Tuesday, March 30, 2010

Mindset of a School Board Member

This is exactly the kind of mindset that frustrates so many people.

On the night he advanced from a field of seven in a primary election to four for the spring general election on April 6, West Bend School Board member Lynn Corazzi said the remaining candidates were clearly divided between those who support lower property taxes and those who support quality education.

   Corazzi, who was appointed to the School Board in 2009, puts himself and nine-year board veteran Kathy Van Eerden in the latter category and relegated challengers Dave Weigand and Randy Marquardt to the former.

“To say that you are for quality education, that you are for fixing all of the buildings (or) to say that you are for lower taxes or not increasing taxes anymore, those in my mind are mutually exclusive,” Corazzi said.

Let’s dig into that a little, shall we?  Corazzi says (as paraphrased by the reporters):

divided between those who support lower property taxes and those who support quality education

Um, no.  that is not the dividing line.  First of all, nobody is talking about “lower property taxes.”  Some folks are merely talking about not increasing property taxes.  But it’s the second part of his statement that I find downright offensive.  He explains it further when he says:

“To say that you are for quality education, that you are for fixing all of the buildings (or) to say that you are for lower taxes or not increasing taxes anymore, those in my mind are mutually exclusive,”

Corazzi is saying that those of us who think that it is worth considering keeping the property tax levy static for this year do not support actually support quality education.  Really?  Seriously?  What’s the magic number in order for Corazzi to think that we actually care about quality education?  If we spend $100 more per kid?  $1,000 more?  $10,000 more?  Take a look at this:

image

Take particular note of the per pupil spending.  It is not going down.  It is increasing at a rate far above the rate of inflation.  Yet Corazzi thinks that’s not enough?  He thinks we need to increase spending even more or we don’t care about a quality education for the kids?

Newsflash, Mr. Corazzi… we do care about quality education even if we disagree with you about how to go about it. Your disrespectful attitude toward a large contingent of the people you are supposed to represent and condescending assertion that people who do not support a tax and spending increase are opposed to a quality education for the kids is manifestly offensive.

(5) Comments
Posted by Owen at 0716 hrs
Politics + Politics - Wisconsin

  1. It’s guaranteed that there are many, many spending items in this and every government budget that are not needed. The problem is that it’s difficult and tedious to wade through the detail in order to root out the stupid spending… but it’s absolutely worth doing.

    The way to do this is to question every expense… is the expense needed, is it duplicated somewhere else, are there less expensive alternatives, how does it compare to peers, etc.

    With labor being the largest item in most any organizations spending, detailed analysis needs to be done in this area as well.

    The problem with all of this is that everyone gets extremely defensive about what they’ve done and if you question anything it’s taken as a personal afront. In actuality, there will be mistakes, double budgeted items, duplicate budget items, nice to have expense that can be eliminated, etc. I don’t believe that any government or school spending has ever been scrutinized to this level by an independant source and if done would yield tremendous reductions.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 30, 2010 at 1123 hrs


  2. How many of you caught the story in the West Bend news about the increased amount of families elgible for discount school lunches. If families in these hard times are finding it difficult to feed there children, how can anyone on that board justify taxing (stealing) more money from these families.

    Its ok to starve your children but make sure they receive a quality education in the process?
    If families cant come up with lunch money they certainly cant handle more tax burden.
    If this is not a crystal clear picture, you dont have enough common sense to be a board member.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 30, 2010 at 1410 hrs


  3. Crusher, I did NOT see that article.  Was it in the West Bend Daily News?  Perhaps you can find a link to that article and email it to each board member. 

    I couldn’t agree with you more.  If an increasing amount of families in West Bend can’t provide lunches for their kids, how on earth can we expect them to shoulder a continued Tax to the Max???

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 30, 2010 at 1744 hrs


  4. The article was in the Saturday (3/26) Daily News - don’t know how to post links to their on-line version, but here are the statistics:

    Washington County school districts are seeing an increase in the number of students who qualify for free or reduced-priced meals based on household incomes in the 2009-10 school year.
      The largest increase in Washington County was at the Hartford Jt. 1 School District, a kindergarten through eighth grade district, which has experienced an increase of 7.3 percent, according to the state Department of Instruction.
      The total number of students eligible for free and reduced-price lunch in the district for 2009-10 school year is 34.7 percent, the most in the county.

    ***********************************************

    Other Washington County districts have also seen increases: Kewaskum is up 5.1 percent; Slinger is up 4.4 percent, Hartford Union High is up 4.3 percent, West Bend is up 3.8 percent; and Germantown is up 2.9 percent.
      The total number of students who qualify for free or reduced-price meals in Washington County districts is 30 percent in West Bend, 18.8 percent in Hartford Union High, 16.3 percent in Kewaskum, 13.4 percent in Slinger, and 11.6 percent in Germantown.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 30, 2010 at 2114 hrs


  5. “disrespectful,condescending, offensive”

    i see nothing in Lynn Corazzi’s remarks that warrant these adjectives.

    Newsflash- he doesn’t agree with you!

    It appears you’ve identified him as the candidate you think can lose- so everything about him is that he is ” a dick” (your words) and the 3 above.

    This is just code to the rest of the team.

    I would never call you those things, even when you offer to spoon feed things to me.

    Loosen up Big O.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 31, 2010 at 2137 hrs


Commenting is not available in this channel entry.