In a March 11 Times Star article I was quoted as saying "we are trying to buy time" and appears to be supporting the article's point of view. While I made the comment the reporter did not provide all of the context of the 20 minute conversation.

Here are some more specific pieces of information to clarify my quote as well as address some of the comments made in the article.

Point One

Times Article Section

ALAMEDA -- About 200 teachers who have been without a union contract for nearly nine months demonstrated outside a school board meeting Tuesday to protest what union leaders called bad faith negotiations on the part of the district.

Response

On July 1, 2003 the current AEA Contract expired. Until a new contract is signed, the expired contract remains in effect.

Point Two

Times Article Section

Just how much money is on the negotiating table depends on who you ask. Union representatives say they are asking for about $1.6 million in health care and salary increases. A school board member said they are asking for $3.5 million. And according to the school district's Web site, teachers want an increase of more than $5 million.

Response

The school board member the reporter is referring to is me. In my conversation with the reporter I broke down what I believe are the total costs of the union's initial proposals. From the chart you can see an over 100% increase in the District's contribution for health care would cost $2,500,000 and their salary increase request would cost $1,000,000.

Point Three

Times Article Section

"We have been negotiating for seven months and have only been able to agree on two articles out of 28," McDowell said. "The district's negotiators are stalling by coming to meetings claiming they are unprepared and don't have the authority to negotiate. It's time the school board knows about it."

Response

The teacher's union requested to negotiate 11 articles and the administration requested to negotiate 17 articles, with 10 being the same. So there are a total of 18 articles to negotiate. Due to fiscal uncertainity of the state budget, the administation's position on any articles having fiscal impact needs to be negotiated together rather article by article.

Point Four

Times Article Section

School board member Michael McMahon said the district is strapped for money and it will be hard to meet teacher demands.

"We're just trying to buy time like every other school district when it comes to the school's budget," he said. "The situation is ugly statewide."

Response

In 2003, we made $1,700,000 in reductions due to 2002/03 fiscal crisis that ex-governor Davis proclaimed in December, 2002. After the 2003/04 budget adoption, it was clear there still was a severe state fiscal crisis. The 2003/04 fiscal crisis required governor Schwarzenegger to finance $15 billion of prior state deficits via Prop 57. The State Budget 2004-05 is still proposing more deficits in the coming years according to the Legislative Analyst Office. Since the Alameda Unified School District receives 89% of its funding from the State, it is my opinion that the most fiscally prudent course of action is to critically evaluate making future multi-year expense commitments when it certainly appears that future revenue increases are highly questionable.