West Bend School Board Meets Tonight
The West Bend School Board has a meeting tonight at 7 PM at Silverbrook. The public will be allowed to comment on the current budget proposal which includes a 9% school tax levy hike. They cut an additional $300,000 from the previous budget proposal.
Here is the letter that the district sent to everyone. We got ours on Saturday. I’d like to comment on a few things in the letter.
The district has experienced 15 years of consecutive budget reductions.
I don’t believe that statement is true. I have asked the district for the total budget number for each of the last 15 years and they haven’t been able to give it to me yet. Yes, I know, one would have thought that such numbers would have been readily available if they made that statement, but they apparently aren’t. While I don’t have the total budget numbers yet, I do have the total school levy and state aid numbers for the last decade or so. Those two numbers make up the bulk of the school spending less some federal funds and fees. Here’s what those numbers show:
Keep in mind that the last state aid number was over $33 million when federal stimulus dollars are included.
The numbers make it quite clear that the district’s funding has been steadily increasing every year. Where are the 15 years of budget reductions? Are they not spending all of the money that they are receiving? Somehow I doubt that’s the case. One has to include to mighty powerful spin on it to be able to claim 15 years of budget reductions.
They also say:
The board had already made $2 million in cuts to the 2009-10 budget.
Keep in mind that that’s $2 million in “cuts” out of what they originally wanted to spend. They do not represent an actual decrease in spending.
The district has also said that they have been cutting programming for the past several years. I have challenged this several times. While programming may have been adjusted, I have not seen a net decrease in programming due to budget constraints. I asked Dr. Herdrich to provide me a list and she referred me to the already published Power Points from the annual meeting. Here they are.
There is a list there, but it’s very general and lacking details. For example it says,“Decrease course offerings.” Which courses were cut? What dollar amount is associated with those cuts? Were they truly cut due to budget constraints or because the course wasn’t that important. We can teach every subject under the sun. That doesn’t mean that we should.
I encourage everyone to attend the meeting tonight. I can tell you based on my email that the teachers and pro-tax increase groups are planning to show up in force - especially the folks supporting the pool and the bands even though neither of them are on the chopping block for this budget proposal.
One more note, if you are like me and oppose a tax increase in this economic climate, you will be told that you hate the kids. Here’s a quote from one letter from an elementary school teacher that crossed my email:
I know you are busy and receiving a lot of feedback from a very vocal anti-teacher and anti-education portion of our community. I surely hope that you understand that this faction, although loud and threatening, is simply a group who has become empowered through their mob mentality. They are neither enlightened, nor responsible in their call for no levy.
Get it? If you just want to hold the budget flat or spend a tiny bit less, then you are “anti-teacher,” “anti-education,” and not “enlightened.” And notice the overreach that we are calling for “no levy.” Not true. We are calling to hold the levy where it is, which will still provide roughly $32 million for the schools.
In any case, go to the meeting. Stay for the whole thing. Be prepared. Be polite. Speak up.
You are leaving out that the levy has gone up but the mill rate went down every year until recently. Home values have increased at a higher rate than the school tax rates have. Incomes have increased at a faster rate than school tax rates. School levy increases have gone up at a slower rate than the city levies. State aid is now less than 1/2 of the revenue- though programming has not increased.
The budget goes up every year because of the built in state mandated deficit between the QEO and the revenue caps. There are inflationary increases of fixed costs. The enrollment is steadily increasing. It costs more than the revenue caps allow to do the exact same programming every year, thus the cuts being needed.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 12, 2009 at 0749 hrs
Where have incomes increased? Except of coarse for the public employees. There is no inflation this year (no ss raises) and yet we still need more money for the schools. Here is a crazy idea momof4. Pay for your own kids !
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 12, 2009 at 0903 hrs
I can believe that the West Bend School administration has experienced 15 years of budget reductions, because I recognize the difference between a budget (what I’d like to expend) and reality (what I can expend, based on my revenue). For example, building renovations: an aggressive private sector business, and probably most public sector operations like Washington County, are going to “budget” some number between 5% and 10% of their infrastructure value into ongoing maintenance or improvements of those things. The school district wants to spend more on those things, but cannot because of revenue constraints.
I need a new family car. I used to get a new leased car every three years, and that cost me around $5000 a year. Each year since 2001, my start-of-the-year budget planning spreadsheet has included this amount, but after I total up all of the needs and compare to the income I’ll probably get, that new car gets removed. That’s a budget reduction, and it is a lot different than an expenditure reduction, and that’s not a “spin”.
An expenditure reduction might be a budget reduction. Let’s say a decision is made to eliminate night-time outdoor high school sports and instead play during daylight hours, so that the field lights can remain off and this reduces the electric bill. The budget would most likely be reduced accordingly. In reality, though, since electric rates keep going up, this sort of decision might just be made to avoid the expenditure increase.
This is an example of how things have changed in the last 10 years. In 1999, $136,387 in local tax dollars was collected and sent to other public school districts for 29 Open Enrollment students. In 2007, the number was $747,871 for 125 kids. The DPI doesn’t have last years or this years figures on their website, but I seriously doubt that the number has gone down. A figure of over $900,000 for this upcoming year wouldn’t be unreasonable. That’s $900,000 of local tax levy dollars that will be collected and sent to other school districts and there’s not a thing we can do about it. If the schools have to make cuts in the regular education program at the peril of increasing the number of kids who go elsewhere to get their education, that’s a direction somewhere between stupid and ignorant.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 12, 2009 at 0951 hrs
55% increase in tax levy over ten years? Reedick
Posted by Smeety on October 12, 2009 at 1001 hrs
Poorboy- Owen is showing a trend over 10 years or so. Look at the income trends the same way- over more than just 1 year. Between 1994-2008, per capita incomes went up over 66% in Washington county.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 12, 2009 at 1130 hrs
Remember WBMomof4 - per capita is not everyone - some get raises, some reductions, some stay flat… It is income that is divided equally among everyone. There is a lot of movement in and out of the district over 14 years as well.
Taxes impact everyone. Those that get raises but also those that get reductions and stay flat.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 12, 2009 at 1150 hrs
Also, watch for the new loophole just released - boards can bypass voters for energy efficiency upgrades. I am sure there will be items pushed into this category now…
“The DPI rules give them a lot of flexibility. They could do just about anything as long as it saves energy”
http://www.jsonline.com/news/education/63979512.html
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 12, 2009 at 1158 hrs
The teacher’s union will be there in force with friends and family. If you are sick and tired of being taxed like I am, make sure you show up and voice your opinion.
The teachers and the board keep pushing this issue because “it is for the children”. If the levy is not raised and they have to find money to plug holes, then the teachers can freeze their raises and help plug the holes. Remember teachers, it’s for the children. Practice what you preach.
When is enough, enough?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 12, 2009 at 1202 hrs
Always pay attention to the levy. Not the mill rate or anything else. There is plenty of fat in any school budget. West Bend is no exception. Notice how they managed to reduce their budget request $300,000 in just a few hours.
Keep the levy as low as you can - since any increase you will be paying for in perpetuity. The levy hardly ever goes down! (and even if it does it is very tiny!) Any increase you have this year - the rest of the increases just compound on top of it forever.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 12, 2009 at 1202 hrs
I would note that there is a small but heroic faction within the teachers union that is offering to freeze wages. Currently they are being shunned. I encourage everyone to support those teachers.
Posted by Owen on October 12, 2009 at 1205 hrs
Of course they are bing shunned. This is about the teachers and their paychecks/benefits.
If there are teachers out there thinking for themselves, the children, and the whole community…please stand up. I’d like to give you a hand.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 12, 2009 at 1224 hrs
I’m wondering where you got the state numbers from- are those only the numbers used for the general fund?. The numbers published on the DPI website have the same property tax levy numbers you show, but the state numbers are significantly higher each year than your figures. For example, 07/08, it is at over 34 M (which comes to 47% of the total revenue figures provided by DPI). By contrast, in 99/00 it was around 52% of total revenue, and stayed b/t 49-52% in the years after. The DPI website doesn’t show figures beyond 07/08 so I don’t know total revenue dollars. But as you stated, in 08/09 it was at 33.2 M with fed stim dollars and this year projected at 31.3M, well below the previous 50% standard and the same as the year 04/05.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 12, 2009 at 1303 hrs
WBMomof4,
What are your numbers regarding teacher’s pensions and benefits?
Posted by Smeety on October 12, 2009 at 1306 hrs
Smeety- the teachers benefits and salaries increase at a rate of 3.8% a year and there isn’t a darn thing the district can do about it.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 12, 2009 at 1318 hrs
The number of Students in the district in 2001 was 6779. Today it is 6917. A $10,000,000 increase to educate 120 more students.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 12, 2009 at 1343 hrs
Bill,
If you got those numbers from the DPI website they tell only part of the story. those numbers are the number of students that the district gets money for. There are actually many more students than that. app. 7100 at last count.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 12, 2009 at 1423 hrs
The numbers published on the DPI website have the same property tax levy numbers you show, but the state numbers are significantly higher each year than your figures. For example, 07/08, it is at over 34 M (which comes to 47% of the total revenue figures provided by DPI). By contrast, in 99/00 it was around 52% of total revenue, and stayed b/t 49-52% in the years after.
Posted by Simon on October 12, 2009 at 1432 hrs
Kris, I mean anon,
So $10,000,000 for an increase of 200 students is better? That certainly seems like an unsustainable rate to me. The Board likes to point to home values increasing - they increased at an unsustainable rate as well - and the market corrected.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 12, 2009 at 1442 hrs
Anon,
Then the 2001 number must have been understated as well. Do you know what that number was? 7000? Where do we find the actual number? Still doesn’t look like there should be a 50% increase for such a minor increase in students.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 12, 2009 at 1457 hrs
The average pay for a teacher in West Bend is $44,000.
I’m not saying that’s good or bad. Just FYI.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 12, 2009 at 1643 hrs
According to DPI figures for 2008-2009, the average salary for a West Bend teacher was $56,743 and a $25,291 total fringe package. Sorry that I didn’t save the web site address for you to look up, Pat.
I suppose if you really want accuracy, you could write the DPI.
People, let’s not forget that there used to be a law that said the minimum salary/benefit increase for teachers had to be 3.8% each year, and that was really only a part of the story due to how the state govt said a district had to calculate it. Now that law is gone and it will be Katie Bar the Door. Let’s also not forget that a teacher who retires at 55 still gets their health benefit, etc. paid for by the taxpayer until they turn 65. If there are 20 retirees each year and if the benefit coat is $20,000 each that’s nearly $400,000 in expense that produces no benefit.
Also, we really don’t know all of the ins and outs of federal and state mandates that might force a school district to hire more teachers due to some Dept Of Ed initiative.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 12, 2009 at 1725 hrs
According to several media sources this school board meeting is attracting attention from all over, including both representatives in Madison and in Washington. WTMJ this morning said that the new head of the WIAA is expected to attend as is the head of the Wisconsin Football Coaches Association to voice their opinions (probably opposing) towards the plan to combine both East and West. Also WITI Fox 6 is saying that attendence is already extremely high.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 12, 2009 at 1854 hrs
You may be right with what you saw Frank but what I found was that the Average US National Salary is $55,195 and the Wisconsin Average Salary is $52,502 for High School Teachers.
For teachers on average:
The average salary for Wisconsin public teachers is $40,939
The average value of taxpayer funded fringe benefits per teacher is $17,135
The average compensation per Wisconsin public teacher is $58,000.
Sorry, I’m not looking for a debate on this. Right or wrong, these are the numbers I found. Either way teachers make what they make because they negotiated for it. If I could negotiate for a million dollars I would. And if someone was to give it to me, that would be fine with me. I’d never complain about it even if others would. That’s the system we have in America and if you don’t like the system change it!
To get control of your childrens education you need to privatize it. There is no need for government to provide an education for your children through tax dollars when it can be done through the private sector. Anytime government controls something that the private sector can provide, the public loses control. There is no reason for socialized education. It is an entitlement program that has run its course. Once parents start taking control of their childrens education and paying directly for it they will have the ability to control the direction of that education. Eliminate public schools and you eliminate the taxes you pay for them.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 12, 2009 at 2033 hrs
I attended the meeting tonight,It was masterfully played!
The sign up sheet had “For” and “Concerned”- not against,
Unlike the Meeting several weeks ago.So it was a steady stream of all those not wanting to cut the Budget for their peticular reasons.
I had to leave after the 10th person said “TAX ME TO THE MAX” !!!!! No i’m not kidding !!
Did they serve Kool-Aid at school today????
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 12, 2009 at 2138 hrs
I like to look at the hourly pay for teachers. That 44,000 per year comes to about $30 per hour. (teachers don’t work 40 hours per week 52 weeks a year)
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 13, 2009 at 0651 hrs
#10 Thank you for acknowledging that some (actually many) teachers are willing to take pay freezes to save vital programming, class sizes, etc. It is out of their hands right now.
It’s fine and dandy, and even normal to place blame, but please stop the teacher pay/benefits bashing. Feel free to get your teaching degree, masters degree, then pay for grad credits every 5 years to renew your license (and pay for it)...do all of the things all public school teachers do, if you are able to find a job, unlike so many new graduates in the education field.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 13, 2009 at 0945 hrs
#26 Wells thats odd, You say there are teachers looking for jobs, But I have heard that if West bend doesn’t pay their teachers well, then they will all quit and go to surounding cities.
It has been my experence that when there are more workers than jobs then the pay goes down.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 13, 2009 at 1244 hrs
Superintendent needs to lay off and hire (with benefits more in touch with the real world) the number of teachers it would take to have a ZERO levy increase.
But our superintendent has done nothing to prove she could run a McDonalds, much less an entire school district.
Sign me up to be a scab teacher.
Posted by Smeety on October 13, 2009 at 1312 hrs
Smeety, so we can expect to see your name on the next school board ballot? And you are getting your superintendent’s license sometime soon? I look forward to congratulating you!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 13, 2009 at 1400 hrs
I have a suggestion. It’s sincere rather than cynical.
Some of you all seem to have time available “during normal business hours” to make a trip to the school district offices. Is there a volunteer who will go there and get a copy of the teachers contract? in electronic format if possible, otherwise you’ll have to run it through a scanner.
It’s a public document and they have to give it to you, and no you dont have to identify yourself to them, all you have to do is ask and they have to give you a copy. It would be informative to have it posted somewhere on the internet so that those of us who follow this topic in this blog can read through it and get a better understanding.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 13, 2009 at 1503 hrs
You are right Concerned WB…I will be right there with you congratulating Smeety when he gets hired to run a school district! I can only imagine how quickly that district would fall to pieces. Wow…that’s an accident waiting to happen!
You say there are teachers looking for jobs, But I have heard that if West bend doesn’t pay their teachers well, then they will all quit and go to surounding cities.
I would like to know where you got this information from—where is the facts that this is true? I am pretty sure the teachers are thankful to have jobs and will not run to another district just to seek a few hundred dollars more and then start at the bottom of the seniority list. That would just be plain stupid. I just wonder where you heard that from—-your imagination possibly?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 13, 2009 at 1507 hrs
You can’t honestly tell me that over the years you have not heard the west bend school board members say that all the surounding districts pay more than West bend and if we don’t pony up that they will steal our teachers?
I guess maybe I have been in West Bend too long. If only I could sell my house. Thank goodness we have great schools I also heard that increases home values.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 13, 2009 at 1551 hrs
I can only imagine how quickly that district would fall to pieces.
The self-importance surrounding the teachers is second to none.
Posted by Smeety on October 13, 2009 at 1851 hrs
“To get control of your childrens education you need to privatize it. There is no need for government to provide an education for your children through tax dollars when it can be done through the private sector. Anytime government controls something that the private sector can provide, the public loses control. There is no reason for socialized education. It is an entitlement program that has run its course. Once parents start taking control of their childrens education and paying directly for it they will have the ability to control the direction of that education. Eliminate public schools and you eliminate the taxes you pay for them.”
This is truly one of the most astonishing and least intelligent comments ever posted here, Pat.
The problem with your suggestion is that providing a free public education to every child in Wisconsin is required in the Wisconsin Constitution.
On another level, your post displays astounding selfishness—“I can provide for my kids—screw yours!”
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 13, 2009 at 1929 hrs
Yes, it’s in the State Consitution. But I still stand by what I said. You have to think outside the paradigm you’ve got yourself locked into to understand what I’m saying. And I’m not saying to screw anyone’s children.
It’s a bit hypocritical for people to say they want less government and more control over their lives but when it comes to the entitlement programs that affect them that’s a different situation. If you want government run education then be prepared to pay for what the government wants for that education system.
I guess I should ask, why in this day and age should we have socialized education?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 14, 2009 at 1223 hrs
Total Entries: 20002
Total Comments: 134062
Most Recent Entry: 05/25/2012 07:41 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 05/25/2012 08:20 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 107
Total anonymous users: 2
Most Recent Visitor on: 05/25/2012 08:29 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).