It's a fair question

Ah yes comrades- these bourgeoisie elites academics, amassing personal property from their work?! The average superintendent makes two to three times the salary of a teacher, just for being responsible for every school in the district? We should pay them $50k- and pay teachers $50 as well, what is the difference between taking care of 30 kids or 30 schools? Besides- it isn’t like you need any sort of skills or special training to be a good superintendent right? We don’t need to offer competitive salaries to what a person with their level of management might make in a private company- especially if we abolish private enterprise!

I’m sorry. The idea of taking the personal property of an individual who earned their salary- arguably should make more than they do, to pay a public debt, simply because we don’t understand that’s persons hob or they don’t produce material goods, and because they appear to have more than someone else.... it has a deep ring of Marxist communism to me. I’d take socialism over Marxism in policy just about any day. Going after an educator to pay for kids to be educated seems wrong compared to asking society of parents as a whole go foot that bill.

Also there are about 13,500 school districts in the US. A new “luxury car” in that income ranges averages around $60-75k on the high end. BUT- many of these cars are leases- equating to $450 or so dollars a month, and when bought are financed at about the same rate over a term of 4-6 years on average. Also, if we take their “luxury cars” their job still requires A car- so we don’t get the entire sum- a “cheap” new car is about $20k to start. So we can get $40-50k back over 4-6 years which.... really doesn’t make a big difference. Certainly not a “fix” to the problem, so we’d be penalizing educators for... getting educated enough to educate? That seems counter productive.

And yet again, addressing things I didn't fucking say.

I didn’t say you said anything did I? If we want to play that game. But what would the superintendents luxury car have to do with anything I wonder? Or perhaps it was just flavor for a short story, a little Tolkien-esq superfluous detail and the comment was a genuine request to ask the superintendent? Or was it an implication that is where the money goes? That and the parking lot and such? What was your point, set me straight.

Leave him, your energy and lifetime aren't worth it.

Embezzlement and misallocation of public funds. I know we've had this conversation before.

It isn’t a sign of embezzlement to buy a luxury vehicle, especially when as stated- the average school administrator has a salary and position which would support such a vehicle. Treating the acquisition of private property as a sign of crime against the state is pretty Marxist. As for the parking lot- parking lots exist. It already existed. Maintenance of facilities is not misallocation. Replacing their own driveway with school funds would be. It MIGHT be a poor use of funds- but that’s also questionable since there is more to the world.

See, many construction issues, damaged pavement or cement, building facades and such- if they aren’t repaired in a timely manner they become much worse and more expensive problems. A parking lot for example, that merely needed a layer of asphalt over it, can end up with deep damage that will require a near complete rear down for safety reasons- at many times the cost. So a cost of $10k now can save $100k or more down the road. That’s actually financially responsible. It’s mitigating future costs of a greater magnitude. There is liability legally from injury if the lot is bad, standing water danger, pest incursion, vehicle damage, and of course the image of the school and perception of parents and such... of course it CAN be a poor use of funds.

@f_kyeahhamburg- lol. Yeah.

I don't get why you're trying to call me marxist. Are you trying to trigger me or something? We're not talking about private business and industry, but a city run service with the sole purpose and objective of benefitting students. Many of which are largely failing in their primary duty.
Is funding intricate non-school facilities and beautifying perfectly serviceable land a misallocation or sign of embezzlement? No. Unless, as is the case in the community I was largely schooled in, the textbooks are 20 years old, kids are suffering heat injuries due to busted ACs, half of the campus lot is derelict and overgrown, and bake sales are being used to cover basic maintenance like mold removal rather than bonus activities, and at the same time the new construction projects were never publicly bid, are being done by friends and family of the board for exorbitant prices, and none of it serves to benefit the students whatsoever.
I suppose it could be a case in favor of school choice, if anything

I didn’t call you are Marxist or try to paint you as a Marxist. I said the sentiment seemed Marxist to me. That is the nuance of language I keep telling you about- the realm of ideas and expressions and states that can exist between polar opposites or extremes of a thing.

You paint a picture of a school district with serious issues. Not the only one sadly. But nothing you have said counters anything which I have proffered. I do not have the information to speak authoritatively on WHY precisely your school was so run down. I can’t say that the administration wasn’t acting in the interest of students and in the most responsible manner for the circumstances they were dealing with. Such determinations require information I don’t have. We ant simplify things and say “if it doesn’t work right then someone is doing something wrong” otherwise what- are we going to pin Covid on POTUS? That seems ridiculous. The fact people are dying or the economy is struggling- we need more than just that and the fact he is in charge if we were going to blame him no? Same thing here.

Also- you make a false assumption in your argument. Schools are not for the sole purpose of benefiting children. At least not here. If you go back to the very founding of public schools in America you will find that they exist for societies enrichment- and the means to that ends is education. Teachers are charged with the interests of the children, but as an organization public schools are to benefit society.

There really is way too much top down decision making for every little thing. And it's rare for those decision makers to have even been in a classroom within the last 10-20 years if ever. I'd be fine if they made it a requirement that you have to have been an active full time teacher within the last 5 years in order to hold an office at the school board and had a minimum of 10 years cumulative teaching experience.

I know there are many many other issues plaguing our school systems but when the people making the decisions have very little experience in having to work under those decisions you get a crappy system.

I largely agree with you, and you have many wise things to say. I’ve been on both sides of the boardroom- wondering what goes on and why it’s worth all that money, and being inside and coming to understand why. I don’t know that the school board should be ran on a pittance- firstly it not only wouldn’t make sense for a person in charge of a bunch of teachers to make the same or less as teachers- for more work and liability and such, why not go be a teacher instead? Secondly- the skills and education one needs to run a large organization like a school district or school are worth quite a bit.

In the private sector, the knowledge and education and equivalent experience of a career school administrator could easily translate into 50-200% higher salaries to start, and with perils but not the sort an educator faces politically and such. I think we need to hold educators and especially education administrators to a higher standard to justify their wages. But- the problem is there aren’t many solutions that don’t involve the parents, and parents have jobs and lives and most... they can’t or don’t want to involve themselves that deeply in their child’s education. They want to pass the kid off to someone else, put all the burdens on them, and then get upset if the free service provided by underpaid and undervalued workers who are over worked and marginally supported doesn’t meet their expectations.

Test metrics or meeting budget goals and such- these aren’t good things to heavily base school performance on, they can be games and their achievement doesn’t translate to a higher quality education or increased success from students. But to have any sort of objective scale would really require brining in parents, having them audit and help shape curriculum and educate themselves on.. education... so they can be informed and understand the scope of things. Becoming a part time educational administrator for “free” doesn’t appeal to most people- and people already scoff at the time teachers take to do these things and say “it’s part of the job..” but.. in ensuring ones child is set up for a “good life” and caring for their education... isn’t that ultimately part of a parents “job”?

That IS what we hire administrators for- to do those things- but when the administrators miss the mark- who is auditing them? If they miss the mark- how do we know that it was incompetence or lack of care or laziness... or that doing what they did was amazing under the circumstances? If we aren’t involved- we are trusting someone’s word on it- and isn’t that the problem we initially came in on- that we couldn’t trust the word of the people chosen to watch our best interests? So at some point, if you any trust the person hired to watch the hen house, and you hire someone to watch the watcher and you ant trust them, and so on... what point do we realize that we just have to be more involved?

I do agree that many administrators know little or nothing about education- or at least what goes on at a classroom level. That’s common in more executive positions sadly. The necessary part there is that there are special skills such “leadership” needs- both hard skills and soft skills- the guy who operates the large know what goes in to the job, but may not have the know how to deal with accounting and politics and personnel and legal issues and so forth. That said- I prefer when someone is “risen up” and invested in- taken through entry level to the top so they understand at least partially- what the job they are supervising or supporting is about and how it is done so they can make better calls from experience.

It’s a sticky wicket. But I agree overall that “throwing money at it and hoping the problem goes away” isn’t a good solution- and in fact- that is very likely a major cause of the problem. I think education issues require some major changes in several areas including society as a whole and how we value and prioritize education. There are other facets as well- parental involvement is nice but not always practical or possible, and frankly, many kids are probably better off of their parents ARENT involved- so we have to keep in mind that part of public schooling is to help make sure kids who don’t get learning support at home get the same quality education as those that do. Or similar in functional terms.