Allen retirement – (G.W.)

Published February 23, 2012 by justicewg

The sweetheart deals that former super Allen received were numerous, but the retirement deal took the cake. The topper was that one year after  they had given him a deal that was not offered to any other employee, he jumped ship in the middle of his two year contract. The entire sordid story stretched over a number of years, this post was from 2005.

“As the This Week newspaper reported, superintendent Allen was rehired after his “retirement” for the same wage at the July board meeting. His pay is frozen for two years, but there is nothing to stop the board from continuing with the 5% raises he has been given in the past after the two years are up. Despite many parents speaking before the board asking for fiscal restraint, the board has taken action that is poor management for a school system that faces a fall levy, and sets bad precedent for future negotiations with the administrators and teachers.

A few responses to comments from the board members after the jump.

Kathy Lithgow is quoted about other districts contacting Allen, “I wouldn’t be surprised if they have. I’m sure many districts would love to have Steve as their superintendent.” A responsible action for the board would have been to only react to a real bid from another district, creating imaginary bidding is a tactic that employees use, not management.

Anita Keller said. “Allen was instrumental in helping to get the district’s last levy passed, and will be instrumental in the upcoming levy effort”. How soon they forget – Allen was also superintendent when the school failed to pass the May 2002 levy, his record is one for two on levy passage.

Suzanne McLeod said her decision to support rehiring Allen was based on a number of factors, including the overwhelming response the board heard at a June 14 meeting from residents who wanted him to stay in Grandview. There was no outright request to refuse his rehire, but she conveniently forgets the many requests at that meeting to show financial restraint and rehire at a lower pay.

Ron Cameron said he has found Allen to be “without exception the most egoless person I’ve worked with”. Add this to the “dynamic” label he used at another meeting, and many other comments – we get it Ron, you like this guy. Maybe you are a little too close to your pal, when you are supposed to be his management.

The worst result of this action will be the precedent it sets for future negotiations with both the administration of the school and the teachers. Other administrators will expect the same deal if they want to “retire”. The teachers will be rightly offended when they are asked to take take a lesser deal.

The recent article in the paper that quoted treasurer Kinsley on the financial shape of the school contained dire warnings about the lowering in state funding levels, but saved the kicker for the end – the board is making its financial projections on the assumption that there will be NO increases in wages for the teachers. Given the way the board has acted, what are the chances for that? (from 2005)


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: