MONROE - Despite an unfavorable reception by board members, the Monroe school board's finance committee will look into the costs of outsourcing custodial positions at one of the district's buildings.
"I don't think this is something we have a big appetite for, but we need to make sure we're being responsible and at least look at it," said board member Brian Keith.
Ron Olson, the district's business administrator, brought the issue to the board at Monday's meeting because one full-time custodial position is currently open, and four more - two full-time, two part-time - may be open by the end of the year.
Some districts have outsourced their custodial staff to save money with "varied success," according to Olson, and now would be the time to consider it because the district wouldn't have to lay off any existing staff with a position already open.
But keeping staff in-house limits turnover and allows them to be more flexible, he said.
"We have great custodial staff," Olson said. "We would prefer to keep our custodial staff in-house."
The district has made cuts to custodial staff three times since the late 90s, according to Olson, with the most recent cuts during the 2007-8 school year.
Building and Grounds Safety/Security Director Tom Rufenacht said they currently employ about 26 custodial staff members. In 2005, that number was closer to 35.
Budget concerns will force the district to look into making changes again, if the board chooses not to outsource custodial staff, said Olson. Regardless of the outcome, he warned that either a referendum or significant budget cuts will have to be made within the next 17 months.
Most board members indicated they would prefer to keep staff in-house.
"I feel like there's a higher standard, more accountability with our own staff," said board member Bob Erb.
Mary Berger voiced the concern that outsourcing would give the district less control over who works at school buildings.
Jim Plourde suggested looking into reorganizing the custodial staff before considering anything else.
Rufenacht offered his own reasons for keeping custodial work within the district, such as the possibility that outsourced workers wouldn't take care of school equipment as well as district staff.
Board member Les Bieneman kept his comment succinct: "I'm not interested in pursuing this at any level," he said. "It's not a good idea."
Michael Boehme agreed with Bieneman, saying he sees lots of issues with outsourcing.
Keith said he'd rather keep the district's own staff as well, "unless there's a really huge cost savings in outsourcing." But he thinks the district should do their "due diligence."
"It makes sense to know what the market might be," Keith said.
Olson will come back to the board with more information at a later meeting, where they will decide whether or not to pursue outsourcing.
About six support staff members attended the meeting.
"I don't think this is something we have a big appetite for, but we need to make sure we're being responsible and at least look at it," said board member Brian Keith.
Ron Olson, the district's business administrator, brought the issue to the board at Monday's meeting because one full-time custodial position is currently open, and four more - two full-time, two part-time - may be open by the end of the year.
Some districts have outsourced their custodial staff to save money with "varied success," according to Olson, and now would be the time to consider it because the district wouldn't have to lay off any existing staff with a position already open.
But keeping staff in-house limits turnover and allows them to be more flexible, he said.
"We have great custodial staff," Olson said. "We would prefer to keep our custodial staff in-house."
The district has made cuts to custodial staff three times since the late 90s, according to Olson, with the most recent cuts during the 2007-8 school year.
Building and Grounds Safety/Security Director Tom Rufenacht said they currently employ about 26 custodial staff members. In 2005, that number was closer to 35.
Budget concerns will force the district to look into making changes again, if the board chooses not to outsource custodial staff, said Olson. Regardless of the outcome, he warned that either a referendum or significant budget cuts will have to be made within the next 17 months.
Most board members indicated they would prefer to keep staff in-house.
"I feel like there's a higher standard, more accountability with our own staff," said board member Bob Erb.
Mary Berger voiced the concern that outsourcing would give the district less control over who works at school buildings.
Jim Plourde suggested looking into reorganizing the custodial staff before considering anything else.
Rufenacht offered his own reasons for keeping custodial work within the district, such as the possibility that outsourced workers wouldn't take care of school equipment as well as district staff.
Board member Les Bieneman kept his comment succinct: "I'm not interested in pursuing this at any level," he said. "It's not a good idea."
Michael Boehme agreed with Bieneman, saying he sees lots of issues with outsourcing.
Keith said he'd rather keep the district's own staff as well, "unless there's a really huge cost savings in outsourcing." But he thinks the district should do their "due diligence."
"It makes sense to know what the market might be," Keith said.
Olson will come back to the board with more information at a later meeting, where they will decide whether or not to pursue outsourcing.
About six support staff members attended the meeting.