SUSD30 priorities do not put proper emphasis in the classroom.  SUSD30 in-class spending efficiency peaked in 2011 with 57.7% in-class spending 9.8% administration costs and average teacher salary at $39,685 (still $6000 less than the state average but $700 more than our peer average) with 4,915 students.  Since 2011 that last available State Audit (2013) shows the district performance degraded in every category listed even with enrollment increasing to 5,198.  In class spending dropped to 53.2%, in-class spending was $3,409 per student, below our peers at $3,779 and below state averages of $4,031 per student (our students have $350 less than their peers and $600 less spent on them in the classroom than the the average state student), administration costs increased to 11.1%, and average teacher salaries dropped to $38,469 paying our teachers $1,500 less than our peers, and $7,000 less than the state.  In 2013 SUSD30 had the second lowest paid teachers in the county, only Altra Valley (Threepoints) paid worse at $37,166.  Significantly underpaying teachers negatively effects retention, recruitment, and morale.  According to the Assistant Superintended over HR, this year our average teacher salary dropped further to $36,253.61 putting SUSD30 in contention for the worst paid teachers in Pima County and the region.  While our teachers pay continued to drop district administration has grown.  On top of bloating administration, comparatively high operational costs have demanded a greater portion of SUSD30 budget, growing form 14.3% to 15.5%.  SUSD30's high square footage costs are more than its peer group, the state average, and are and above what the state auditors deem acceptable.  
http://azauditor.gov/Reports/School_Districts/Districts/Sahuarita_USD/2014/Sahuarita_USD.pdf

For this district to be sound and excel at producing exemplary students it needs more fiscal focus:

• Pay teachers at least a regionally competitive wage
• Pay beginning teachers a living wage (starting salaries in the $20s does not properly value the new professionals entering SUSD30)
• Increases in-classroom spending percentages at least back to the 57.7% that we had in 2011 and find ways to increase it to the 60-62% that is typically the national average in-class spending
•  Decrease administration costs, SUSD30 cannot continue to have an administration grow at a faster rate than the district.  The district should not be allowed to spend more than 10% in administration overhead.
• Improve efficiencies in plant operations to at least bring its percentage costs in line with peer districts.
• Prevent district from spending money on low return investments like kindergarten I-pads, smart boards, full day kindergarten, etc.

I have regularly attended school board meetings and found it frustrating that the SUSD governing board rarely discuses how votes on policy changes, funding, etc. effect the quality of the student product being produces, or the efficiencies of the tax dollars being spent.  Rarely is there any discussion, it is more akin to social banter or self aggrandizing than debating and deliberating the pros and cons associated with the current vote.  If school boards or any elected body appears to never have vigorous discussion of consequence before votes they are either conducting those discussions prior to public meetings (which is prohibited by open meeting laws) or they have abdicated their responsibilities.  It is my belief the SUSD30 board falls under the latter.

06/27/12 was the last time the school board voted against the recommendation of the Superintendent.  When it was unanimously voted 0-5 not to proceed with building a football field for Walden Grove High over septic tanks without proper certification and authorization that it would be allowed.

10/06/10 was the last time the school board didn't vote unanimously.  Hall voted to spend money on National School Board Association Membership, the other four did not (David Eves wasn't yet on the Board, at this time the seat was held by Mike Lurkins)

It has been over 2 years since the Board has voted anything but unanimously in agreement with the Superintendents suggestion, and almost 4 years since they voted non unanimously.

We currently have a "Yes" board who show up just to vote yes.  I appreciated all 5 members willingness to volunteer on the board, but this district deserves a board that doesn't just show up to vote yes but one that also comes from diverse background experiences and opinions and publicly debates SUSD policy before votes so the district can grow effectively and find the optimal paths forward