Budget Cuts
 

Just got back from a clinic, and it looks like one of the counties in my association is going back in time---only the 3 required 3 person crews per school per season. I tossed out the suggestion of a reduced fee to keep more of the 3 crew games. Sounds like they may present it.

No, No, No!!! Don't devalue the job that is being done. Do not offer to work 3 Man for less. Demand that if they want only 2 referees, that the current 3 Man fee be paid to the 2. That will put and end to the request for 2 vs 3.

While I agree with your sentiment, many schools will be making big cuts in budgets going forward. They're looking to save money, not take crews from 3 to 2.

As has been well documented around here (I think most recently in RichMSNs retirement-consideration thread) the "savings" of this move is somewhere between $1,000 and $2,500 total per year -- depending on which state you're in and if they play G/B or JV/V double headers (and which one of us does the math).

In the perspective of an entire school budget that could be in the millions or multi-millions, it's nothing. I remember somebody comparing it to the typical property taxes paid by either one or two homeowners in their district.

Look at it another way. Spending 2.500 total per year more than you have on varsity basketball means a 200 user fee.

The school district and the freeholders or the councilors or the aldermen or the town meeting aren't willing to spend more than they need to, nor should they. It's not just 2,500 for basketball, the cuts are hitting public safety, senior citizen meals programs and the core educational curriculum. Property tax bases have been battered in many communities.

These are kids playing basketball, it ain't the NBA and it ain't NCAA. Yup, mistakes might happen, but coaches, players, scorekeepers and league commissioners make mistakes too.

Already, kids aren't playing because in many places they're being charged to play. If the schools around here can come up in another 1,000 to 2,500 from the taxpayers for a particular sport, they should use it to reduce participation fees, not indulge the know-it-all attitude of officials and their one-track-mind take on what the budgetary priorities of an educational system ought to be.

I have neither a one-track mind nor do I pretend to know more about school budgets than anyone else. But I do know this: coaches get paid and their pay goes up each year. Teachers get paid and their pay goes up each year. Health care costs go up each year, but in most school districts, teachers and other school employees do not share in that higher cost (which is nothing at all like what happens in my private business.)

I understand full well why budget directors are trying to cut expenses and as a taxpayer, I fully support those efforts. But I reject the notion that officials should be the only ones that must make less money to keep costs in check. Of course, most officials are not part of the "system" and we will see our fees cut long before we see the pay of anyone on the inside cut.

First of all, your assertion that teachers do not share in the higher cost of health insurance is false. As a teacher myself, I can tell you that they take more and more money out of my check each year for health coverage, and my co-pays have gone up each year also.

Having said that, there really is no reason to accept less pay as officials. The Districts can and should save money on travel, out-of-state tournaments, etc., etc. But our services are needed and we should not accept a pay cut. We also should not expect a pay raise.

That is not how it works here. The only way that teachers pay more for health insurance here is if it is bargained as part of their contract. Not surprisingly, the teachers are very strong in their desire to keep the status quo and have not shared in the higher costs of health insurance. I don't blame them for that stance. But for the school district, if it has to pay $100,000 more for health insurance (as a simple example), then it has to cut that money from somewhere else or raise revenue. Sports is always an easy place to start. There is one school district in this state that pays nothing for sports. All the money has to be raised by the teams, boosters and parents. Last year, one of its basketball teams won the state championship for its division...and much was made of how it pulled that off without any formal school funding.

The alternative to two-person crews is to cut the scheduled number of games by each school. Teachers are losing their jobs. Others within the school districts are losing their jobs. The AD for this particular county is a member of our board and is a long-time official. With property values in FL declining, the taxable base is also shrinking. Raising property tax rates to compensate is not something that is happening.
One proposal might be to pay 3 crew members $50 per game instead of $60.
A crew of two would be paid $65 per game. So, the school would pay $30 less per game, which would be $10 less per official. Or, it would be only $20 more than what they are proposing per game. Crews of two have cost $130 in years past and that would not change.
Crowds generally are sparse from what I have observed with just a few exceptions.

Rockford, Illinois, public high schools have eliminated AD positions, jv and freshman football teams next year.