While there is plenty I could say about Homan getting an $8700 a raise next year and a month of vacation, it is the secrecy of her contract that kinda chaps my hide;

Homan did not want the $15,339 raise, however. She met with the school board and agreed to take a 4.87 percent raise next year — worth $8,747 — the same rate awarded other school and school district administrators under their new working agreements.

“I think Dr. Homan was a little bit uncomfortable with it,” said school board president Doug Morrison. “The board certainly would have stood behind the contract … but she wanted to take a look at it.”

Homan’s salary next school year will be $188,355.

She felt uncomfortable? BAHAHA! Like how she feels uncomfortable about a $100 a week slush fund and free vehicle usage. Yeah right. And of course Morrison stands behind it, because instead of the school board being the watchdogs of the administration they are the lapdogs. Anything you say Master Homan. But what do you expect when you pay the people who are supposed to be watching her $75 per meeting, and the employee they are supposed to be watching over $200,000 a year (when you include fringe benefits).

But why the secrecy around the contract?

Konrad said the new contract authorized by the board Tuesday would not immediately be made public because it has not yet been signed. She did release what she said was the new language within that contract.

The school district has not made the full text of the new five-year working agreement for teachers public, either. The teachers union voted for the new contract April 17, but only the salary schedule is now available online.

“The working agreements are still being put into written form,” Konrad said. “They don’t go into effect until July 1, and they will be posted with that timeline in mind.”

In my opinion, once the contracts have been read by the employees, they should become public immediately. What is there to hide? I actually think it is a good idea for the public to view the contracts BEFORE they are signed. I think the public weighing in, especially on Homan’s contract is important. But I wouldn’t expect anything less out of the rubber stamp school board and Ms. Secrecy Homan.

24 Thoughts on “Why is Duper Super Homan’s contract kept a secret until after it is signed

  1. Alice15 on May 30, 2013 at 3:34 pm said:

    The sad state of affairs is this community, and probably others, doesn’t give two craps about education and so they don’t care about any of this until it effects them directly. This will not change until multiple people run for school board that are willing to engage the community and all that involves. With that, comes repurcussions – especially if you’re on an island by yourself. We are trapped and this administration knows it. Until we demand more, we keep getting what we get. Just look at who was re-elected to the school board.

    Funny conversation that I had with someone last weekend regarding tearing down homes around Mark Twain. A certain realtor board member stated to this person that it never came up at the public meetings because noone asked. Hey – good for you – way to be transparent and honest with the community and along with that, we taxpayers have paid all of the costs that have been associated with remaining quiet because noone asked. I suppose if your kid comes to you at a young age and says they are pregnant, that statement of “you didn’t ask, so I didn’t tell” will also suffice for an answer. Pathetic.

  2. I’ll never understand why Homan refuses to talk to the public or press. Yes, she’ll agree to an ocasional KELO puff piece, but everybody knows they’ll never ask a tough question.

  3. pathloss on May 30, 2013 at 5:59 pm said:

    Information you can’t get from TV news or Argus (if they’re still in business). It’s sad when you must find local news via the internet or Zamby billboards. Homan accepted because she gets an extra month per year vacation. We plan our vacations. She plans when she works.

  4. And actually, the combo of the pay raise and the vacation exceeds the amount she was “entitled” to.

  5. You know, the pay has never really bothered me, if she wasn’t such a Nazi.

  6. Joyfull on May 30, 2013 at 9:05 pm said:

    you know after raising three kids and all graduating through the system in Sioux Falls I am really satisfied with the outcome whether the School Board or the Superintendent had anything to do with it is beside the point the teachers are awesome that continue to provide their service in this district.

  7. I will agree, I several friends who work as teachers in the system, and they are the BOMB! But Homan has really disenfranchised teachers and parents. To tell you the truth, if I want to be a real cynical f’ck about it, I don’t care because I don’t have children. The part that bugs me the most about her is her control of information and her lack of transparency. And if anyone on the school board had a set, of anything, they would advise her to talk to the media anytime they ask her a question, actually demand it in her contract (which ironically she wrote) or find her a couple of empty boxes and send her on her way. The forefront of combatting censorship is in our school rooms and when administrators are the epitome of censorship and controlling the message, it makes you wonder what is going on in the classroom, especially when teachers are in fear of their boss. And as for the school board, they are cowards for not standing up to the person they were elected to manage. Seriously, what’s the point? You are not even worth the $75 we pay you to show up and act like a Zombie.

  8. Alice15 on May 31, 2013 at 7:51 am said:

    Exactly, Detroit.

  9. It’s time that we stand up and set a pay rate for these positions that reflect the pay base of the community. If these “super egos’ don’t want to work for the pay than so be it. I am sure there are plenty of folks in the school system who could do a great job for a lot less. we keep looking at other cities of same size to set the wage. And then we have to 1 up it. How is that fiscally sound reasoning?

    We need to do this with all the positions in our goverment. Just look what our city engineers and planners make and the huge golden parachutes their given when they leave. Their is super talented people out their that will do these jobs for far less. I’m not talking minimum wage but lets get back to a wage but a pay that the rest of us taxpayers live on.

    Pam, look at what a new teacher is paid or a substitute for that matter, and then consider you own pay. You should be ashamed of yourself.

  10. hornguy on May 31, 2013 at 9:19 pm said:

    “I’m sure there are plenty of folks…”

    Yeah, I love these arguments that just use rhetorical sleight-of-hand to justify wild, unsubstantiated assertions. I don’t know what LJL does, but hey, I’m going to suggest he’s probably wildly overpaid too. I bet we could find someone to do his job for a lot less, because I mean, hey, it’s SOUTH DAKOTA. People working for less is what we’re all about here! Race to the bottom! WOOO!!!!

    Like Homan or not, she’s paid a competitive salary based on her industry – just like doctors, just like athletes, just like everyone else.

    I’m not suggesting that government should spend money irresponsibly, but anyone in South Dakota who dares to complain about their onerous levels of taxation needs to hop on the clue bus.

  11. “Like Homan or not, she’s paid a competitive salary based on her industry”

    I would agree, but I do disagree with all of her ‘fringe benefits’ and incredible retirement package. That being said, I will go back to what really irks me about her, that we pay her a very good competitive wage, from property tax revenue, and she lacks transparency.

  12. Your all class hornguy.

    I work in the private sector where my products demand and the merit of my work sets my compensation. The saving for my retirement is my only golden parachute and if you don’t like my product I don’t get paid.

    The exact opposite of the new goverment model which never stops growing, never stops demanding more and increasingly cares less for those interests in which pay it.

    I’ll only guess which of those scenarios pay you.

  13. hornguy on June 1, 2013 at 1:16 pm said:

    Not the one you’re implying, champ. So I’m guessing the product you sell isn’t related to your talents as a prognosticator. Keep setting up those straw men and hitching your wagon to empty-minded speculation, though.

  14. hornguy on June 1, 2013 at 1:28 pm said:

    “I actually think it is a good idea for the public to view the contracts BEFORE they are signed.”

    I meant to ask this earlier. You don’t think this is just a recipe for too many cooks in the kitchen who know nothing about the particulars of a situation but all want to believe themselves to be experts?

    I’m all for Homan’s contract being made available to the public, but I think it’s a bit far-fetched to effectively ask that her contract be negotiated in a proverbial sense on the front page of the Argus. I mean, where does that line of logic stop? We elect a school board to handle these matters. I get that you’re not enamored with them as a group, but they’re still the people that are elected.

    (I’ll gladly confess, as I mentioned in another post, that I think the way South Dakota allows school districts to hold their own elections on seemingly random dates on ballots with no other races is mind-blowingly stupid and that if these races were put on a spring ballot with all the other municipal elections, the outcomes could be far different.)

  15. “I meant to ask this earlier. You don’t think this is just a recipe for too many cooks in the kitchen who know nothing about the particulars of a situation but all want to believe themselves to be experts?”

    I thought this exact same thing while writing that. Don’t get me wrong, the ignorant bug me, but the educated can sort thru that stuff. All I am saying is that the public deserves a right to see it weigh in. The School Board makes the ultimate decision based on that.

  16. Hornguy—I doubt you even understand what your rebuttal meant. Biut thanks for trying. As far as prognosticating goes its right on track, as the number of public sector jobs has surpassed the private sector 3 years ago. ( That means more people work for the goverment than do business hornyguy).

    Your right horny. I should just get on that bus , sign up for a gov job and find a cubby hole in one of those tax funded buildings to hide in.

    The theme stays simple in this blog. Dems are OK with big gov as long as they get theirs. But their never OK with the gotta make a living based on profit working class.

    No worry Pammy, all the posters so far are good with your bloated wage compared to your subordinates just as long as you don’t go private. If you worked for oil, tabacco, firearms or claimed to be a big R they’d be all over you like stink on shit.

    P.S. make sure you make small talk with hornguy at the next democrat/ teacher rally and he will kiss your ass all through to next NEA negation. Hooray for public ED, hornguy knows what bus to be on.

    Keep it simple comrads.

  17. anominous on June 1, 2013 at 7:46 pm said:

    Executive talent retention is a bitch sometimes. In the end, they will all be replaced by Sony robots.

  18. hornguy on June 2, 2013 at 2:42 pm said:

    “As far as prognosticating goes its right on track, as the number of public sector jobs has surpassed the private sector 3 years ago. ( That means more people work for the goverment than do business hornyguy).”

    Not only does your grammar suck in your post, but so does your math. Per the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the ratio of government employment to population has hovered between nine and tend percent for the last 30 years. We’re presently at our lowest levels of public sector employment on a percentage basis in that entire period. (http://goo.gl/RHGv0)

    And if you’re actually trying to assert that of the other 90% of the people, fewer than nine percent of them work in the private sector, you might as well start trying to sell that bridge you’ve got out back.

    I’m as moderate as they come, but one thing I have no patience for is conservatives who have to make up numbers to support their assertions.

    So yes, please get on that bus. Take it someplace that will teach you how to spell, write, and do math – skills apparently unnecessary in this whiz-bang private sector job of yours that rewards you on your merit.

  19. Soory Horny
    AWWEE.. nice try again. From one of your one liberal news channels. http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-03-04-federal-pay_N.htm

    You’re good as gold.. Just cc her in this blog and your in good for life with the teacher retirement … Big moderate…. I mean look at your original post… OH Boy..

    How did you put it??? Straw men???? That’s cute Mr. Scarecrow.. The wicked witch makes 5 times more than you but she knows better. Swallow hard here.

    Yep GWIZZ i MUST B a MUSicle gradurelate from yur class. Hope yur kids can use their organ.

  20. Testor15 on June 3, 2013 at 10:21 am said:

    Since when did USATODAY become liberal?

  21. hornguy on June 3, 2013 at 12:29 pm said:

    “As far as prognosticating goes its right on track, as the number of public sector jobs has surpassed the private sector 3 years ago.”

    LJL, as a favor to me, please quote the relevant portion of that USA Today article that proves the point in this statement – that there are more public sector workers than private sector workers. After all, that’s precisely what you’ve argued.

  22. Craig on June 4, 2013 at 3:40 pm said:

    LJL, I’m curious if you are shooting for an all time record on the number of logical fallacies in one post… because you’re racking up a rather impressive number.

    First of all, you would be wise to retract your statements when you said “the number of public sector jobs has surpassed the private sector 3 years ago” and “That means more people work for the goverment (sic) than do business” as the link you provided later does not even remotely suggest such a thing.

    You did actually read the source you cited didn’t you?

    Not only are you blatantly misunderstanding very simple concepts here… but you are actually doubling down on them rather than admitting your error. That is odd behavior for someone trying to prove others wrong.

    Second, you may want to look up the term “prognosticator” in the dictionary… because based upon his usage, hornguy was pointing out that your suggestion he was a government employee was incorrect. Again you seem to wish to refuse to admit your error.

    Third, USA Today isn’t a “liberal news channel”, but even if it were the source doesn’t actually say what you think it does. Thus this is a moot point.

    Fourth, if you wish to argue that Dr. Homan is overpaid you are free to do so, but simply pointing out that federal government workers are paid more than their private sector counterparts is a poor way to do so. For starters Homan is not a federal employee, you have provided no data to compare her salary to that of anyone else in the private sector, and you appear to be basing your assumptions off of statistical averages – not specific cases.

    For the record I have no idea if Dr. Homan is paid above, below, or at levels commensurate with her private sector peers, but I can say that the CEO of a company the size of the Sioux Falls School District would likely pay substantially more than she currently earns (I personally know lower level Vice Presidents and Senior Vice Presidents who make more than she does and are several levels removed from President or CEO level positions).

    Fifth, if you don’t know what a straw man argument is, you probably shouldn’t attempt to use the phrase as a retort. You aren’t helping yourself. At all.

    Honestly LJL – you haven’t done yourself any favors here. Form your arguments based upon logic and sell your viewpoint, but when you resort to the name calling, the insults, and the heavy dependency upon logical fallacies you are clearing displaying that you are in far over your head, and it is probably time to simply move along.

  23. Huh? on July 8, 2013 at 2:49 am said:

    I have a random question: I am a veteran teacher who moved to South Dakota (and Sioux Falls) from out of state last year. I have applied to numerous teaching positions in and out of the Sioux Falls School District. I have plenty of experience, great references from my former principals/bosses, and have a masters degree… However, I cannot seem to get ANY teaching positions, let alone an interview. I had to settle for a VERY low paying position within the district- but I am happy to have something. I fear that I might be deliberately shunned due to my experience and education, as I see fresh-out-of college students getting positions at high schools, middle schools and so-on…

    Am I missing something here? Should I look elsewhere? I have been told by some within the school district that having one’s master degree is the kiss of death in this district. Any truth in this???

    Thanks in advance.

  24. l3wis on July 8, 2013 at 8:06 am said:

    That is a good possibility. I do know Homan likes to cut the budget where she can. I having a Master’s most likely puts you in a higher pay bracket.

Post Navigation