Confronting a financial disaster they helped create, Santa Ana teachers union leaders did Tuesday what they’ve done for years: They blamed someone else.
In a newsletter they sent to all Santa Ana teachers, union leaders blamed me for the declining enrollment in the district’s schools.
In short, they say my work to provide parents with alternatives to underperforming schools led to an exodus of children from district schools.
It’s true that more and more Santa Ana parents are choosing public charter schools over poor-performing union-run schools. But student enrollment in Santa Ana has been falling for years. I first heard about it in a March 2015 school board meeting when the district’s assistant superintendent gave us the Facilities Master Plan, a document showing that the number of students in our district had been falling since 2002, and would continue to decline about 2 percent per year through at least 2018.
Despite that long-term decline, teachers union leaders continued to lobby for higher teacher pay every year. In any other business, a decline in customers would lead to cost-savings measures. But not in Santa Ana Unified. Since 2013, union leaders worked overtime to sell their members, and my colleagues, on a myth: that teacher pay can rise even as the student population — and the associated state and federal funding — declines.
Three times in three years, union leaders Susan Mercer and Barbara Pearson peddled that myth. Every year, my fellow trustees took the path of least resistance and caved in. In the end, teacher pay jumped a total of 16 percent over three years.
The most recent increase, a 10 percent pay raise approved 4-1 in 2015, now costs the district $32 million annually. I voted against that increase because it failed to grasp the reality of declining enrollment.
On Tuesday night, we reached the dead end of the union’s logic. That night, my colleagues on the school board — the same board members who voted for the pay raises — acknowledged that we are confronting a financial crisis. They voted to save $28 million by pink-slipping 287 teachers. Mine was the lone dissenting vote.
Those 287 teachers won’t be terminated because they’re bad teachers. They’ll be terminated only because they’re new — because the union leaders who led our teachers into a financial dead end also insisted that their contract include what’s called the LIFO (last in, first out) clause, so that in a budget crisis the most recently hired are the first to go.
Releasing those 287 teachers means that Santa Ana students will be moved into larger classes. It means that our remaining teachers will shoulder the additional work of those larger classes.
I want to speak directly to those 287 teachers who may be laid off: I’m sorry. You no doubt started your work here with great enthusiasm for the mission of educating Santa Ana’s young people. You likely knew the challenges and rewards of working here, and celebrated your new job with calls to friends and family, telling them that you were ready to embark on your teaching career with energy, courage and creativity.
You had no reason to expect that the leaders of your own union would betray you. But they did. And you had every reason to expect that our school board would protect you from the union leadership’s destructive, single-minded push for higher wages. But they didn’t.
The union leadership’s choke hold on the district — the destructive influence of union money poured into the political campaigns of my fellow trustees — confused my colleagues. They came to believe that they owed their positions to union leaders, rather than to the education of our children, the promotion of great teachers and service to our parents.
You young teachers deserved better. Our students and their families deserved better.
Cecilia “Ceci” Iglesias is a Santa Ana Unified School District board member, and community relations director for the California Policy Center’s education initiative.
With all these financial woes and uncertainty, I wonder if SAUSD is still pushing to build that expensive sports stadium at Saddleback High?? That will be really weird if they still want to move forward that plan. The surrounding neighborhood does not want the stadium at their back door and has made that clear. The homes are way too close to the proposed stadium site. Who needs that hassle?
All I have to say is where is our City Mayor ,City Manager, and the city council? Our SAUSD teacher’s are paid to do just that “teach,” don’t blame the teacher’s. Blame the economy and the days of one single income are gone. Both parents have to work just to make ends meet. Blame the parents, it’s their responsibility and accountability to make not only their children are in school but to make sure they’re respectful to their teacher’s. Kids these days a desensitized and act with a sense of entitlement. The saying is, “You’re a product of your environment.” I say, “You’re a product of the decisions make in life.” I went through SAUSD and graduated from SAHS and a University. I have three children one who’s graduating this year from Long Beach St. and who’s a sophomore at Cal State Dominguez Hills. Parents TAKE ACCOUNTABILITY and RESPONSIBILITY for YOUR CHILDREN, don’t blame the teacher’s.
Ceci needs to stop blaming the unions. First, as a board member, she runs the schools. There is no such thing as a union run school. The decisions that have lead to today’s financial issues came about from the school board. The previous board members (Palacio, Amezcua, Hernandez, and Iglesias) that made these decisions were all elected without union support.
Prior to the election, Iglesias violated board campaign contribution limits. “It’s not enforceable,” Iglesias said in an interview. “It just didn’t seem like…I had to be complying with something that [is not] enforceable. It’s just more like a document that was passed before I got on the board.” She said she has no plans to return any of the money from donors who contributed more than $1,000. “It’s something that is fair, and it’s something that is not illegal,” she said. Why does she need to take $5000 from a Newport Beach real estate developer? Does feel she owes her position to the parents or these special interests? I doubt outsiders have a real interest in the education of the children of Santa Ana. I speculate that they see her push for charter schools as a money making opportunity. (http://voiceofoc.org/2016/09/santa-ana-school-board-member-exceeded-campaign-contribution-limit/.) As for her lack of ethics, she has violated election laws before. Noted in an OC register article, she has violated election laws in her run for Congress. (http://www.ocregister.com/articles/campaign-273450-reports-election.html.)
Ceci has a very small group of about ten parents that canvas neighborhoods lying to parents. They lie to parents that a charter school will solve all your child’s academic problems. As more studies are showing charters and vouchers not to be the solution, she should work with teachers to help families. Instead, she loves to use Facebook to attack teachers.
Simply, Ceci is using this platform to take complete responsibility…that everyone else is at fault.
Actually the teachers’ union has been endorsing Palacio for years. I am pretty sure they endorsed Amezcua and Hernandez last time around too.
And she is not the only one blaming the union. The OC Register has done so too and we agree as well. The greedy union pushed for an unsustainable raise and now teachers are getting fired. That is on the union 100%!
Ceci has been the top vote getter in every SAUSD School Board race she has been in. Clearly the local parents and voters agree with her!
Ceci is a “top vote getter” because she breaks the rules. She took illegal conrtibution$.
Really? You think lies will prove your point? She was cleared by the FPPC. But then you knew that didn’t you?
The only one lying is Ceci. Get it right. This is from the Superintendent…
Dear SAUSD Colleagues,
At its Special Board Meeting last evening, the Board of Education had a discussion about the District’s financial state. Within that discussion, I shared with the Board the fact that the District has been experiencing declining enrollment for the past 10 years. Over the last three years, we have lost an average of 1,300 students each year. While we continue to increase our efforts to recruit and retain students in the District, the reality is that we project a decline in student enrollment for the next three years. In addition to declining enrollment, our projections show minimal funding with the State, and a possible 18-22% reduction in federal funding. In light of this uncertainty coupled with our declining enrollment, to ensure that our District is able to balance its budget and be fiscally solvent, the Board voted to issue preliminary notices by March 15, to certain groups of our certificated staff who provide services that are listed in the resolution and who may be impacted (visit website for agenda item). Please keep in mind that although these notices will be handed out, it does not mean each person who receives a notice will ultimately receive a final layoff letter. While the process of issuing and receiving notices is very uncomfortable, it is necessary in order to provide the Board maximum flexibility to make strategic decisions so that our budget is balanced by June 30th and address our declining enrollment. There are also additional expenditures that will also be reduced between now and June which could impact classified employees and management staff.
This is a difficult time in our District as we are forced to consider possible reductions to balance our budget. The Board and I value each and every staff member, and we realize that this process is tough and may cause anxiety. We will continue to work together as always through this challenging time and ensure that we remain focused on educating our students.
Sincerely,
Stefanie P. Phillips, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Get what right? Ceci cited the declining enrollment when she voted AGAINST the unwarranted pay raises! The rest of the school board stupidly approved the pay raises and look where we are now.
She violated school board rules. These have no legal effect. Even though these rules are not legally enforceable, other board members and candidates have abided by them. Again, why does she need outside monies? Why do ethics not matter? But then you knew that already, didn’t you?
Of course you are ignoring the THOUSANDS of union dollars spent last year to elect the pro union slate of school board candidates…
Sorry, if you actually checked, the last election, Palacio, Hernandez and Amezcua were not supported. If they ever had support, it was many years ago. Should teachers ever get raises? Didn’t Santa Ana teachers take pay cuts or have no raises for about 7 years prior to this raise? (I’ll save you from responding incorrectly; yes, they did.) I have issues with the lies that Ceci tells. Sure, tell parents what they want to hear and you’ll get votes. She has attacked teachers for not doing their jobs. For a parent, it is much easier to blame your child’s teacher than to reflect on your own parenting. If your child doesn’t do what is necessary for success (reads at home, do homework, show up with attitude/ behavior for success, etc.), She feeds into this by claiming to be the parent advocate.
I’m a teacher at SAUSD. I have been with the district 4 years. I agree that the union is greedy. Last years raise was beyond absurb. No district should be giving 9% raises. We are way over paid compared to other districts. The ones who suffer for this are the students and new teachers. The old veterans with a MA degree are making about $95000 a year plus they charge for tutoring tutoring which easy gets them to about $100,000 a year. In my 15 plus years of teaching this is the worst union I have been apart of. The leadership is not considerate of the entire union membership when asking for raises and contract consessions. The union is lead by old teachers and they are only looking out for their benefit and can care less for the new teachers. The new teachers at the district are the ones that should be kept. They are the ones who are truly making connections with the students and families, changing their perspective on education and engaging them. Most of the old teachers just want to shove a book in front of student faces and ignore them the entire day. I know this because I see it at my high school on a daily basis. If SAUSD is going to change and become successful they really need to get rid of tenure.
City of SA government +bunch of sucios y ladrones!!!!!!!!!!!
City governments and school boards are independent of each other.
PEOPLE KEEP COMPLAINING ABOUT EVERYTHING BUT THE RIGHT THING.
STOP VOTING FOR THE SAME BONEHEAD. TIME AND TIME AGAIN WE SEE THE SAME BONEHEAD RUNNING FOR OFFICE.
LET’S START GETTING NEW PEOPLE IN THERE.
The time of one term is here. If these socialist rascals aren’t doing their job the first term vote them out the second.
What is so damn hard people?
If you mess up at work then you get fired!!!
Why don’t each member of the counsil, school district, county get the same treatment!!!
The title to this article is “alternative facts” at its finest. smh
The truth hurts doesn’t it? Your union blew it!
Editor, you truly are an idiot. This isn’t a union problem… this is a board problem. The board controls the money for the most part. The union doesn’t. Get it right. Every district is run that way with a board in charge/overseeing things.
Most of the Board was elected with union support and the union tried very hard to elect three more candidates last November. So you see the teachers union is indeed the problem