“The MEA’s current contract proposal embraces several of the ideas that you have proposed. As of this evening, it is apparent that we are approximately two weeks away from a work stoppage and perhaps two months from a shutdown. Both possibilities are not only undesirable to the entire school community, they are avoidable,” Evans said.

Boyce said that the board would not engage in a discussion about the negotiations at the meeting.

One audience member voiced his support for an increase in the health care contribution from the MEA saying the public has to absorb the lion share of the health care. He advocated the contribution rate be brought in line with what private sector workers pay.

There are two negotiating sessions planned between the district and the scheduled March 29 strike date.