Time and a Place
This frustrates me.
Following the rejection of a 12.1 percent increase in the property tax levy at Monday’s annual meeting, the School Board and district administrators will re-examine the proposed $66.5 million budget for the 2009-2010 school year, looking for ways to reduce it.
“The decisions will be wildly unpopular,” Herdrich wrote in an e-mail received by the Daily News Tuesday. “The final decisions will have lasting impact on the students, families and the homeowners we serve.
“We take that responsibility very seriously and understand the full impact of the decisions on the students.”
“We are absolutely going to present to the community what taking $2.4 million out of the budget of one of the lowest spending districts in the state will mean,” said Board President Joe Carlson.
I understand that managing a budget in this economy is hard, but stop whining and get it done! For example, when my employer was setting budgets last year, I spent my time crafting my portion of it and arguing for the resources I thought I needed. At the end of the day with the economy how it was, my budget was lower than I had hoped. But my directive from higher up was to get the job done with what I had. The time for debate was over and it was time for me to do my job with the hand I was dealt.
In this case, the employer - the citizens - have made it clear that the district needs to work within their current funding level. Joe and Pat need to understand the will of their employers and show leadership in implementing the directive. The budget may be “wildly unpopular” to some folks, but clearly that’s what the folks who pay the bills want to happen. It’s not Pat and Joe’s school system. It’s all of ours. Pat and Joe need to demonstrate to their employers that they can intelligently manage their budget to continue to achieve great results within the confines of the budget they have. If they can’t get the job done, then the community needs to find someone who will.
Amen. Hey public officials were are all sufering right now and that includes your budget. Sorry, but deal with it.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 0744 hrs
Hey wait. Give the board president and super some credit here. The word from the public is not as clear as you make it sound. I am sure they get many many calls in support of continuing specific programs from folks you refer to as their bosses. They have to provide some political cover for their actions. You Owen, and those who generally agree with you in this case, are inaccurate to assume that the message from Joe and Pat’s “boss” is as singular and clear as the message you received from your boss. There are real and distinct differences between the private sector and the public sector. I think it is important to informed public debate on the topic to discuss things in light of that.
I read the communication from the school leaders as you’ve excerpted it here to mean that they were doing just what you want them to do. Some commenters here have indicated the likeliness that the board would go right ahead and tax WB regardless of the results of the non-binding vote at the annual meeting. Given the wide range of expectations and reactions to their decisions, it appears that these folks are doing the best with what they have.
Your reaction here seems to say that anything other than absolute fealty to your views and the views of those who voted with you at the meeting is whining and somehow not doing their job as you see it. That seems pretty narrow.
Posted by Mike on September 30, 2009 at 0822 hrs
Strange how the state constantly increases their take of our money, then reduces the amount they distribute as in the 2.4 million to the West Bend school district. It just seems no matter who Doyle gets in bed with (WEAC) they end up getting scr—ed. I hope someone has the foresight to check Doyle’s pockets before he leaves the office to make sure he remembers to leave the keys to the state treasury.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 0833 hrs
The word from the public is not as clear as you make it sound.
So ... what meeting did you attend, Mike?
Posted by Smeety on September 30, 2009 at 0848 hrs
Hmmm…let’s take one guess what Herdrich’s ideas will be….
2. Cut all Maf and Englich teachers. (This threat has worked in the past and will certainly work again! Tax Payers cut the budget when I was a kid too.)
1. No heat in the school buildings during January. (“What cold tax payer would make us do that?”)
3. Cut the three most popular extracurricular programs to be determined at a later date to ensure maximum scare power.
4. Close one of the middle schools (we won’t say which one so everyone thinks it is their school to be closed) .
Herdrich, you are a powerful woman. Here is a wild idea…tell the teachers to freeze their pay raise and hold future raises to under 3%. Deep cuts to any budget starts with salaries and benefits, not threats of taking away from the educational opportunities of the children. I believe you, the Board, and every teacher know this to be true. Step up and do the right thing Dr. Herdrich, either through persuasion or example.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 0902 hrs
Wis. Guvment: 1 democratic guvner (he is not the king) and senate officers: democrats – 18, republicans – 15 and assembly officers: democrats – 52, republicans – 46, independents – 1
There were precedents set by the way the state handled the budget this year:
Feb-Mar 09 –State Released Per Pupil Allocation
Ap 09 Preliminary Budget Approved by the school board
Apr 09 District Hiring for 09-10 School Year
May 15, 09 Madison warns funding could be reduced – precedent (Late timing)
May 28, 09 Joint Finance talks about it – precedent (Late timing)
June 28, 09 Budget is signed – precedent (Late timing)
Aug 18 property value projections UpdateOwen, I’m didn’t know that your company operates within the same Core Principles for Spending as a school district (see district homepage->our schools->district home->”key quest asked”. I didn’t know your customer base was as varied as a school district’s. I didn’t know your company had the power to blow off legal contracts and state laws at your discreation to make budgets work after an afternoon’s work. Please continue to make us aware of the similarities between your company and a school district.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 0907 hrs
Why is it always the same threats. As soon as tax payers complain the officilas try to cut things important to people. Don’t want your taxes raised ? Then no police or fire protection, no salt for the roads how you like that!
How about we act like a private sector buisness. Cut things that don’t affect the customers. How about only 1 principal for the whole high school. How about the principals and administrators work 2000 hours a year like everyone else has too. (at least the people who still have jobs)Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 0958 hrs
Translated means that are going to cut all the sports and keep all the crap.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 1016 hrs
Smeety- I wasn’t at the meeting. But if reports are accurate, there were people speaking on both sides of the issue. A responsible public official listens to all sides and goes forward in a way that respects as many views as possible. I am assuming there was more than one view present at the meeting. Is that a false assumption?
I don’t think a public official should tally up the votes and once one side reaches majority, stop listening to the other side.
Posted by Mike on September 30, 2009 at 1050 hrs
Meeting should have been a mandate. It the board or superintendent cannot meet the budget they should resign.
Posted by Smeety on September 30, 2009 at 1056 hrs
Smeety- That would be convenient, wouldn’t it?
Posted by Mike on September 30, 2009 at 1100 hrs
If the vast majority of people were against it - then you can ignore the minority. It’s not like this was a 51/49 issue, more like 85/15.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 1129 hrs
If the good doctor has the mindset to again threaten and use scare tactics, then perhaps we need someone else to fill her position, somebody that will work with the community not work against us.
She is employed by the taxpayers has been given a budget and recources as decided by the taxpayers, now do your job.
With a salary of 140,000 I think we could find a qualified applicant somebody who will not bite the hand that feeds them.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 1214 hrs
How is she biting any hand that is feeding her? She has not been given a budget by taxpayers. She has seen a vote at the annual meeting which indicates she should not look to raise taxes. Her job, in conjunction with the elected board, is to craft that budget, I assume. It would be best if she crafts it in keeping with the results of that non-binding vote. Has she said anything that indicates she will not be doing that?
Maybe the problem is that she is not showing due reverence toward the leaders of the movement that turned her proposal aside. Going prone before the majority is NOT a leadership quality. It is the quality of a follower. Again, WB will ultimately decide what they want, for better or for worse. Hopefully, despite Bill’s advice, the elected officials won’t “ignore the minority”.
Posted by Mike on September 30, 2009 at 1256 hrs
Mike,
What color is the sky in your world? When the majority is paying your salary, it is your responsibilty to act in a wat that will display the majority’s best interests.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 1317 hrs
Crusher
Dr. Pat Herdrich is the Best School superintendent in the state- Period
I’m sure the staff was stunned when she first came back to West bend over her expectations -her work ethic and her drive for improvement.
The West bend School District could not be led by a more qualified person.
I understand the fear and concern that is out there-it’s realI understand also that most people don"t understand how the budgeting process works- and how much is out of a local boards control (That’s where state elections matter)
I don"t understand our urgency to demonize public officials who are making do with less every day.
We cut bone with these cuts- not muscle or fat.
As for her salary-Dr. Herdrich is worth every penny we pay her
She loves the community and the students and she puts them and us first
The bile demonstarted on these boards would make a reasonable person say
“enough- let them have the schools they want so desperately”
But I guess you’re right about one thing
When it comes to having a 2nd class school district-
“Dr Pat Herdrich is completely unreasonable”
MHM
PS-the fact that realtors advertise “Slinger schools ” has nothing to do with the ski slope ,race track or the great downtown .
Slinger residents get what they pay for- and so do we.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 1321 hrs
‘Cut to the bone’
LOL
Sorry I just busted out laughing when I read that!
You should write fiction books - you’d make more money.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 1346 hrs
Why has the school budget increased faster than the rate of inflation for the last 20 years, I sure they can cut less than 3 per cent from the current budget, they will still have 97 per cent of what they want.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 1403 hrs
MHM
Okay. We’ll put the saw down and leave the bones alone. I agree, let’s stick to the fat and start with teacher’s salariesPosted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 1417 hrs
Let’s face it…the money just isn’t there for the school to raise taxes on the people of West Bend. It’s time to slash some programs. Is is going to hurt, you bet. At this time we need to focus on educating the children in the basics (reading, math, science, history, english) and the rest will have to wait until revenue is up again.
Cut some classes, cut some programs…that is how the schools can save money. The teachers are getting a 4% increase in pay when everyone else has taken a freeze a cut or lost their jobs.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 1432 hrs
ITA with Kelly. Let’s face reality here—with the massive job losses this past year in the state, where is the money going to come from? The taxpayers can absorb only so much, in light of all the state-mandated tax/fee increases they must absorb as well, plus whatever is coming down the pipeline from the feds.
Instead of saying “slash” would “suspend” be better? It’s about prioritizing (instead of 10 sports programs, we can afford 5 this year—which 5? instead of offering 5 foreign language programs, we can afford 3 this year—which 3? instead of offering 20 AP classes, we can afford 12—which 12?), while emphasizing that the rest will be added back on as funding becomes available.
The bottom line is that they can’t have it all—that’s not realistic.
Posted by hsgbdmama on September 30, 2009 at 1528 hrs
My administrator friend in the district said it was likely the cuts will be strictly “specials” based. Cutting art, music, and the rest of library. Also cutting the Gifted and talented programs at the elementary and middle school levels and merging GT into AP courses at the high school level. Also cutting all middle school and freshman sports in the district.
I don’t want to pay the tax but I don’t want the kids to suffer because of who is running our district. It really is a tough decision.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 1529 hrs
I vote for cutting Chinese. Kids don’t need it to get into college or to enter the work force, and if they want it they can get it in college. Sure, it’s a nice-to-have that other schools don’t have, but when your mission is to get kids ready for college and the workforce, Chinese is a lot more fat than muscle.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 1552 hrs
Mayhem - in times like this everyone has to share the pain - even the kids. Its not hard. There is no money; makes cuts. People do it every day in the real world. And we do it even when kids are involved. No pay raise this year so the kids have to cut back on some stuff. Less new clothes, one less activity, etc. If you have to cut sprots so be it. If you have to cut the Gifted and Talented program so be it (public schools should only be a safety net anyway).
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 1555 hrs
One big way to cut the cost to tax payers is for fees being charged for class electives. There is no reason that if a student wants to take an elective that they shouldn’t be able to pay for it. If they can’t afford to pay for it then they could perform work study. This would help cut maintenance costs too.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 1636 hrs
One big way to cut the cost to tax payers is for parents to start paying directly for their children’s education. We shouldn’t have this socialized education system where the tax payer pays for their children’s education. Fees should be at least charged for class electives. There is no reason that if a student wants to take an elective that they shouldn’t be able to pay for it. If they can’t afford to pay for it then they could perform work study. This would help cut maintenance costs too.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 1641 hrs
Joe, Lets not get into whether or not a child needs to be involved here. Because if your case is that these kids need to be impacted because of what grownups are doing then you are as crazy as the school board thinking that they can tax us to death to solve their problems. If anything we should be finding a solution that has a MINIMUAL impact as possible on the kids.
I fully believe that there are programs that can be eliminated and the central office can be thined out without first going to cutting the arts, or effect class sizes. Regardless of anyone’s feelings towards this school board or administration the last group of people that anybody should be effected or gone after is the kids themselves. Until they pay taxes, or they can work, or vote, we, us, them make the decisions that are best for them…that my friends is taking everything away from them. I personally want more for my kids and my neighbor’s kids then what I had. We should be doing what we can to ensure these kids have a good education but doing so in a proactive and smart manner.
With all that said that gets us to the way the district wants to bandaid the problem. Face it folks, we are going to be taxed regardless of what that vote was the other night. It is going to be between 5.8 and 8.4 percent according to the numbers told to me regardless of all the cuts that will be made. All this being done without looking at all the real issues in the district. Any auditing firm would come in and make atleast a million dollars worth of suggestions by just looking at their own administration and outsourcing some positions. Hiking the tax quota everytime there is a problem is never going to solve anything and isn’t a total solution. Sometimes I feel like they are going to try to stick it to us just because we voted down their referendum.
Don’t worry though, the super and the Elmbrook 5 will likely be headed to MPS before the end of the next school year and then hopefully we can get somebody in here that better relates to the issues and nature of the community as a whole.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 1707 hrs
The distirct should give the middle finger to some Madison laws. Take for example the parents who keep their severely disabled kids in the district from age 18-21. Why is that allowed?That’s a 3 year x $9,000ish burdon on all wb taxpayer 4 each kid; if your kid is “special” that’s your problem.. Same goes for when a high school kid’s too smart and the district can’t match his brains with hard classes…the district (the wb taxpayers) has 2 pay for the kid to go to college or tech classes. If a kid gets kicked out of a school and they apply at wb, the district has to take em in. Private schools don’t have to do this. They just pass off the retarded, felons, and the geeks to the public schools making it a taxpayers problem. Why provide sports art music, libraries they dont read.turn them into classrooms and stop bitching about space. why do do i have to pay xtra so other people’s kids can throw a football! whats that got 2 do with the basics!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 1715 hrs
West Bend has been getting too much tax subsidy from the state for a lot of years. As a result, the school tax is 25% less than the other school districts in Washington County. As a percent of total revenue, there are only 19 districts out of 412 who get a greater subsidy.
As mentioned in reply #6, the subsidy got reduced in late June.
Now your tax will only be 12% less than the other county districts.
It seems like the overall feeling of the people typing in this blog just want to cut their fair share of the operating cost contribution back to where it was, in other words still pay 25% less than the rest of the county, and less than 400 other school districts.
In order to do that, you’ll go from spending 15% below the state average per pupil to something that’s approaching the least amount of any district in the state.
Some of these ideas are fair questions to ask, but bare in mind that even though the state cut back your subsidy (which, by the way, is still nearly double all of the other districts in Washington County combined), they actually increased the number of courses and time spent in classrooms this year. They also stiffened the rules for contract arbitration: the employment relations commission can’t consider your ability or desire to pay less salary than the highest paying districts in your region, they’ll support the unions’ desire to become the top.
Can’t cut elementary art, music or gym: the state requires a fixed number of hours per child each week. Can’t cut the GT programs, there are laws to that effect. Fees can only be charged for “consumable goods” such as construction paper, workbooks, and so forth.
Cut Special Education, what the administration calls Fund 27. Its around 22% of the budget, very little of it is federal or state funded, and it impacts a small per cent of the total number of kids. The administration will try to convince you that it cannot be cut at all but its the sacred cow that is beyond fat.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 1737 hrs
I just saw post #27.
Who are the Elmbrook 5, and what do they do.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 1742 hrs
Frank, The mandate for “specials” only applies to the fact that a certain level of access is available. For instance, private schools skirt this policy by basically having classroom teachers teach lessons that include art and music into part of their classroom instruction.
Also as a husband of somebody who is a school district business manager lets get the facts on Special Education budgets. Fund 27 and Fund 80 programs (special education and tax exempt programs like church groups) are tax deductible for the school district. That 22% (closer to 20%) is technically right HOWEVER of that 22% almost all of that is a tax write off. My wife works for a school district bigger then West Bend and their special education budget after all deductions is right about 3% of the total budget and that is basically your material and training that teaching assistants get that gets reimbursed. Fund 80 programs are your church services that are held in schools that need to be staffed by district personal. This also is a tax write off which is why West Bend offers so many churches their buildings on the weekends. Until Fund 27 and Fund 80 tax code loop holes are closed by our elected officials at the national level districts like West Bend will never drop these programs.
Frank, the Elmbrook 5 are the 5 people including the super who have ties to the Elmbrook school district during the time that the super was there. It is like Eckert who brought in his people when he took over.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 1822 hrs
Horsehead-
Blue, unless its cloudy. The minority is paying the same tax rate as the majority. They have no right to be heard?
Joe, Wendy, Kelly, hsgbdmama- keep in mind when you suggest the cut, its a good idea. If the super or the board president do so, its a scare tactic. Your side cannot have it both ways.
Recognize the fact that your school leaders are very likely to move forward within the confines of the budget suggested by those at the general meeting. Half of you will not like their choices (they cut soccer, not Chinese; art not music; etc.). They know this. They will move forward anyway. There are no magic bullets in this game. Every cut hurts someone. Hope its not you or yours.Posted by Mike on September 30, 2009 at 1948 hrs
Mayhem-
I remember when Elmbrook went through there building remodeling phase VJS construction served as the exclusive construction authority. So now the Elmbrook team come to West Bend and VJS is sitting on a 28 million dollar contract. Perhaps a few more then 5 made the move north.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 2032 hrs
Stop complaining about being taxed for education. If everyone sent their children to private schools, or home schooled their children, the public schools would start drying up and taxes would go down. Supply and demand. It’s time to stop socialism and the schools are one of the biggest socialistic drains on society that we have. Parents should pay for their kids education. Senior citizens and people without children shouldn’t have to pay for other peoples kids socialistic education.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 2037 hrs
well, Pat, I’m willing to bet that senior citizens and people without children paid for your education.
unfortunately for you, you live in a state whose constitution says that all children between 4 and 20 are to be offered a tuition-free education in publicly-owned schools, and that everyone pays a tax to support their local schools. A founding principle of the United States, from the pen of no less than Thomas Jefferson: The tax which will be paid for this purpose is not more than the thousandth part of what will be paid to kings, priests and nobles who will rise up among us if we leave the people in ignorance.
However, there’s nothing in the consitution that requires people who aren’t senior citizens to pay for the income and health care for those who are. So why pay into social security and medicare? oh yeah, that’s right “Someday you’re going to be old and will collect what you paid in, plus more.” Okay, that works up to the point where someone dies before they get old enough to collect. Shouldn’t their estate get refunded all of the money the deceased had paid into the two programs?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 2222 hrs
I’m all in favor of education for every U.S. citizen. Heck, I wouldn’t even mind if illegals get educated here…
Posted by Smeety on September 30, 2009 at 2228 hrs
Oh Mayhem, I almost forgot about you.
First of all, I made no mention of Fund 80, the Community Services fund. It happens to be used for a whole lot more than “church groups”, it also covers the costs of running after-hours programs for children and adults in the schools, and a lot more. For $120,000 in tax revenue, it must be doing a lot. Unfortunately, for both you and me, the school district is withholding the detail of what that revenue is to be used for. It sure would be nice if this district put their entire budget on line, like many of our neighbors do, wouldn’t it?
Taxes paid to Special Education are tax deductable? tax write offs? seriously, did your wife the business manager tell you that, or are you making it up as you go? Who do we write them off to, ourselves as a school district? you do mean public institutions, not private for-profits? pardon me for being skeptical (okay, more like bemused) but you’re going to have to substantiate that one for the class.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 2250 hrs
Smeety, illegals do get free public education. Well, illegals from Mexico, not illegals from Illinois - if the child is a FIB, they have to pay tuition.
In 1982, your friends on the US Supreme Court decided 5-4 that the framers of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution clearly meant to include illegal immigrants when they said any person within a state’s jurisdiction ie entitled to equal protection under the law.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 2300 hrs
Adam Smith, the father of capitalism, considered the unappeasable desire to make a lot of money as a mental illness (Theory of Moral Sentiments) (52).
Adam Smith believed educational schooling corrected the damage done by tedious working environments (15). Smith did not claim education contributed to national prosperity, only free trade; a division of labor added to that (Wealth of Nations) (105) Smith said the role of education was required to compensate for the defects created as by-products of the same processes that produce wealth (106). Artificial environments created by free trade and unregulated competition cause psychological damage in four ways: 1) they make workers spineless, 2) unintelligent, 3) lazy, and 4) apathetic to everything but their base urges. Only educational schooling can heal the destruction caused by capitalism to community and individuality. According to Smith, the father of capitalism, the children of the best and the lowliest, all children, have the same talents that can be awakened by training. If these children do not receive “subject for thought and speculation”, they become “deformed” and cannot handle complex thinking. Their power of judgment for small to complex matters is lessened.
Andrew Carnegie believed educational schooling gave working people bad attitudes, it taught what was worthless; it instilled in the future workers “false ideas” that created distaste for a practical life (The Empire of Business) (15).
William Playfair, Smith’s publisher, created the expression “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing” to explain his ideas that the issue with public education is not that common people are too stupid to learn: Rather, they are too smart to be allowed to learn (107). Playfair argued that educational schooling (public schools) would destroy national prosperity instead of contributing to it (Playfair measured prosperity in dollars.). He argued that the education of the middle and lower classes should be replaced with psychological conditioning in habits and attitudes of appetite for wealth, envy for the wealthy, respect for the wealthy, and a mistrust of self, to preserve capitalism and its benefits: privilege for the wealthy and their prodigy. Ancient Chinese emperors named this policy: “Keeping the people dumb”. This was practiced by U.S. Southern slave owners and illustrated by the policy of not allowing slave to learn how to read and punishing those who took it upon themselves to educate slaves.
Gatto, John Taylor - Weapons of Mass Instruction – A School Teacher’s Journey through The Dark World of Compulsory Schooling
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 30, 2009 at 2313 hrs
Mike, I used to see it as a scare tactic when I was on the “other side.”
Posted by hsgbdmama on October 01, 2009 at 0349 hrs
Frank,
Jefferson did believe that education should be under the control of the government, free from religious biases, and available to all people irrespective of their status in society. But it’s not in the US constitution. That is unless you interpret the preamble to include education. We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
The term “general Welfare” could cover a lot of things including healthcare, social security, medicare, parks, fire departments, police .... Socialism is socialism no matter how you rationalize it. If your pro socialistic education don’t complain about the price for it.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 01, 2009 at 0620 hrs
Dr. Pat Herdrich is the Best School superintendent in the state- Period
Are you kidding?
Whats so great about making threats? If my boss tells me “there is no money for new equipment or more manpower” and my response is ” well your going to be sorry I ‘ll show you how bad it can be ” Guess what that does not make me a great employee. It would make me unemployed. If Pat Hedrich can’t get the job done with what she has to work with then I am sure someone else would be willing to take that $140,000 a year job.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 01, 2009 at 0631 hrs
Pat, I said “you live in a state whose constitution says…”. not nation.
In my opinion, “socialism” is still an economic term, and it’s more absolute than you’d probably agree to. In a pure socialist context, there would be no private alternatives to the government run schools, but there are.
I find your agrument of “if I don’t use or need it, I shouldn’t have to pay for it” to be amusing. Personally, I don’t use the public library, why should I have to pay for it? I am not a resident of the Washington County Jail, why should I pay for it? I don’t use all of the roads in the city or county, is it fair to make me pay for their maintenance? City and county parks? sorry, I don’t use them either. Fire protection? my house will burn to the ground before the FD arrives. Sherrifs Department? I live in an incorporated municipality with its own Police Department, I have no need for a County Sherrif, why do I have to pay for them?
How about the methods employed for payment for those public services? Based on the perceived market value of our homes? As if a person who lives in a $450,000 home is going to consume three times as much public service as the person in a $150,000 home? At best it’s probably equal, in reality it’s probably the inverse. Yet the person in the $150,000 home perceives that the owner of the larger home has a “greater ability to pay”, so they need to pay his share for him. That, Pat, is the simple definition of Marxism: “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need”. Most people would mislabel the philosophy as communism, but they are not far off when they do.
State Equalization Aid payments to schools are based on this Marxist philosophy. A good number of taxpayers believe that state aid still flows to a district based strictly on enrollment, but that hasn’t been true in a very long time. Instead, it’s based on the comparison of local enrollment, local spending on public K-12 education, and local property values compared to the total state enrollment, total state spending on public K-12 education, and total state property tax values. If your school district spends less per pupil than the state average, you get a greater subsidy than those districts who spend more than the average. If your property value per pupil is below the state average, you get a greater subsidy.
West Bend gets one of the largest per-pupil subsidies in the state using this philosophy of “to each according to his need”. The firebrand in this whole discussion is the dimished amount of subsidy being taken from other districts and given to West Bend. Put bluntly, a decrease in the Marxist type support that’s been enjoyed for over a dozen years is now saying “sorry but we’re taking less from those with the ability, so those with the need are going to get less.”
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 01, 2009 at 1001 hrs
Frank, Then the tax payers should be paying for the essentials in education. All the rest of the frosting should be paid for by parents.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 01, 2009 at 1055 hrs
I’m pretty sure your personal definition of “frosting” is different than mine, and ours are different than our neighbors. None of that matters, though, because the laws we live by clearly say that public school districts are tuition-free environments for the district children.
I hope you have lots of energy to devote to getting the Wisconsin Constitution changed to support your viewpoint. Then once you’ve done that, you’ll need to get elected to the legislature in order to get the laws that require 380 minutes per day of classroom instruction for each high school student and also prescribe what those minutes have to be devoted to. As of today, a lot of what you probably think of as “frosting” (vocational education, art, music, and foreign language) is already specified in the law as “tuition free” classes. And those are in addition to English, math, science, social studies, P.E. and health.
It’s usually easier to get elected to state office once you’ve gotten some local experience in a public office such as school board. Two seats are up for election this April; more might be available if there are recall actions after whats been going on.
Who knows, Pat, I might even support you.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 01, 2009 at 1211 hrs
So socialism is good if the majority benefit?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 01, 2009 at 1246 hrs
I attended the meeting monday. I believe for the most part it was a well run meeting, and informative. I also believe, ten years ago the results would have been different ( especially the size of the crowd ). Who among you would turn down an increase in pay ? The unions almost sent Harley packing and nearly killed Fond du Lac. I really hate the mind set that says if I don’t have it you shouldn’t. There was a resounding response to the referendum presented with the rediculouse dollar sign a while back, and to the proposed tax increase. I resent the way Pat and Joe responded in such a threatening mannor. This isn’t and shouldn’t be a personal thing. There are some scared people out there who are in a very real situation. They don’t know from one day to the next if they will have a job or a home. What Pat and Joe are saying to them ( think so or not ) is what the village idiot said monday night, if you can’t afford the increase you can’t afford to live here. This is a high income community you know. Try thinking about when you were in your twenties and thirties. Maybe the county board should put a moratorium on people moving into the county. Only people without children and a contract not to procreate. Residents have to come up with solutions not just bark at the heals of the system. And the system needs to come up with some serious changes in the way they do business. Take a reality check, this isn’t 1919 anymore. Don’t keep looking to the future, this is the future. WAKE UP before it bites you in the ASS
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 01, 2009 at 1713 hrs
Who among you would turn down an increase in pay ?
Exactly.
Now let’s ask: Who among you would accept a pay cut in order to keep your job?
We have accepted a pay cut and indefinite pay freeze in our house, but my husband still has a job. That is the reality for now.
Posted by hsgbdmama on October 01, 2009 at 1849 hrs
Altoona, WI, may be just one of many suburbs in the nation that has the idea Spotter discusses in post #47. New house construction in Altoona was limited to homes in the $300,000+ range in 2001. With political activism, the city council could be convinced to create new construction rules mandating minimum house construction costs within city limits. Condominium and apartment construction costs could be mandated as well. Future homeowners seeking to turn their properties into rental properties could be limited or denied. Some of these rules exist already here in WB; the city council could be persuaded to raise the floor. My post in no way should be construed as my advocacy for this route.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 02, 2009 at 0105 hrs
I encourage people to look back on their property tax receipts if they owned a home in West Bend in 1993 or prior.
In 1993, school revenue limits went into affect.
In the early 1990s, A $60-70,000 home cost a higher school district levy tax than in 2008.
I bet your research will reveal:
The house’s value increased +110-130%
The Total Tax bill increased +22-27%
State tax +82-88%
County taxes +39-43%
WB city taxes +87-91%
MPTC +82-86%
School District tax -20-24%At the Monday (Sept. 28, 2009) meeting, people were angry about their taxes. They directed their anger at the school levy tax, a tax that decreased 20-24% over 15 years while other went up.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 02, 2009 at 0129 hrs
Interesting data JP. Schools have been trimming and trimming, not wasting and squandering. When folks intimately involved (board members and superintendents) speak out in defense of their institutions, even when its in the face of political will contradicting them, they are not always being arrogant, or lazy, or thoughtless. Sometimes they are being fierce advocates for the institutions they have been trusted to run.
While lots of individuals have been feeling the pinch in the past sixteen months or so, public schools have been feeling the pinch for the past sixteen years. Some of these cuts have brought desired efficiency, many have been punishing and debilitating.
Posted by Mike on October 02, 2009 at 0724 hrs
You’re leaving out some significant facts. For example, the two-thirds funding was passed in 96-97 resulting in a large decrease in the school property tax. Since then it has inched back up with the result being that we are spending more than ever on schools but the taxes to pay for it are being split between the property tax and state taxes.
There hasn’t been a single year that the West Bend schools spent less than they did the previous year. That’s not “trimming and trimming.”
Posted by Owen on October 02, 2009 at 0852 hrs
I keep hearing we are a low cost district. There is a reason for that and it can’t be made up for in a year or two. It has to be very frusterating trying to fix years of neglect with construction costs what they are and limited funds. The first thing is to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. The next is stop thinking you are the only ones that care, because your’e not getting what you want. Don’t over think things. The term,” educated well beyond common sense “comes to mind. Don’t pout it only adds friction. TThe problems didn.t occur over night They can’t be resolved overnig ht
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 02, 2009 at 0912 hrs
So socialism is good if the majority benefit?
Posted by Pat on October 01, 2009 at 1246 hrsPat, I don’t know why you keep using “socialism” and various derivatives of that word to describe the system you are dead-set against. But apparently it is the word you believe is appropriate, so I’ll just let it go. I suppose you could just as easily make up a word like “qwertyuiop” to apply. Let me just say this: I believe the State has every right to collect a tax to provide for the general welfare of the State and that the method of collection must be according to a common rule and measure of apportionment. The State has the sole right to define, and change, the meaning of “general welfare” as best suits the need of the State.
With that in mind, I suppose you could substitute “majority” for “general”.
_________________________________________________
Enough hijacking of this particular thread. The origination was “cut the school expenses so that our taxes do not increase.” Opinions on how to accomplish this have included cutting or freezing teacher salaries, eliminating classes and programs a/k/a cut teaching jobs, and charge tuition for certain classes.Charging tuition for classes you offer is illegal. Just that simple.
Cutting or freezing teacher salaries: sorry, but you have a labor contract with them, with guaranteed pay rates. Until the laws are changed, the compensation for municipal employees can only go up, never down. How much they go up is controlled by the Employment Relations Commission, and they are forced to examine the desires of both the employees and the employer, make comparisons to surrounding similar school districts, and render a decision that cannot be based on a perceived affordability of the pay hike.
Eliminating classes and programs: extracurricular programs are not required, but a great philisophical debate can and will ensue which will focus on the benefits to a childs welfare. And, so far as I know, participants are already charged participation fees, so there’s no real savings to be had by reducing or eliminating those programs. Curricular programs and classes might be reduced for the next school year but not this one, since the legal restriction on public schools in this regard have a May 15 deadline for the ensuing school year.
Since the objective seems to be to recoup the $3,000,000 or so that was taken away by a shift in the Marxist philosophy I previously discussed, somewhere between 50 and 70 teacher and administrator jobs will have to be eliminated. Once again, those pesky laws affect the choices: public school students must receive direct instruction for over 6 hours per day in the upper grades, and only a little bit less in the lower grades. Eliminating classroom teachers will only make class enrollments larger and for as much as some might want to think otherwise, classroom enrollment and student achievement are intertwined. If the all-holy “state test scores” are to be the measure of the schools success, then the owners of the schools need to decide whether they are satisfied with the fact that West Bend schools are already the worst in the county. Taking teachers out of classrooms isn’t going to improve that.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 02, 2009 at 0921 hrs
An Alternative Idea
Although it does nothing to fix this years problem, the West Bend school district would increase the tax base by annexing the 1/3 of Jackson that is in the Germantown district. The tax base would grow by 4% overnight, resulting in a 4% redistribution (cut) for the rest of West Bend School District.
That part of Jackson should want to do this, since they’re paying 25% more than they would if they joined West Bend. They wouldn’t be bringing very many children into Jackson Elementary, Badger or WB High, either (no new teachers would be needed or allowed.)
I have a few friends who live in that part of Jackson, and they would love to kiss Germantown goodbye.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 02, 2009 at 1008 hrs
Frank, If the city, state or federal government uses taxes to provide educational services that replicate private industry practices and then distributes those services to the population then a case could be made that that is a socialist act. But we can agree to disagree about it.
Is it wrong for government to provide this service when the private sector could just as easily do it? I think so. But it’s also unrealistic to think that everyone will pay to send their children to private schools when there is a free one down the block. Everyone wants a free education for their children. But a free education is not free. It costs everyone. And because it is under the control of the government a good deal of what happens is out of the peoples control. But we do have control over who is elected to the school board.
The bottom line is, we have created a monster with public education and people believe the cost is too much for the tax payer to handle. So what can be done?
A new approach needs to be taken by the school board. It’s time to start applying lean principles to identify and reduce waste in the system. Instead of finding it necessary to create referendums to build more schools it’s time to take a look at a year round school year. Children would attend school for the same number of days but because we could creatively rotate the students throughout the year, the need for more space will be reduced and class sizes may be smaller.
Just a couple things that could be done immediately that would benefit the tax payer without affecting, and possibly improving, public education quality.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 02, 2009 at 1043 hrs
Cutting costs shouldn’t simply mean cutting pay or programs. High construction and maintainance costs gobble up money as well. I would feel better if I knew we were getting the quality along with the cost when it comes to educators. Everyone turns a deaf ear when you mention virtual school. Think about it. I know a few people that have had their children attend. It isn’t a matter of handing them a computer and turning them loose. It’s actually very structured. A schedule can be set for every other week or every other month school attendence for hands on. Colleges started doing this years ago for the same reason. First it was day classes then night classes were added then video and dvd finally on line. You won’t be able to ignore it much longer. Brick and mortar are priceing us out of providing quality education. As for laws, They are changed or ignored everyday at the legislatures convenience.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 02, 2009 at 1139 hrs
I was at the meeting and there was a clear mandate to not raise taxes.
I see the board’s problem. The state mandates this that and the other; the teachers’ salary is contracted and if it goes to arbitration the district could easily be on the losing end; the state then decided to cut funding of schools.
Hmm. The state madates something, takes my money to fund the mandated items, then refuses to pay. Seems like the state’s school boards need to tell Madison to stick it and cut the mandated items. This can be solved in court.
The West Bend School Board heard us load and clear - do not raise that levy! Now find something to cut and don’t be spiteful about it.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 02, 2009 at 1217 hrs
Seems like the state’s school boards need to tell Madison to stick it and cut the mandated items. This can be solved in court.
Sure, that’s just what the School District needs right now, a bunch of legal bills. I’d say Grothman and Strachota are the ones who should be acting.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 02, 2009 at 1732 hrs
Um Charlie,
With what power? As I am sure you know, the “education friendly”, WEAC backed Democrats have full authority in Madison - executive and legislative…
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 02, 2009 at 1853 hrs
With what power?
I guess I’m cursed with a memory. Weren’t the Republicans in charge not too long ago? And, somehow Darling managed to protect her school district.
Can you ever admit that we’ve gotten the shaft around here when it comes to education funding?Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 02, 2009 at 1925 hrs
Ah yes Charlie, those Republicans got rid of the QEO and changed the arbitration rules…
Yes, the Republicans were in charge of the legislative - but how exactly were they supposed to get anything by Doyle?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 02, 2009 at 2048 hrs
Total Entries: 19655
Total Comments: 129831
Most Recent Entry: 02/11/2012 08:28 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 02/11/2012 04:55 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 57
Total anonymous users: 1
Most Recent Visitor on: 02/11/2012 09:12 pm
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).