82 cents

In the currently proposed school board budget, 82 cents of every of your property tax dollar goes towards salaries an fringe benefits.

If we want to reduce the budget, we need to get the 800 lb gorilla on a TrimFast diet. The first step towards doing that is to make a stand with administrators' salaries. They are expecting a raise of about 2%.

As Al Borland and Jill Taylor would say, "We don't think so, Tim."

Instead, here's what the school board needs to do:

1. Ultimately, in this economic climate NO ONE should be getting raises. Realizing, however, that there are not 4 school board members with enough backbone to freeze salaries, the best we can hope is to give no more than 1%. And we suggest making that what the state terms a "non-base-building" raise that doesn't keep on keeping on.

2. We need to seriously increase the percentage share that these employees pay towards their health insurance premiums. State employees pay between 6 and 8% of their health insurance and dental coverage (save for annual exams and cleanings) has been discontinued. In 2009-10, administrators paid 4% of their health insurance premiums and ZERO for their dental premiums. Remember that Local 60 members pay 9% towards health insurance and 14.5% of dental premiums.

3. Increasing the employees' share of insurance premiums will mitigate any small raise they receive. This year has to be at worst a cost neutral contract, or preferably, move towards reducing the overall district budget.

4. Repeat steps 1 -3 for Admin Support and Substitute teachers. For Local 60, ultimately we should reduce their percentage contributions towards health insurance to a common school board benchmark.

Will That Be 1 Lump? Or 2?

Wednesday's night's Budget Hearing and Special Elector's meeting made three things perfectly clear.

1. The people in this community are largely hurting from the recession.

2. A 7.8% tax increase is unacceptable.

3. They feel the school board is either oblivious or (a)pathetic.

And that folks, is recipe for a tea party.

And we've already heard rumblings to that effect.

The date: October 11, 2010

The venue: The Annual Elector's meeting at the new high school.

Last year the school board moaned and groaned and even insulted the electors after the proposed levy was reduced by $2M. When the smoke cleared, however, instead of having to "borrow $800,000 from "savings" (Fund Balance) to balance the books, they actually deposited $400-$500,000 into savings. That, folks, means we were UNDER budget by $1.3 MILLION dollars. How can we be that far off of budget unexpectedly? And they can TRY to convince us that staff just didn't spend to their (reduced) budget limits...but that's playing us for fools.

The plain and simple realities are that there was more revenue available than they let on, and there subsequently a lot of fluff remained in a "tight" budget. The district expects to be patted on the back for doi\ng a good job but they don't see that it's this manipulation of money that has enraged the taxpayers. It worked when we were all asleep at the switch. But that was then...THIS is now.

The question we're asking is: How come we didn't hear a peep about this until Monday July 26th? Even members of the Finance Committee first heard it that night. Did it just magically appear? Or was it another one of those secret secrets that they didn't want the public to know? We certainly see how damaging the info is to the district's case.

The school board may be thinking that if the electors cut the levy again, they can just override them, as threatened last year. Newsflash, school board. You may have statutory authority to override a tax levy voted by the electors "if it is insufficient to operate the schools". But good luck with that after the levy was reduced by $2M last fall and YOU STILL HAD A $1.3M SURPLUS.

The school board still has time--but not much--to make a case that they ARE listening and to actually tighten the budget belt a few notches. The ball is squarely in their court. Take action now, or the electors will do so on October 11.

Dear school board,

The community is taking orders...how do you take your tea?

School District has a $1.3M Surplus

Community residents reduced the proposed tax levy last year by $2 MILLION dollars.

We heard school board members and district administration snipe at the community for their "short-sightedness".

We were warned of the "rebound" effect.

We were warned that taking money out of the slush fund (Fund Balance" would hurt our credit rating, costing us higher borrowing rates.

Then the mirrors were shattered...

...and the smoke cleared.

We borrowed money with NO adverse impact on our credit or bond rating.

We made it through the school year with only $1.1M in "reductions".

Nobody lost their job.

Administrators and Local 60 were hit with ONE furlough day.

But the biggest news only materialized this week.

Despite a proposed levy reduced by $2M,

the district budget still had a surplus (increase) of $1.3M.

That's right folks. We heard about the doom and gloom of reducing fund balance.

We prepared to have Fund Balanced reduced by $800,000 to $7.2M.

Instead, Fund Balance GREW to between $8.4 and $8.5M

Hmmm....maybe the levy should have been reduced FOUR MILLION!

We all believe in providing a quality education, but how can we support the budgets and levies presented to us when they are this unreliable?

If we---excuse us--if the school board continues to sanction these unreliable budgets, where do you suppose the "surplus" money is going to be spent?

85 cents of every dollar in the budget goes towards salary and fringe benefit costs. So...it follows that 85 cents of any surplus dollars in the budget will wind up funding either new positions we do not need (like another vice principal at a high school with only 1400 kids in it) or ridiculous raises for staff.

Until we can trust the school board that their budgets are certified fluff free, it sure looks like the community will come out in force and cut the levy themselves.

It's a very dangerous game the school board is playing.

They are playing with fire...

...and they WILL get burned.

Community Votes to Maintain Busing Distances

In a close 85-79 vote last night, community members voted to maintain the 2.0 mile limit for busing middle school students, instead of reducing the limit to 1.5 miles, saving taxpayers $90K.

Even at a drastically reduced cost of $89,650, perhaps community members were reacting to displeasure with the school board's proposed 7.8% tax levy increase. The Special Electors meeting immediately followed the district's third (and final???) public hearing on its budget. The tone of comments indicated that the community feels that the district simply isn't in touch with the realities of cut wages or lost jobs that the district taxpayers continue to face.

We wonder if the move to reduce the busing distance was doomed to failure by virtue of being a spending headliner act forced to take the stage after the district inflamed taxpayers at the budget hearing.

$1.3M Pendulum Swing

At last night's Finance Committee meeting, a major budget development was revealed.

The bottom line:
Instead of taking $800,000 from Fund Balance in addition to making $1.2M of temporary budget reductions, after virtually all bills are in, the budget picture grew a whole lot rosier.
We actually INCREASED Fund Balance by $500,000.

That means a net change in the budget picture of PLUS $1,300,000

You will hear the details of this at tomorrow night's public hearing on the budget.

What does it all mean?

Remember all those snide comments about those horrible elector type people that severely damaged the district? Nuh uh.

Remember all that fear mongering about "the rebound effect" and that our credit rating would drop? Poof!

Perhaps the board's "outcry" regarding the electors' decision was more feigned than real. The district likes to have their play money, but very clearly, we CAN do just fine---in fact have a surplus--even with a little cutting.

Yes, Virginia, there MUST be a Santa Claus....because, in the end the levy was reduced by $2,000,000 and we STILL had a surplus of $500,000.

Get off your bassboat and VOTE!

If you do ONE thing this summer that could be filed under boring, tedious, or mundane, then come out to the Public Hearing on the School District budget this Wednesday and stay for the Special Electors Meeting at 7:30 PM.

Whether you agree or disagree about whether the school district should spend $89,000 (increasing annually) to cut the distance that middle schoolers have to walk from 2 miles to 1.5 miles....cast your vote.

The school board and district administration think (or hope) that you're either asleep at the wheel, absolutely thrilled with another 8% property tax increase, or that you simply don't care enough to do something about it.

Prove them wrong.

It's easy...just grab a neighbor and bring them out to the Public Hearing on the Budget followed by the Special Elector's Meeting. The Brewers play in the afternoon that day, and NFL training camps are just beginning to open. The TV has nothing but low quality reruns, so come on down!

This Wednesday July 28, 2010

Performing Arts Center at the new Sun Prairie High School

888 Grove Street

6:30 pm: Public Hearing on the School District Budget

7:30 pm: Special Electors Meeting to decide the busing issue

Don't know what to say? Here are some ideas

• Do you think school district employees (particularly $100K/yr administrators) deserve fat raises? Get up to the microphone and tell them.
• Do you think the Local 60 support staff should continue to get the short end of the stick? Or should all employees be treated equally? Tell them what you think.
• Health insurance premiums cost $1,200 per month for a family. Some staff are paying as less than $17.00 per month. TELL the board what percentage of premium costs you think they should be having employees pay.
• Dental insurance premiums cost about $500 per month for a family. Some staff don't pay a dime!. TELL the board what percentage of premium costs you think they should be having employees pay.
• Other than turning the thermostats up and down 2 degrees, the district has only incorporated about $15,000 of permanent reductions into their $72M 2010-11 budget. Think that's good enough?
• The school district portion of the mill rate will be at least $12.12 this year. That's 7.8% higher than last year's $11.24. That additional $0.88 means an additional $176 property tax on a $200,000 home. How do you like them apples?

Remember....if you stay silent and do not show up, the school board interprets that as tacit approval to march on with their budget. Remind them NOW that they need to sharpen their pencils, because you will be back in force for the October 11, Annual Elector's meeting.

Tell the board that if they don't change the levy now, they run the risk of YOU changing it for them in October.

Of course...if you got a great raise at your job this year, you think the economy has turned around, that teachers and administrators are underpaid and you think we should continue to blindly throw money at the school district in the name of education even if we don't score that well on state tests and don't have state or national merit scholars....

then you can tell them that too.

Read the STAR article

Uh Oh! Pool Problems?

We've heard a number of reports from community residents indicating the following concerns related to the new high school pool:

1. Not Certified. Although we've had "the keys" now for 5 months, the pool still lacks a Health Department certification. This means no one can swim in it. That means no revenues from community swim. It also means paying for pool use time for our swim teams until this gets resolved. How embarrassing is it for us to be buying pool time when we've shouted fromn the highest mountain top that we have a brand new pool?
2. The roof leaks! It was reported that a large gathering of "pool people" (not to be confused with "pod people") happened to be at the pool this past Thursday night during the rain event and witnessed water flowing in.
3. Vent grillwork is already rusting. Nice...if it's rusting the metal, care to guess what's going on in side lungs?
4. The wrong diving boards. The two diving boards, at a cost of $500 each, are "recreational" type, rather than "competition" grade. Word on the street is that it has been known since the day they were delivered and sitting around in the bottom of the pool during construction, that they were the wrong boards. People have expressed this to administrators Phil Frei and Tim Brooks, whose answer is that we have to eat the cost!
5. The wrong pool lane dividers. The pool lane dividers do not meet WIAA standards, which means that, without replacing them, we cannot hold WIAA sanctioned competitions. There goes all those revenues and spectators fees we banked on . Not to mention the cost of adding the hallways needed to handle these crowds.
6. Wasted chemicals? Everyone knows that a pool needs chemicals to maintain pH balance and chlorine levels. What some may not know is that these chemicals have a very finite shelf life because of their reactivity. We've now heard too many reports to think that there isn't something to a rumor that someone purchased far too large a quantity of chemicals and now a large quantity must be disposed. We've heard figures ranging up to $1,000 worth of chemicals having to be trashed..

A call placed to the district office to confirm these reports and to obtain comment was not returned. Seriously...does anyone think the district will ever come clean with their dirty laundry?

What community members are saying

"If you have a specification, shouldn't the work be done to specification? Shouldn't someone be following up on that? Especially for what we paid for the specifications."

"Someone screwed up, so tell them to fix it."

"I know [the diving boards cost] is only $1,000, but [sic] thats all the more reason someone else should be fixing it."

"Shouldn't [District hired Construction Manager] Hoffman be looking at this and getting it fixed, since he is paid to do this stuff?" SP-EYE: One would think that's why we pay them $7,300 per month.

"I am sure the pool roof leaks might be higher priority, but these guys need to stop looking at the construction dollars as a tub of free money to use."

We don't think we can say it any better than those who let us know. We spent $100M total for our new construction. Nearly $4M alone for the pool. We pay our administrators -- who are currently seeking a salary increase of up to 2.5% we hear--- $80,000-to $120,000 per year. We expect better form them. We'll give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that they would NEVER suggest that the district --and taxpayers-- should simply "eat the cost" of mistakes made by contractors. But, at the same time, to people that make $100K, $1,000 is pocket change. They forget --or are oblivious to the fact -- that $1,000 could feed a small family for several weeks to a month.

If We Wait Long Enough, Will It Be Free?

Make up your minds, will ya!

Residents of Wyndham Hills--and the public--were initially told that if they went ahead with a plan to demand that a Special Electors Meeting be held to reduce the required distance for busing from 2.0 to 1.5 miles would cost district residents at least $292,000.

Given the economy, that pronouncement seemed to loom as a potentially painful poke in the eye with a very sharp stick to residents struggling to make ends meet and already worried about rising property taxes.

Was it Fear Factor Sun Prairie?

Was that initial cost projection a tad elevated to suck the wind out of the public's lungs and perhaps deter the Wyndham Hill community from pursuing their quest?

As usual with this school district, we can only guess and infer because full disclosure is simply not going to happen unless a major overhaul of the school board is enacted.

Busing Costs Become A Moving Target

In the span of just 35 days, we have seen the estimates of the cost of providing busing to middle schoolers that live more than 1.5 miles (instead of 2) drop from $292,000, to $146000, and now to $89,000.

June 17, the STAR

...If the walking distances for middle school aged children are decreased, it will affect the entire school district. SPASD business services and Kobussen Bus Company project that if the distance was decreased from two miles to one and a half miles, the transportation costs would be $292,000. Costs would continue to increase by 3 percent for the next five years.

--the STAR June 17

July 14, the STAR

...A decrease in the middle school busing distance would increase the district’s busing costs. For example, reducing the distance to one and a half (1.5) miles would increase busing costs by an estimated $146,000. All residents living in the school district may attend and vote at this meeting.

-- the STAR July 14

$146,000 was also the figure cited on a special postcard mailer received in all homes this week.

July 22, School District Administration E-Mail

From: Phil Frei pfrei@spasd.k12.wi.us>
Sent: Thu Jul 22 08:55:39 2010
Subject: News on reducing the MS milage to 1.5 miles

Kobussen ran the proposed routes for 1.5 miles. It wont take as many new routes as originally planned, the estimated cost is now $89,650. This is about 2 1/2 cents on the mill rate or $4.50 tax increase on a $200,000 home.

. .................................................

Ya know...it would seem that for what we pay our administrators, one would think that we could get better accuracy on the numbers coming out of the district. It just seems that with every issue, the cost is a moving target.

Tryin' To Reason With the Hurricane Season

(with copious apologies to Jimmy Buffett)

And the award for the Most Confoundedly Enigmatic School Board Member goes to....Caren Diedrich!

In April, she won re-election by receiving nearly 2000 votes, leapfrogging Al Slane by more than 300 votes. This event blew many in the community away. "How could she have been elected over Al Slane, who appeared to be coming into his own as a board member?", many asked...and are still asking.

Here is just a sampling of our too many termed school board member's antics.

Is This Compliant With Political Sign Ordnances?

We have two reported sightings of Diedrich walking about within the community wearing an "Elect Caren Diedrich" t-shirt prior to the April 2010 Election. The aformentioned residents have been duly flogged for not thinking to snap a cell phone pic.

Going Walkabout

This past Monday, Ms. Diedrich attended the FTT Committee's tour of the "Prairie Phoenix Academy"and then proceeded to go walkabout----disappearing in the middle of the tour without saying a word and walking from the to the Municipal Building. WTF?

No Kit Kat Bars for You!

By God after hearing a report that employees were now receiving granola bars on their birthdays instead of KitKat bars, she checked to be sure that employees are not getting either! Diedrich has now successfully wrestled the crown of Birthday Treat Nazi from Rick Mealy.

The Case of the Stinky Smoking Coffee Maker

After clearly being on the wrong end of a Finance Committee 'unofficial' vote to recommend discontinuing personal appliance fees, Diedrich tossed a 'Hail Mary' and requested that the issue be moved to the FTT Committee to review the safety hazard of these personal appliances being left on over the weekend. Hello! Does she really think that having to pay an appliance fee has ANY relationship to remembering to turn said appliances off at night and over the weekend???

Battling against the second Police Liaison Officer (PLO)

Diedrich clearly wasn't pleased with the board's decision to hire a second Police Liaison Officer a year earlier than planned. She was clearly fuming. To make her point, when the official contract came before the board this week, she pored over that contract with a fine-toothed magnifying lens. Perhaps hoping to sway the board to reconsider their decision, or at least serve as a fly in the ointment, Diedrich asked:

---are we paying the PLO for snow days [Yes]

---we're providing the officer with an office? a computer? a phone? [Yes...did you want him to sit in the hallway and pass notes?]

---Does he need a desk phone AND a cell phone [um...YES]

---if the PLO is called away on another police emergency, are we still charged for that time? [Yes...but seriously...how often does that occur?]

---Do we have liability insurance to cover the PLO? We have someone in the schools who has a gun on his hip. [Yes...um...hello...we have for years]

Going Off the Deep End Debacle - the Pool Manager Fiasco

Many are still wondering how we hired a Pool Manager for $51,250 per year ( Yes...a POOL Manager for that amount!) after the school board voted in open session (4-3) to set the salary at $40,000. Well...

Initially Caren Diedrich was on the majority side of a 5-2 public vote to reduce the Pool manager salary to $40,000 (Admin requested $45,000+). Then the closed door sessions began, and by a vote of 4-3, we're told by several community members(who must be talking to board members!) , the board agreed to increase the salary range. It is reported that Caren Diedrich was 1 of 2 board members to flip her vote from the public session. [ Geee...nothing like publicly looking like a fiscal conservative to the taxpayers that elected you , only to flipflop behind closed doors and outside the public eye!] But it doesn't end there!

Remember that there was ANOTHER closed door session called? Reports from multiple sources indicate that Diedrich requested a meeting because she had "changed her mind and wanted to change her vote". Of course what wasn't said (that we know of) was that Diedrich, being the swing vote, essentially held the board hostage because if she changed her vote at the open meeting and voted AGAINST hiring the Pool Manager, the board and district would look really, really, really wacky.

So...in the end...what happens? Diedrich fully votes to hire the Pool Manager at a salary over 25% HIGHER than what she originally voted! This has got open records request written all over it. The truth WILL come out!

.......................................................

We're wondering which version of Ms. Diedrich will manifest itself when raises for Administration are discussed at the board table (or behind closed doors) and Administration Support raises go through her HR committee.

Never a dull moment. Trying to make sense of Ms. Diedrich's actions is like trying to reason with the hurricane season. Batten down the hatches for 3 more years of this.

And now I must confess,

I could use some rest.

I can't run at this pace very long.

Yes, it's quite insane,

I think it hurts my brain.

But it cleans me out and then I can go on.

--Jimmy Buffet: "Trying to Reason With the Hurricane Season"

Will You Vote On July 28th?

*** Special Electors Meeting on July 28, 2010 ***

The Sun Prairie Area School District will hold a Special Electors Meeting on Wednesday, July 28, 2010, at 7:30 pm in the Performing Arts Center of the new Sun Prairie High School, 888 Grove Street. A petition to decrease middle school busing distances from the current 2.0 miles has been submitted to the school district. The Special Electors Meeting is a result of this petition. At this meeting, electors in attendance could vote to change this distance. 6:30 pm: Public Hearing on the 2010-2011 School District Budget 7:30 pm: Special Electors Meeting A decrease in the middle school busing distance would increase the district’s busing costs. For example, reducing the distance to 1.5 miles would increase busing costs by an estimated $146,000. All residents living in the school district may attend and vote at this meeting. Prior to the Special Electors Meeting, there will be a Public Hearing on the Proposed 2010-2011 School District Budget at 6:30 pm. This is the third public hearing on the proposed budget. Community members are encouraged to attend both meetings to learn more about the budget process and to give input on the topic of middle school busing distances. Click here for more information on the proposed budget. If you have additional questions, please contact Deputy District Administrator Phil Frei at 834-6510. ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................... What's an "Electors" Meeting? An Elector's Meeting is an official meeting of school district residents to discuss and vote on any number of orders of business that fall within the scope of "Powers" of the Electors. State law requires that each year (in October in Sun Prairie) a meeting of the Electors be held to vote on the amount of the school district tax levy. Astute observers will recall that at last year's Annual Electors Meeting, residents voted to reduce the levy requested by the district by $2M. What's a Special Electors Meeting? A "Special" Electors Meeting may be called in addition to the Annual Electors Meeting when district residents wish to effect a change with respect to one of the "powers" of the electors. How Often Do Special Elector's Meetings occur? Pretty rarely, actually. The last one in Sun Prairie was about 4 1/2 years ago when a ridiculously expense lease proposal was being pursued to use the new "Y" swimming pool. Of course, you now know that was voted down by about 120 or so residents at the Special Elector's meeting. State statutes allow up to two additional "Special" Elector's Meetings (in addition to the "Annual" Electors Meeting) each year. All that is required is a petition with 100 district resident signatures. The petition must clearly state the nature of business for the meeting, and it must fall with the scope of the "Powers of Electors". Who is an "Elector" (Who can vote)? Anyone that is 18 or older and has lived in the school district for the past 10 days. It's that simple. If you live within the Sun Prairie Area school district boundaries (and have for at least 10 days) and are at least 18, you may vote. What is the Issue being voted on at the July 28, 2010 Meeting? A request is being made to direct the district to change the minimum distance for bus service of middle school kids from 2.0 miles to 1.5 miles. This request comes from residents of Wyndham Hills, whose children were eligible for bus service up until this fall? Why The Change? The City recently installed a bike path the extends from the Wyndham Hills development to Prairie View Middle School. Prior to the availability of the bike path, the school kids' walking/bike route was declared "Unusually Hazardous (there are statutes to define that...of course). That allowed the district to provide busing and receive state aid to defray the cost. Now that the area is no longer officially deemed hazardous, the kids must walk the route. How Much Will It Cost? The current projection is about $146,000 for 2010-11; obviously transportation costs increase every year. With the current budget numbers, this looks to add about 4 cents ($0.04) to the mill rate, bringing it to about $12.16 for the school district portion for 2010-11. 4 cents amounts to about $8.00 annually for a $200,000 home. What are these "Powers" That We Have at Electors Meetings? (1) CHAIRPERSON AND CLERK. Elect a chairperson to run the meeting (2) ADJOURNMENT. Adjourn from time to time. (3) SALARIES OF SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS. Vote annual salaries for school board members or an amount for each school board meeting the member actually attends. (4) REIMBURSEMENT OF SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS. for expenses incurred (5) BUILDING SITES. Designate sites for school district buildings (5m) REAL ESTATE. Authorize the school board to acquire, by purchase or condemnation, real estate and structures and facilities (6) TAX FOR SITES, BUILDINGS AND MAINTENANCE. Vote a tax to purchase or lease suitable sites for school buildings, to build, rent,lease or purchase and furnish, equip and maintain school district buildings. (7) TAX FOR TRANSPORTATION VEHICLES. Vote a tax to purchase, operate and maintain transportation vehicles and to purchase liability insurance for such vehicles, and to finance contracts for the use and services of such vehicles. (8) TAX FOR OPERATION. Vote a tax for the operation of the schools of the school district. (9) TAX FOR DEBTS. Vote a tax necessary to discharge any debts or liabilities of the school district. (10) SCHOOL DEBT SERVICE FUND. Vote a tax to create a fund for the purpose of paying all current bonded indebtedness for capital expenditures. (10m) SCHOOL CAPITAL EXPANSION FUND. Vote a tax to create a fund for the purpose of financing all current and future capital expenditures related to buildings and sites. (11) TAX FOR RECREATION AUTHORITY. Vote a tax for the purposes specified in s. 66.0123. (12) SALE OF PROPERTY. Authorize the sale of any property belonging to and not needed by the school district. (14) LEGAL PROCEEDINGS. Direct and provide for the prosecution or defense of any action or proceedings in which the school district is interested. (15) TEXTBOOKS. Authorize the school board to furnish textbooks under conditions prescribed by the annual meeting or by the school board. The authorization shall continue in effect until revoked by a subsequent annual meeting. (16) SCHOOL LUNCHES. Direct the school board to furnish school lunches to the pupils of the school district and appropriate funds for that purpose.

Will you come out on July 28 and vote to speak YOUR position on the issue?

SP-EYE: We applaud the residents of Wyndham Hills for (A) becoming engaged in the school district process, and (B) for doing their homework and exercising their rights to demand a Special Elector's Meeting. Elector's Meetings DO offer some district residents some pretty awesome powers.

We hope they'll stay engaged for the budget hearing and, more importantly, for the Annual Electors Meeting scheduled for October 11th.

Will State Superintendent Tony Evers' School Funding Plan Work?

Admittedly, State Superintendent Tony Evers tells us that he has withheld the intricate details of his plan. His hope is that over the summer, people will at least get talking about school funding. Mission accomplished, Mr. Evers; you have our attention.

Evers points out that about $900M in school tax levy "credits" is given to municipalities to lower property tax bills. If it were split evenly to the approximately 450 public school districts, that would amount to about $2M per district. Currently, Sun Prairie, a larger school district, gets about $4.4M. Of course the credit would not be equally distributed.

Evers' plan --at least the extent of which he has shared is essentially based on returning the "School Tax Levy Credit"-- which you may or may not recall seeing on your property tax bill-- where it belongs: schools. Presently, the school tax levy credit dollars are paid from the Department of Revenue directly to municipalities, who in turn apply it, according to a formula, to each property owner's property tax bill. School districts see not one thin dime of that money--although the money is "counted" as a state aid towards schools. Evers' plan is to instead pay out that money directly to school districts, who in turn will apply it against their budget to reduce the tax levy.

With that as a very basic lead-in, and understanding that none of us knows exactly what Mr. Evers has in mind just yet, let's see if, on the surface anyway, it passes the smell test.

* DISCLAIMER *

We are using real numbers, but applying them as best we can tell from information we have at this time. Until we get detail from Evers, this remains conjecture, not fact. The numbers are factual; the way they are applied may change once we learn the details of Evers' plan. We are also simplifying it by using ONLY City of Sun Prairie numbers. In theory, we should be entitled to a larger pool of school tax levy credit dollars from based on a portion of tax levy credit provided to other municipalities within the Sun Prairie School district.

Superintendent Evers wanted to generate discussion. This is our 2 cents.

What are the key numbers?

• In December 2009, for the 2009-10 school year, the City of Sun Prairie received a little over $4.4M in school tax levy credit.
• The Sun Prairie school district's "average" home (which they have used for years to demonstrate Referendum impacts is assessed) at $255,400 for 2009.
• This "average" home paid property taxes of $5,546.85 for 2009.
• This "average" home received a "School Tax Levy Credit" of $455.09 for 2009.
• The effective mill rate "credit" of the school tax levy credit was $1.78 per $1,000 assessed value.
• The actual -after credits-- Sun Prairie school district portion of the property tax for our average home was $ 2,556.94
• The after credit effective mill rate of the SPASD portion of property taxes (for all SP homes) was $10.01 per $1,000 assessed value.
• The 2009 tax levy for SPASD was $ 44,249,461.

Key Assumptions

1. We remove the school tax levy credit ($ 455.09).
2. We reduce the tax levy by the amount of the Sun Prairie school tax levy credit ($ 4,430,336)
3. This reduces the tax levy required by the same amount to $ 39,819,125.
4. Using the re-calculated $ 9.01 effective mill rate, the new SPASD portion of the property tax for our average home is $ 2,300.93.
5. All other property tax portions remain the same.

The Result

Based on the assumptions above, the property tax for an average home in Sun Prairie actually INCREASES by just a hair under $200, or a 3.6% increase from what this average homeowner actually paid.

Does it really help the schools?

Again, we lack the details of Evers' plan because he has not released them. On the surface, it would seem that there is simply a trade-off as the tax levy needed to run schools is reduced by the amount of the tax levy credit. If the plan calls for just simply giving the tax levy credit directly to the school district as an additional state aid, then we're just substituting tax levy dollars with levy aid dollars. No new revenue is being generated. It's the same revenue, with more coming from the state.

Why it doesn't appear to work

Two big reasons:

1. Unless the plan allows for more spending (increases revenue limits), it has a net zero effect on schools.

2. It actually INCREASES property taxes -- at least for Sun Prairie under this scenario.

Go back to one key figure: the effective mill rate of the school tax levy credit - $1.76.

Now consider that the SPASD portion of the property tax bill is reduced by $256.01. That amount translates to an effective mill rate credit of only $1.00. That means that by trading away our school tax levy credit for the ability to directly apply the entire credit against the district's tax levy, we are effectively trading away a $0.76 mill rate credit. That's a loss of $76 per $100K home value.

The reason for this MAY be the missing piece of the Evers plan. Because Sun Prairie's tax levy is so high: $44.25M, the net effect of the tax levy credit ($4.3M) represents only a 10% reduction to the tax levy. However, the school tax levy credit for our average homeowner, $455 represents a 17.8% decrease in the school district portion of average homeowners tax bill.

What We Don't Currently See in the Evers Plan

What seems to be missing is how exactly this plan gives more money to schools. With the information we have at this time, it appears that Evers' plan simply trades one dollar source for another. The tax levy credit actually has more value to a property owner when it comes directly off the top rather than after it is diluted by the overall tax levy.

Of course, that depends on the absolute value of the tax levy, wouldn't it? For instance, if the school district tax levy was only $4.3M - the same as the total value of the tax levy credit-- then the adjusted tax levy would be zero, meaning the school district portion of the property tax would be reduced to zero.

Where's the Spendability?

What's missing from the Evers Equation is the basic spendability. If he wants to provide more money to schools, then the plan has to be more than just placing the school tax levy credit on a different line of the property tax bill. In short, the money allocated to municipalities to reduce property tax bills must be ADDED to each given school district's revenue limit. That's the only real way that "more money" can be given to schools. They have to be able to SPEND it. And, that, folks is scary monsters with the captains we have at the helm.

What does Raising the Revenue Limit Mean?

Remember the old "See Dick. See Dick run. Jane likes to watch Dick run" book?

Here's an updated version.

See the Revenue Limit.

The Revenue Limit "limits" how much a school district can spend.

See Revenue Limit expanded.

See school district budgets expand as allowed by expanded Revenue Limit.

School district budgets are 80-85% personnel costs.

See school districts hire more people and pay them even more ridiculous salaries and raises.

See Dick lose his school tax levy credit.

See no change to the school district portion of Dick's property tax bill because the school district won't be taxing any less.

See Dick's property tax bill go way up.

See taxpayer Dick take it in the shorts.

Board Approves $6,900 to Ensure Uniform Table Tops

If there's ONE thing that none of us can stomach, it's school table tops that do not match. Right?

From the STAR, July 8, 2010

Following considerable discussion, board members voted 5-1-1 (Stackhouse opposed; Welke absent) to allow use of $100,000 as a contingency at Cardinal Heights Upper Middle School (CHUMS). The money has already had projects totaling roughly $65,000 taken from it, leaving about $34,000 for Findorff to use during the balance of the summer.

Seriously...shouldn't we have "no blank check" policy?

One of the projects is a wall which required additional load bearing support. A second project

requires the excavation of and replacement of subgrade in one of the three parking lots being

upgraded around CHUMS for parent and bus drop-offs.

Sure...some of these projects make sense and fall under what would be considered "contingency".

Huffman expressed frustration during the FTT meeting on July 1 at the board being unwilling to

allow the use of contingency money by the company without returning each time to the board for

approval.

Frustrated...maybe. Very well paid for those" frustrations"...definitely.

But board member Dave Stackhouse used one potential project as an example of why the fund

should not be put at Findorff’s and Huffman’s disposal: $6,900 for table tops so they can be

uniform in the new science rooms at CHUMS.

Kudos to David Stackhouse for voting against this. And don't we pay Huffman $7300 per MONTH to be OUR representative? Is this what WE think is a good use of $6,900 of referendum money? Making sure that table tops in a science lab match? Hell they'll be acid scarred in no time at all. We're betting John Welke was glad he missed this meeting due to a previously scheduled vacation. We wouldn't have wanted to be a part of this vote either!

Communication? What's That?

Despite warnings from one district resident that their actions may not be in accordance with state law, members of the Sun Prairie School Board on Thursday, July 1 recommended that Board Clerk Jill Camber Davidson set a special electors meeting for Wednesday, July 28 to coincide with a rescheduled public hearing on the Sun Prairie Area School District’s 2010-11 budget.
---Sun Prairie STAR

Here we go again!

Once again, the date for the next Finance Committee Budget Hearing is not even communicated to the Finance Committee 's CITIZEN members. We had to read about it in the STAR.

Understood...they weren't asked for their input at the last budget hearing. Al the board wants is for them to rubber stamp approval of the budget.

Statewide Benefit DIS-Parity?

A review of how a sampling of similar sized (to Sun Prairie) school districts reveals that generally--but not always-- AFSCME (American Federation of State, Country, and Municipal Employees) staffers generally get the short end of the benefit stick.

Heroes

We looked at 6 similar sized districts, and two stood out. Both Manitowoc and Middleton-Cross Plains school districts treat ALL employees equitably. Universal benefits are provided for all. The two were, however, at opposite ends of the budget spectrum. While Manitowoc seems to have established reasonable employee share costs of benefit packages, Middleton-Cross Plains throws caution to the wind and provides all benefits at no charge to the employees. Hmmm...no wonder why MCP is in the midst of a severe budget crisis.

Zeros

All the rest, including Sun Prairie. That makes 5 out 7, or 70%.

How can these school boards treat employee "classes" so differently and look at themselves in the mirror?

You'd think this might be something that a local or state newspaper might want to pick up on.

Of course, the STAR likes to play nicey-nice with the district. So we certainly couldn't expect Chris Mertes et al to expose something like this and use the old journalistic crowbar.

What's Wrong With This Picture?

Equitable \ˈe-kwə-tə-bəl\, adj.: dealing fairly and equally with all concerned

Oh we've heard members of the school board and administration wax prophetically (and ad nauseam) about how they value their employees. And in how they treat all their employees fairly, as evidenced by the former Birthday KitKat bar (since replaced with the Birthday Granola Bar). And of course, let's not forget about memorial flowers should any employee suffer the loss of a family member.

So...all employees are treated "equitably"...right?

Hogwash!

The Sun Prairie Areas School District operates as a mini caste system, with Administrators clearly on top of the pecking order, and Local 60 (Support Staff) mired in the murky bottom. When it comes to contracts, Local 60 has clearly been fed the scraps after administrators, administrative support, and teachers have feasted like kings. In many ways, it could be said that the niceties bestowed upon these other groups are balanced by taking away from Local 60.

Finance Committee Citizen Representative Pastor Harold Rayford spoke loudly and clearly that the district should pay staff well since this is "a growing " school district and because we want to provide the best education possible. Either Pastor Rayford doesn't believe that Local 60 staff are part of that education equation, or maybe he just didn't know how inequitable the situation was.

This is going to be a very difficult year for wage adjustments. The teachers union has already been addressed through a 2-year contract signed last year. But what about raises for those hard-working Administrators? Administrative Support staff. Oh...wait...and what about Local 60, whose contract expired July 1? Are we once again going to pay the top of the caste and stiff the lowly Local 60?

More to the point:

When are we going to provide the same benefits at the same cost to each employee?

In state government (sorry, Seabass!) ALL permanent employees are afforded the same benefits, at the same cost. Why should it be so different for school district employees. Teachers may teach the kids, but custodial staff ensure that they teach in a clean environment. Food service staff make sure that the kids have a proper source of nutrition. And we know that without proper nutrition, learning is unlikely to occur.

Check out SPASD contracts for yourself

...............

Dear School Board...

Al Slane offered a challenge to you recently. We offer you a different one. We challenge you to create an equitable health insurance co-pay system. We realize you cannot reduce Local 60's share overnight. Nor can you bring the other groups' co-pays up to Local 60's level in one fell swoop.

What you MUST do is (1) identify the target percentage of health insurance costs which EACH employee shall pay (Hint, Hint: perhaps use other district contracts as a guide) and then (2) develop a plan to get there as quickly as possible.

The Cost of Living

Union members forgoing raises, cost-of-living increases

Across the state and nation, more school boards and unions are settling on one- to two-year contracts with cost-of-living increases from zero to 1.5 percent, officials say.

--Dispatch Politics June 7, 2010

In case the school board doesn't read much beyond those scintillating memos and articles provided by Tim Culver that would not possibly be slanted in any particular direction, perhaps we should look at how good our employees have had it.

We continually hear that teachers' salaries are not keeping up with the cost of living.

We hear about how those that are retiring started out making only $10,000 per year, and therefore are justified to be retiring--under the pretty sweet Wisconsin Retirement System--on a salary of $75-80,000 per year.

Horse puckey!

You've heard the unsubstantiated and well spun claims. Now get the facts. Become educated. As we've said countless times, we don't want you to get your information from the incredibly slanted school district...nor do we want you to trust us. We want you to GET THE FACTS and make an informed decision on your own.

Myth: Teachers salaries are not keeping pace with the cost of living.

Reality: Let's look at that teacher (or elementary school librarian!) who is retiring today at a salary of $70,000, $75,000, or even $80,000. Over the last 35 years, since the Social Security system based benefit payments on the COLA (Cost of Living Adjustment), the COLA has averaged 4.3% increase per year.

Now we've warned you about statistics. The mean (average) for any set of data can be skewed/biased heavily by erratic data. In these cases, the median, or middle value, represents a better estimate. The mean COLA since 1975 is 3.5%. Hmm...are you starting to get an idea where the old QEO figure of 3.8% might have originated?

If a teacher who started in 1975 at a salary of $10,000 received annual wage increases tied solely to the COLA, their salary at retirement in 2010 would have been $43,100.

Now that's a pretty far cry from $70-80,000. So clearly things aren't quite as dark as we sometimes hear.

Reaganomics 1978-1982

Love him or hate him, while Ronald Reagan was in office, from 1978-1982, the nation saw a phenomenal, statistics-defying increase to the COLA. Over those four years, the COLA increased by 9.9%, 14.3%, 11.2%, and 7.4%. Social Security payments increased a net 50% as a result of those increases. The closest single year increase we've seen since then was 5.8% in 2008, which, of course was followed by 0% in 2009.

Those four years contributed significantly to our 35-yr average COLA of 4.3%. In fact, if one breaks the COLA down into average increases:

Last 5 yrs 3.10% average increase

Last 10 yrs 2.78% average increase

Last 15 yrs 2.61% average increase

Last 20 yrs 2.84% average increase

Last 25 yrs 2.96% average increase

Last 30 yrs 3.80% average increase

Last 35 yrs 4.30% average increase

See how a couple of big numbers can skew a set of data?

Getting Back to That $10,000/yr Teacher

So let's look at that teacher who retired at a salary of $75-80,000, but who struggled so mightily initially with a salary of $10,000. First of all, a salary of $10,000 was (A) the going rate and (B) not shabby back in the early to mid-seventies.

Second...in order to go from $10,000 to $75,000 or more over 35 years, the average increase (think average rate of return on your investments) would have to be 6.025%. That translates to an average raise that was 40% better than the average COLA, and 72% better than the median COLA.

That's not too shabby.

In fact, math folks have a term for the growth curve exhibited by teacher salaries in the graph above. It's called "exponential growth". Look it up.

Don't take our word for this stuff...check the data out for yourselves.

Social Security COLA data since 1975

Raising Questions About Raises

So...district administration has built a * SECRET * percentage wage increase into the budget for Tim Culver, Administrators, Administrative Support staff, and Local 60 employees. Questions abound.

Did they factor in...o%? 1%? 2%, 2.5%, 3% ? 3.8%? 4%? More?

We don't know because they won't tell the public for fear of hurting their "negotiation position". Which position is that exactly? Bent over the table,waving a "We Give Shamelessly" flag?

Will the school board match what the teachers contract for 2010-11 provides? The SPEA contract, signed last June, calls for a net 2.81% salary increase per teacher. So...is the magic number 2.81%?? Is that what the board is shooting for? Did any of YOU get 2.81% this year? Wait...let's clarify...we mean did any of you get a 2.81% (or more) wage INCREASE this year?

What is a fair wage increase?

Is a fair wage equal to changes in the cost of living? Gee...all those folks living on Social Security income---increases to which are tied to "Cost-Of-Living-Adjustments" (COLA), were ZERO for 2010, and almost certainly will be ZERO for 2011 as well.

So...if the senior citizens that helped pay the way for us to be where we are at now...and who WE should be taking care of now...are getting ZippetyDooDah, why should we be increasing wages?

We can't ignore existing economic conditions

Look...as much as Seabass doesn't want to hear about state employees, state employees, like school district staff, are public sector employees. Unless you've been doing an ostrich imitation for the last 2 years, you know that NATIONWIDE, the economy stinks. Wisconsin state employees' contracts expired July 1, 2009. For 2009-10, there were NO raises. In fact, all employees were give 8 furlough days each, amounting to a 3% wage CUT. In addition, those scheduled for a 2% wage increase in June 2009 saw that increase canceled. For the July1, 2010 through June 30, 2011 fiscal year, another 8 furlough days and another ZERO percent wage increase.

County and municipal employees faced the same. So PLEASE...tell us why school district employees deserve a wage INCREASE when everyone else's salary is flat at best or being cut? Got an answer for that? Please....e-mail us. Don't be shy. Instead of just saying school district staff deserve more, please tell us why school district staff deserve more than what the rest of the world is getting.

Should wage increases be tied to COLA (like Social Security increases)?

The COLA for 2010, based on 2009 data was ZERO. Wanna bet that 2011 won't be much different? NEA, the National Education Association (the nationwide voice for teachers) has as one of their three primary missions, raises that exceed the cost of living in at least 50 percent of NEA higher education locals.

Should wage increases be tied to Consumer Price Index (CPI)?

The CPI for 200, based on 2009 data was NEGATIVE 0.8%. Through May 2010, the CPI was showing a 2.2% increase. But we know how things fared in June, don't we? The Social Security COLA is based largely on the CPI...and already they are projecting 0% increase fort 2011.

.......................

Dear school board...

Time to actually get in touch with what the rest of the world is facing and practice independent thought.

Rollercoaster Budget Ride

The July 1st Finance Committee and School Board meetings offered a rollercoaster ride of good news and not-so-good news on the budget front.

Good News: July 1 Initial State Aid Estimate UP

Phil Frei reported that the district had budgeted on receiving approximately an 11% increase in state aid (the increase related to the 4K program). The July 1st estimate from DPI indicates an increase of approximately 12.5% is expected.

That means about $300,000 MORE in state aid, and thus $300K LESS for the tax levy

Not So Good News: Special Elector's Meeting could increase Busing Costs

At the full meeting of the school board, a special elector's meeting was scheduled for July 28, in response to a petition (as per state statutes) containing at least 100 citizen signatures calling for a special meeting of the district electors (anyone of voting age that has lived in the district at least 10 days). The item up for vote is to change the maximum distance that middle school students must walk before district bus transportation is provided from 2.0 miles to 1.5 miles.

If a majority of electors who come out for the July 28 meeting vote in favor of the change, the net effect will be to increase district busing costs by about $292,000 for 2010-11, which will increase in future years.

If the busing change is approved...and that certainly looks to be the outcome, then the effect of the increased aid is effectively negated.

Not So Good News: Equalized Value Projection LOWERED

Following discussions with the city, Phil Frei recommended that the projection for property values district-wide (the "Equalized Value") be lowered from an initial estimate of 1% growth to 0% growth.

This means that because the Equalized Value is decreased by 1%, then the Mill Rate increases by 1%. A projected $12.00 per $1,000 of assessed value mill rate now projects out at $12.12 ($30 additional property tax on a $250K home).

SP-EYE - Hmmm....play back those Finance Committee DVDs. We think you'll find that citizen representative on the Finance Committee Rick Mealy pressed the committee back in the spring to use a 0% growth estimate. Of course the committee disagreed and voted to use the 1% growth estimate. What a difference 6 weeks makes. eh? Mealy's rationale was that all indicators at that time pointed to a net 0% increased in property values; in fact the City of Sun Prairie was basing ITS budget on 0% growth. In addition, it is far better to initiate budget discussions with a worst case scenario and then as projections become more solid, a brighter picture for the mill rate might emerge. It's better to go into the Annual Elector's Meeting with better news...right? Now we've told the community to expect a mill rate of $12.00 and in one fell swoop, it increases to $12.12.

The net effect of these three changes (since the increase in state aid and the increased busing costs are basically a wash) is to increase the projected mill rate to $12.12.

Factoid of the Week: (based on current budget parameters) Every $1M change in the tax levy changes the mill rate about about $0.25.

So...either cutting or increasing the tax levy by each $1M changes the mill rate by 25 cents.

Time To Put the 800lb Gorilla on a Diet?

Since none of the school board members want to talk about the 800 lb gorilla in the room , except of course to mention that no one is talking about it, allow us.

One of the things that constantly has us scratching our heads is that members of the public can take the time to analyze publicly available data with which to evaluate how our budget masters are performing. Consider health and dental insurance premiums. We know that state employees pay between 6 and 10% of the cost of their health insurance premiums. We also know(fact, folks) that state government employees have historically been afforded pretty nice benefits to make up for the gap in income between state jobs and similar jobs in the private sector.

But...school board member and Finance Committee chair Jim McCourt is tired of hearing about state employees. So let's give him something different to hear. SP-EYE reviewed employee contracts from 8 different school districts similar in size to Sun Prairie. We're still searching for those from the other 12 districts similar in size). A little Sunshine Review kudos for Sun Prairie and these 8 school districts that make their employee contracts available on their websites (as it should be, folks). Note: state employee contracts are available on the Office of State Employee Relations website.

Herewith is the comparison of what Sun Prairie Teachers pay for their benefits relative to what the other 8 districts pay. We did the best we could to "normalize" contracts to Sun Prairie as a baseline, and have annotated the data as needed.

Observations:

• Only Middleton-Cross Plains employees pay less of a share for Health Insurance than Sun Prairie employees.
• It seems that the going rate is for employees to pay-on average- 5% of the cost of their health insurance premiums. Sun Prairie is well below that. In fact--in the current contract--employees pay a fixed fee...which only means that the percentage share that employees pay will continue to decrease.
• Dental Insurance benefits remain a force to be reckoned with. For a family plan, these cost nearly 25% of what health insurance premiums are.
• Note that in their last contracts, the state reduce dental benefits--available only through HMO plans--to annual dental exams and minor fillings.

Dear school board...

As you get to thinking about raises for Administrators, Admin Support, and Local 60, you should really require a higher pay-in for benefits. Oh wait...except for Local 60. They are already being beaten like a red-headed stepchild by paying 9% for health insurance and 14.5% for dental!