Print this story | E-mail story | This story has 14 comments Add your own | iPod friendly
photo by Steve VanGunda
Keithshawn Owens ask Maryann Downs for help with a problem during multiplication baseball from Maryann Downs. Downs is the McLaurin Elementary School math and science lab teacher.
School board discusses rehiring crossing guards
Published Friday, October 10, 2008
NATCHEZ — At Thursday’s meeting of the Natchez-Adams County School Board, board members discussed their legal options in rehiring two crossing guards that were dismissed on Oct. 1.
But it was not the school district that dismissed the guards.
The decision to dismiss the two guards, posted at Morgantown Elementary School, was made by the Adams County Board of Supervisors.
“After discussion and deliberation, the Board of Supervisors has determined that the employment of the school crossing guards should be the responsibility of the Natchez-Adams County School District,” Henry Watts, board president, said in a letter addressed to the district’s superintendent.
The letter goes on to say that the guards will no longer be employed by the county as of Oct. 1.
District Superintendent Anthony Morris said the news came as a surprise to him.
“We weren’t expecting that,” Morris said.
And while the county’s letter calls for the district to employ the guards, the district is not legally allowed to do so.
School board attorney Bruce Kuehnle said a recent opinion issued by the state’s attorney general would prohibit the district from hiring employees to work on county roads.
While Watts could not be reached for comment, supervisor Mike Lazarus said he had no idea the district could not legally hire the crossing guards.
Lazarus said the decision to let the guards go was made during the county’s budget meetings weeks ago.
“We had to make serious cuts,” he said of the budget.
Lazarus also said since the district has a much larger budget than the county, the supervisors felt it logical that the district should pay.
Kuehnle suggested an agreement where the county would rehire the workers and the district would compensate the county for their salaries and benefits.
Kuehnle said he would be contacting the county’s attorney to discuss the matter.
However, the school’s students are not without protection.
Morris said both guards have continued to work at the school.
“They are to be commended for the dedication,” he said.
In other news, the school board briefly discussed the district’s MCT2 scores.
The test results were made public last month.
Morris said, with the exception of Robert Lewis Middle School, the schools that took the MCT2 scored at a level where they were deemed to be making adequate yearly progress by federal standards.
Kris Kaase, the Mississippi Department of Education’s Deputy Superintendent, said the schools that met the AYP standard are in line to have 100 percent of their students scoring at the proficient level by 2014.
Kaase was not at Thursday’s meeting.
Kaase also said the state accountability standards, which use a 1-5 grade scale to rank schools, is not being used this year.
The MCT2 is so much more rigorous than the traditional MCT that using the same grading scale would not be a fair assessment of a school’s performance, Kaase said.
Comments
Posted by gemccull (Gary McCullars) on October 10, 2008 at 7:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)
http://www.dailytimesleader.com/index.ph...
Posted by beammeupscotty (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 7:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So while they argue among themselves the children are at risk. Isn't government wonderfull!
Posted by mike8427 (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 7:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I am confussed, were the crossing guards released because of the law or was it budget cuts, the article says both reasons
Posted by CarlDCampbell (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 8:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I attended Morgantown Elementary & Junior High in the 60's & now live out of state. The two crossing guards we had were wonderful! We trusted both of them totally, as did our parents. Not being in Natchez now, I am now aware of the situation. I just hope children aren't hit on their way to & from school. The cost of lawsuits would surely be more than the salaries of the crossing guards!
Posted by anonymouscoward (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 8:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)
mike8427, it says they were dismissed from the county payrolls because the county thought the school district had enough money laying around to pay for them. Now it appears the school district cannot pay for them legally, since they will be working on county roads. Kuenle is suggesting a compromise where the district pays the county to pay the crossing guards.
Posted by acedog (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 9:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)
you gave a small tax cut, and claim things were so good , but you cut school gurads , whom probaly work 20hrs per week,providing a needed service. thats dealing with the safety of our kids. come on. I know the board of supervisors care more about our kids safety then that to make this a issue. natchez democrat please let us know whom all voted to approve this cut.
Posted by straightup (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 11:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Do your homework Mr. Watts. taking someone off the payroll like that can be devastating in these times. How would you like to not receiave pay because someone said you was not a resident of Adams County? Get the facts.
Posted by Krogers (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 1:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
what a bunch of BS
I agree with Watts. There is no way the BOS can supervise these people. But I disagree with that bogus lawyer talk about the school district not being able to hire someone "to work on county roads". For Heaven's Sake the crossing guards are working from school property, escorting kids from school property across the street, and what does it matter if the guards walk across a county or city road with the kids. They would certainly be under the supervision and employ of the school district, the school principal immediately, I would think. The crossing gaurds are not digging ditches on the road, paving the road, or working "on" the road. They are working with the kids to safely exit school property.
I think Kuehnle should go back and study that a little further and earn his pay by arguing FOR the school to hire these crossing gaurds. Then the crossing gaurds can report to duty under the supervision of the appropriate school principal. In my opinion. For that matter, go ahead and hire them and if someone objects then worry about it, in the meantime the school board, school district, school budget can pay these guys and PROTECT THE KIDS>
Posted by mike8427 (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 1:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
krogers, it wasn't Kuehnle it was the Attorney General who made the decision. The BOS shouldn't of made that decision without confirming there would be a crossing guard in place. This comprimises the safety of the students and was a very stupid decision.
Posted by msfixit (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 1:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
With these stories on record now, until the issue is resolved, the BOS is running a huge risk. Right now the crossing guards may still be working, but if they choose to stop, and something happens to a child because there is no guard, the BOS will be liable for a major lawsuit.
Posted by beammeupscotty (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 2:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)
As I read the article the decision to let them go was in the budget meeting only after people complained did the story change to one of legal concern. Lies,lies and more BS from elected officials.
Posted by msfixit (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 2:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What should be even more frightening to the BOS is that the way tort cases involving school issues have been decided recently, suit could be brought against the supervisors individually if they try to claim sovereign immunity for the BOS, especially if this article is correct in that they apparently did not do their homework before deciding on this cut.
Posted by freedom42 (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 7:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Morgantown Rd. is not school property. There is at least a 3/4 mile distance, yet the crossing guard "works" on Morgantown Rd. Remember a few years ago one of the guards was accidently killed because the driver was blinded by ice on her windshield? I would have to get a whole lot of pay to do that job on that road. And what about the one on the highway in front of McLaurin? I have witnessed trucks zipping by even with the stop sign up.
Posted by rayford (anonymous) on October 11, 2008 at 11:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)
How about this for a solution. At all schools use NPD or ACSO personnel for traffic control as well as crossing guards. The crossing guard positions would give valuable and much needed one on one contact with impressionable young minds and the traffic control being handled by officers/deputies might instill a little respect for school zones from motorists. Besides these people are already on the payroll.
Post a comment (Terms of Use Policy)
(Requires free registration.)