Originally posted in a LVRJ forum
$280K/yr AD Livengood said: A good development person [like its $109K/yr ex-head fundraiser, Bill Brady] can quadruple what you pay them just because they're that good at raising money.
This outrage cannot pass unconfronted.
When a beggar asks you to donate to a charity (like UNLV) you might expect him to be uncompensated. After all, you want all of the money to go directly to the nominal beneficiaries (ie students). Then you find out that "Whoa!" The money is used to pay the $100K+ salary of the hustler.
I've actually met a couple of jokers like that. They were full-time fundraisers for some of those BIG charities you probably heard of. Each was making ~$400K! That's right.
UNLV is like all the other big charities out there. Probably ~96% of its charitable support goes to pay for executive salaries, wine-&-cheese parties, and Lake Tahoe chalets. Virtually NONE of the money goes to *real* students who truly need assistance. The "charity" is reserved for athletic scholarships for jocks who couldn't care less about education.
Sorry. UNLV accepts federal funds. It can't escape Title IX. The cost of Men's football is WOMEN'S football.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
UNLV Athletics Dept Needs Remedial Math
Originally posted in a LVRJ Forum
UNLV [Athletics] estimates that it will end its fiscal year June 30 with $26.06 million in revenues and $27.99 million in expenses.
Those budget figures DON'T add up. It's not rounding errors. That $26M revenue figure isn't even close. Even so, the $280K Athletic Director is employing fuzzy accounting.
Sports boosters never factor in the ridiculous departments (lke Sports this-&-that) and degree programs (like University Studies) which need to be maintained in order to provide jocks with academic cover, nor the compromised admission standards (non-existent, really) required to get the chowderhead jocks in the door in the first place, nor the complete distraction to Admnistration and disruption of what should be a tranquil, ivy tower environment.
When you look at how UNLV prioritizes (ie the $1M hoops coach and $450K football coach) you could conclude that UNLV exists to play BIG sports. Academics is just a pretext. The true cost of UNLV sports is closer to the entire cost of the University.
UNLV [Athletics] estimates that it will end its fiscal year June 30 with $26.06 million in revenues and $27.99 million in expenses.
Those budget figures DON'T add up. It's not rounding errors. That $26M revenue figure isn't even close. Even so, the $280K Athletic Director is employing fuzzy accounting.
Sports boosters never factor in the ridiculous departments (lke Sports this-&-that) and degree programs (like University Studies) which need to be maintained in order to provide jocks with academic cover, nor the compromised admission standards (non-existent, really) required to get the chowderhead jocks in the door in the first place, nor the complete distraction to Admnistration and disruption of what should be a tranquil, ivy tower environment.
When you look at how UNLV prioritizes (ie the $1M hoops coach and $450K football coach) you could conclude that UNLV exists to play BIG sports. Academics is just a pretext. The true cost of UNLV sports is closer to the entire cost of the University.
Monday, April 12, 2010
University of NV for Free!
Originally posted in a LVRJ forum
There are ~450,000 kids in Nevada K-12 (public+private). Assume, 35,000 enter 1st grade with 25% attrition. That means ~25,000 HS diplomas awarded here each yr.
The University of Nevada (now UNR) was established as a small A&M school. It was endowed with capital sufficient to make further taxpayer obligation to it unnecessary. Basically all of UNR's applied science students should be getting free rides or else paying just nominal tuition. That's right.
UNR's endowment is on the order of $200M. The trust manager should be able to yield 5% -- $10M/yr. [I doubt that highly paid, politically connected nincompoop returns even *half* of that]. 1/2 gets paid out to cover operating expenses (the rest reinvested).
I could argue for much a lower number, but assume operating expenses are $10,000 per student. That means you could enroll ~500 students TUITION FREE. UNLV is similar. Consolidate its endowment and science programs at UNR and you can support ~1,000 students (250 per class).
The top 1% of NV high school graduates would be eligible.
If our political constituencies object we could modify this structure slightly. Reserve 500 seats for women, 10 for ethnic minorities, another 100 for jocks, etc.
There are ~450,000 kids in Nevada K-12 (public+private). Assume, 35,000 enter 1st grade with 25% attrition. That means ~25,000 HS diplomas awarded here each yr.
The University of Nevada (now UNR) was established as a small A&M school. It was endowed with capital sufficient to make further taxpayer obligation to it unnecessary. Basically all of UNR's applied science students should be getting free rides or else paying just nominal tuition. That's right.
UNR's endowment is on the order of $200M. The trust manager should be able to yield 5% -- $10M/yr. [I doubt that highly paid, politically connected nincompoop returns even *half* of that]. 1/2 gets paid out to cover operating expenses (the rest reinvested).
I could argue for much a lower number, but assume operating expenses are $10,000 per student. That means you could enroll ~500 students TUITION FREE. UNLV is similar. Consolidate its endowment and science programs at UNR and you can support ~1,000 students (250 per class).
The top 1% of NV high school graduates would be eligible.
If our political constituencies object we could modify this structure slightly. Reserve 500 seats for women, 10 for ethnic minorities, another 100 for jocks, etc.
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Ronald McDonal For CCSD Superintendent
Originally posted in a LVRJ Forum
It doesn't matter who replaces Rulffes. NOTHING will change. Why should a bureaucracy controlled by Rogers or Rhoust be any better than one controlled by Rulffes?
On a personal level, Rogers is quite a demagogue. Someone less pompous (and cheaper) would be better.
My personal favorite is a poster named 'Jack' who sometimes lurks in CCSD-related fora. My second choice is Ronald McDonald. He's great with kids, has enterprise experience, and he is already familiar with McEducation products.
It doesn't matter who replaces Rulffes. NOTHING will change. Why should a bureaucracy controlled by Rogers or Rhoust be any better than one controlled by Rulffes?
On a personal level, Rogers is quite a demagogue. Someone less pompous (and cheaper) would be better.
My personal favorite is a poster named 'Jack' who sometimes lurks in CCSD-related fora. My second choice is Ronald McDonald. He's great with kids, has enterprise experience, and he is already familiar with McEducation products.
Thursday, April 8, 2010
Hey CCSD Parents: Demand A Revenue Share!
Originally posted in a LVRJ Forum
CCSD makes >$10,000 per kid. Students receive little education value in return.
Hey >20 parents from Glen Taylor, Twitchell and Vanderburg. Threaten to pull your kids OUT of CCSD unless it revenue shares. The way it already does with its unions. In the aggregate, over your kids' dubious CCSD careers, they represent >$1.2M in state revenue for CCSD. It can't afford to lose you. It'll find a way to accomodate you.
CCSD makes >$10,000 per kid. Students receive little education value in return.
Hey >20 parents from Glen Taylor, Twitchell and Vanderburg. Threaten to pull your kids OUT of CCSD unless it revenue shares. The way it already does with its unions. In the aggregate, over your kids' dubious CCSD careers, they represent >$1.2M in state revenue for CCSD. It can't afford to lose you. It'll find a way to accomodate you.
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Administrators Make Money For Public Schools
Originally posted in a LVRJ Forum
A lot of people are going to post loud comments about cutting administrators. You folks don't understand the economics of public education.
CCSD has *thousands* of regulations it needs to comply with. You can't expect teachers to know them all. Only a small army of $100K+ bureaucrats can do the job.
Then you have all the non-teaching positions which were built into the grant applications. You can't eliminate them without violating -- penalties apply -- the terms of the grant. Besides, those "cost-plus" positions actually make money for the district. Fire them and the "profits" go too.
Then you have all the political hires whose jobs serve to curry favor with state legislators and large voting constituencies.
So you see, Administrators are valuable. *Teachers* are burden.
Teachers have expensive and inflexible employment contracts. State funding is per *student*, not per teacher. Fewer teachers reduce CCSD expenses without reducing state funding. Teachers are susceptible to making controversial statements and having illicit contact with students, which exposes CCSD to costly lawsuits and political embarrassment. And finally, many teachers are just incompetent. Get rid of them now en masse and avoid lengthy, expensive individual employment discrimination suits.
A lot of people are going to post loud comments about cutting administrators. You folks don't understand the economics of public education.
CCSD has *thousands* of regulations it needs to comply with. You can't expect teachers to know them all. Only a small army of $100K+ bureaucrats can do the job.
Then you have all the non-teaching positions which were built into the grant applications. You can't eliminate them without violating -- penalties apply -- the terms of the grant. Besides, those "cost-plus" positions actually make money for the district. Fire them and the "profits" go too.
Then you have all the political hires whose jobs serve to curry favor with state legislators and large voting constituencies.
So you see, Administrators are valuable. *Teachers* are burden.
Teachers have expensive and inflexible employment contracts. State funding is per *student*, not per teacher. Fewer teachers reduce CCSD expenses without reducing state funding. Teachers are susceptible to making controversial statements and having illicit contact with students, which exposes CCSD to costly lawsuits and political embarrassment. And finally, many teachers are just incompetent. Get rid of them now en masse and avoid lengthy, expensive individual employment discrimination suits.
School Volunteering
Originally posted in a LVRJ Forum
CCSD receives > $10,000 per "normal" student per year, including debt service and PERS. I think NPRI calculates ~$12K.
That private school is on the high end. Volunteering/fundraising is also required! I don't know about $/punch but I'm sure if CCSD spent that much its incidence of violence wounldn't *diminish* -- not even if all the additional money went toward hiring extra security. That private school simply attracts a higher class of kid.
Parents who use CCSD should be the ones volunteering. For all the good that would do. I know a bright lady, a former full-time K-12 teacher, who volunteers regularly at her boy's school. Let me be clear. This lady spends a LOT of time in her son's classroom.
During recent parent teacher conference the teacher suggested that the boy get tested for a learning disability. He doesn't read in reading group. THE BOY CAN READ TWO YEARS ABOVE GRADE LEVEL. The lady is so disgusted she has asked my wife about homeschool options!
CCSD receives > $10,000 per "normal" student per year, including debt service and PERS. I think NPRI calculates ~$12K.
That private school is on the high end. Volunteering/fundraising is also required! I don't know about $/punch but I'm sure if CCSD spent that much its incidence of violence wounldn't *diminish* -- not even if all the additional money went toward hiring extra security. That private school simply attracts a higher class of kid.
Parents who use CCSD should be the ones volunteering. For all the good that would do. I know a bright lady, a former full-time K-12 teacher, who volunteers regularly at her boy's school. Let me be clear. This lady spends a LOT of time in her son's classroom.
During recent parent teacher conference the teacher suggested that the boy get tested for a learning disability. He doesn't read in reading group. THE BOY CAN READ TWO YEARS ABOVE GRADE LEVEL. The lady is so disgusted she has asked my wife about homeschool options!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)