Indexes
February 8th, 2010
February 6th, 2010
February 5th, 2010
February 4th, 2010
February 3rd, 2010
February 2nd, 2010
February 1st, 2010
The following stories have received the most reader comments during the last 7 days.
- Will terrorists be given Miranda warnings? (70)
- President Obama's first year (67)
- Lodi Unified School District president issues warning to speakers over cuts (64)
- Local business leaders say tourism, Costco, Home Depot may play roles in city's future (60)
- Islamic symbol in mosaic — what is all the fuss? (49)
- Writer comments on Neely column (42)
- The Home Depot hopes to join Costco at Reynolds Ranch (41)
- Many reject the politics of 'no' (37)
- Police: Train victim was a Lodi teen (31)
- We need to conduct respectful conversations (30)
ADVERTISEMENT
Lodi Unified School District cell phones, BlackBerries, wireless Internet cost taxpayers $117,000 a year before rebates
By Jennifer Bonnett
News-Sentinel Staff Writer
News-Sentinel Staff Writer
Saturday, March 7, 2009 12:46 AM PST
Lodi Unified School District spends close to $10,000 a month, not counting rebates and special rates, on portable hand-held devices to ease communication among departments.
The cost of cell phones and BlackBerries has become a hot topic as the district looks to cut $25 million from its 2009-10 budget. In addition to staff cuts and school closures, the district has also cut back on ordering supplies, paying overtime or allowing out-of-area travel without the superintendent's approval.
Still, the number of hand-held communication devices keeps coming up.
"It amazes me that we are spending money on those things when so many of us are having to pay for our own basic supplies," Tokay High science teacher Susan Heberle said.
The district currently has 259 cell phones — including 75 BlackBerries — with a total of 70,000 available pooled minutes, or 270 per month for each device, according to a request for proposals from the technology services department.
Additionally, the district has 19 broadband cards used for connecting remotely and wirelessly to the Internet. Most of these are used by trustees and top administrators at the school board meetings.
Some of the phones also have GPS capability and the push-to-talk walkie-talkie feature. BlackBerries enable users to not only talk, but connect to the Internet and send e-mails from the hand-held device.
LUSD cell phones by the numbers
70,000: Available pooled minutes165: Standard cell phones
71: BlackBerries
19: Broadband cards with unlimited wireless Internet capability
18: Push-to-talk phones
17: Pagers
Cell phone costs at a glance
City of LodiNumber of phones: 175
Cost: $110,174
City of Galt
Number of phones: 83
Cost: $31,200
San Joaquin County
Number of phones: Approximately 900
Cost: Ranges from $6 to $60 per phone monthly, depending on phone and usage.
County departments with separate contracts
Registrar of Voters
Number of phones: 600 to 800.
Cost: $10 per phone on election days only. Total cost depends on number of precincts. One phone issued per precinct.
Human Services
Number of phones: 66 (23 full cell phones, 43 radio phones)
Cost: $70,620 per year
With its group rate, the district spends $30,512 per year on these items, according to Doug Barge, chief financial officer.
Most of the district's principals, as well as Superintendent Cathy Nichols-Washer and Associate Superintendent Odie Douglas, carry BlackBerries, according to the 12-page public document. A large number of the cell phones, on the other hand, are used by maintenance personnel such as electricians and grounds keepers, as well as computer technicians and coordinators of the after-school Bridge program.
Barge said it is automatic for upper management personnel to receive a cell phone, but if an employee would rather opt for a BlackBerry, it must be approved by the assistant superintendent of that department. Each manager, too, is responsible for not only approving an employee cell phone, but overseeing its use, according to district guidelines.
Nichols-Washer feels that is working, but said the cost is something to examine.
"Do we all need them? No," she said. "I think we need to look at who has them, what kinds of packages we have for folks and is it necessary to have all that stuff on the phones."
Both citizens and the superintendent's Budget Advisory Committee, tasked with making recommendations for cuts to close the multi-million-dollar funding gap, have requested the cell phone figures from Barge.
Teacher's union president Sue Kenmotsu said her members have been curious as to why so many district employees need cell phones — and at what cost.
But Barge defends the use of district-funded cell phones because sometimes, he said, some employees have to be informed of things quickly.
He points out that he was visiting his daughter at college in Indiana when a district bus was involved in a vehicle accident several years ago.
"I was able to get on the phone and give certain people the information they needed," said Barge, who does not own a personal cell phone.
But some are saying "no" to district-funded phones. English language arts instructional coach Nanci Webber Johnston was among a group of six who turned in their cell phones last week. She said they found they were using their own personal phones to keep in touch with one another on a new program before they were issued district phones during the current school year.
"It's not costing us anything more. It's one less headache for us to deal with," Johnston added of carrying two cell phones. "If it's going to save the district money, why not turn them in? If it can save one teacher, then it's worth it. But it's going to have to be more than just our six cell phones."
Contact reporter Jennifer Bonnett at jenniferb@lodinews.com.
Search for Ads 
Today’s Print Ads 
RSS Feeds
Reader Feedback
Giovanina wrote on Mar 9, 2009 9:31 PM:
Giovanina wrote on Mar 9, 2009 9:29 PM:
Also, quite a few schools don't have hot water except in the cafeteria. Not even some science classes have hot water, but I bet the District Office has plenty of hot water heaters so they have hot water to wash their hands.
Plus, the District has been on a program of purposely hiring off the bottom of the pay scale with new, intern, and temporary teachers, and not the experienced veterans we need to get scores up. "
Lodian wrote on Mar 9, 2009 2:08 PM:
Contrapasso: I agree. The move to ALL CP classes in English, Social Science and Math have been extremely detrimental. Bad move indeed. "
Contrapasso wrote on Mar 9, 2009 12:45 PM:
Also, in case of emergency, the district has an auto dialer system. The schools can program recorded calls to go out to all parents and staff if necessary. "
Contrapasso wrote on Mar 9, 2009 12:11 PM:
As teachers, we are endeavoring to teach all kids, (no matter what the skill level, interest level, language level, etc.)college prep curriculum at college prep pace. When you have at least half of each class way below grade level at reading/writing, you are supposed to "differentiate" the lesson....which is just a politically correct term for dumbing down. Example....allow a student to "draw" a definition for a vocabulary word instead of write it out. Oh yeah, then take into consideration the fact that many of the "non-motivated" students spend their time causing disruptions because they are not interested and they don't care about their grades. So. take a class of 35 kids, with 3rd grade to genius skill levels, and try to teach Macbeth, or To Kill a Mockingbird, or any of the books students are expected to have read by the time they get to college......it is extremely frustrating. "
kidsalami wrote on Mar 9, 2009 9:42 AM:
edumacation wrote on Mar 8, 2009 11:17 PM:
During Mr Huyetts tenure, it was learned that Odie Douglas was his supervisor at Florin High school. It appears that his promotion was one of these political paybacks. We didn't need that position before Huyett, so why do we need it now? "
govagent wrote on Mar 8, 2009 5:42 PM:
RaiderHater wrote on Mar 8, 2009 5:26 PM:
NOFXfan wrote on Mar 8, 2009 3:37 PM:
concerned parent wrote on Mar 8, 2009 8:28 AM:
Lets Be Real wrote on Mar 7, 2009 5:38 PM:
I have to admit that normally I do not agree with your postings. However, I must agree with your assessment of evaluating employee effectiveness at the LUSD. However, lets not just limit the employee evaluations to the top administrators. I think this budget crisis provides a great opportunity to reopen the teacher contract and insert some provisions that weed out those would-be educators who aren't cutting the mustard. I keep hearing that LUsd has many schools whoch are missing their academic goals. I keep hearing all this talk about how cutting teachers hurts the kids because they are the ones who are providing the education. Well, if the kids are not learning and are considered failing, lets start holding some of them accountable too! In fact, isn't this the very same point that one of the students from Lodi High made in an editorial that was ran in the LNS? "
Lets Be Real wrote on Mar 7, 2009 5:31 PM:
Lets be real and do some real reporting! Instead of throwing out some overall numbers on cell phone usage, how about finding out how many phones are assigned to teachers versus non teachers? Also, what a poor choice to use Galt school district as the only comparison school district. They have about less than 1/3 of the student enrollment in Lodi Unified? What, you couldn't go the extra mile and CALL Stockton Unified for their cell phone costs? Or did you call them and find that the numbers wouldn't support this type of yournalism - that yellow journalism! "
Jerry wrote on Mar 7, 2009 4:15 PM:
The cost of technology (any technology) can only be justified by its effect on the work product of our top administrators. How do we assess and evaluate our top administrators? Are these folks a plus or a minus? Is teaching and learning being positively affected?
Are the top administrators supporting the efforts of teachers or are they doing next to nothing? Have the administrators become a bunch of academic thugs or are they helping children (children and parents who need help). Or, are they a bunch of insentive bullies who have demoralized the District's teachers to the point of mass revolt? Are these people arrogant, self-absorbed, hyper-critical, isolated and unresponsive to parents, students and teachers?
Are these highly paid kleptocrats making education better or worse? Or, do they have any impact at all? Until we can answer these kinds of questions costs associated with their toys are way down the list of priority.
What are your thoughts? "
marleyo wrote on Mar 7, 2009 2:57 PM:
shockedinlodi wrote on Mar 7, 2009 10:36 AM:
Whoa Nellie! wrote on Mar 7, 2009 10:24 AM:
Granted, I do not understand why so many Principals would need a blackberry. I do know that many are off their own school site alot for meetings, which in turn is why there are so many VP's.
Call, leave a voicemail or send an email. Problem solved. "
Native wrote on Mar 7, 2009 9:52 AM:
We need to get people employed to start the process of recovery! "
WOWerzz wrote on Mar 7, 2009 8:37 AM:
Rhodie wrote on Mar 7, 2009 7:42 AM:
Wait, so does he reimburse for when he uses his cell phone outside of work? "
takealook wrote on Mar 7, 2009 7:32 AM:
Mad Dog wrote on Mar 7, 2009 3:14 AM:
Comments on this story are now closed.