Other People's Money

The problem with many school districts, including Sun Prairie, is that the district administration (no matter how vehemently they argue to the contrary) find it too easy to spend other people's money. Instead of Tim Culver spending time with the high salaried muckety mucks, we'd love to see him visit a few seniors who are dangerously close to losing their homes.

 We ALL want a good, solid, quality education for the kids of Sun Prairie. And we might all enjoy eating sea bass dinners. But the simple reality is that most of us don't have the means. It is also the seniors who struggle with property tax payments that built this district from the ground up.

 Where's the respect they are due? The district offers a wonderful property tax reduction incentive, but again what Culver and his ilk fail to understand is that many of the folks that could best benefit from this assistance are either disabled in some manner or caring for a spouse who needs full-time assistance. They simply may not be mobile enough to come to the district for so many hours per week to volunteer.

Wisconsin Act 10 Designed to REDUCE Property Taxes
In a recent article in the LaCrosse Tribune, Dale Knapp, research director for the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance, a Madison-based nonpartisan, not-for-profit advocacy organization, projects that,

between 0.5 and 2 percent property-tax increases statewide in the wake of the biennial budget, although the numbers will vary by district.

Less than 2% increases?  Guess Sun Prairie must AGAIN be one of those rare districts that Phil Frei always likes to tell us about.  Only this time, we're the not-so-good rarity.

So...how does Sun Prairie stack up against similarly sized districts?

Oh...and we understand that not everyone can navigate the internet sufficiently to find this information. If you have any doubts regarding the accuracy of this information, please e-mail us at Sp.eye1@gmail.com, and we'd be happy to provide you links to any of the supporting documentation.

Soylent Green May Be People, But PBIS Is Candy

PBIS is all the rage in school districts across the country. No...Sun Prairie didn't just dream this up all by themselves. What, exactly, is PBIS? PBIS stands for Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports. It's an offshoot of the IDEA program (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act). You may see/hear it as SWPBS (School-wide Positive Behavior Supports). In a nutshell, PBIS is a system of behavior modification, with three stages of intervention.

Primary intervention is targeted to all students and is s system designed to clearly identify which behaviors are acceptable and which are not. Exhibiting positive behavior is rewarded in some fashion. In theory, about 80-85% of students respond to this primary level of intervention. The overall target is to develop a system in which positive reinforcements (for "acceptable/desired" behaviors) outnumber negative reinforcements (for unacceptable behaviors) by about 4:1. In this way, kids overwhelmingly see that "being good" is the place to be. You get rewards.

PBIS extends further to the 2nd tier, kids that do not respond well to these primary tactics. These kids represent about 10-15% of the population and are those that potentially are at risk for "failure", or at the very least not realizing their academic potential. This group, however is not in need of individualized attention, but rather is targeted in small groups (a modernized form of "group" therapy). The third tier, which includes about 5-10% of students, covers those students who require individualized attention to develop positive behaviors and squelch those behaviors which are not acceptable.

The Case of The Starlight Mints
This is an example of PBIS in action. We had the occasion to review some e-mail correspondence between two administrators recently. One of which was an upper level administrator at the high school. While we'll be accused of glossing over the details, the simple fact is that during this past school year an administrator happened to visit the high school cafeteria and found that a staff member was handing out "Starlight" mints to high school students as they passed through the lunch line. Noting that such a practice is contraindicative to the district's wellness policy, an inquiry was made. It seems that if the high school students said "please or thank you" while passing through the lunch line, they were rewarded with a Starlight mint for their manners.

OK..let's pause for a minute. On one level, this seems innocuous. But, what are these kids? Our Pavlovian dogs? And does anyone think that you can teach a high school student manners with a mint? Come on, people! These kids are smart enough to parrot a word or phrase to get a treat. Adopting some new learned behavior they are not, as Yoda would say. They want a candy, so they utter the phrase. End of story.

On another level, we need to ask the question, "THIS is the answer from our very well compensated professionals?" Candy? Really!
Aren't we just trading one problem for another?
Sure, getting a candy bar or treat may secure good behavior in the class—or lunch—room, but what are we really teaching kids with this approach? Is candy the only thing we can come up with as a “reward” for good –or expected—behavior?  Doesn't that conflict with nutritional wellness philosophies, not to mention root psychological issues regarding food as a reward system?

It's gone WAY Beyond Mints
Just so it's clear that we're not talking about a few isolated mints, an open records request for a finite period of time revealed the following:

• $1,938 for candy (LOTS of snickers bars.....can you say "peanut allergies???)
• $500 for soda, including $65 for 20 oz. individual bottles)
• $448 for foods of minimal (or non-existant) nutritional value): donuts, Twinkies, PopTarts, Ho-Hos
• $29 for gum. Gum! The scourge of teachers everywhere!
• "Venom" Energy drinks (Really?  Energy drinks?  Like that won't have them bouncing off the wall)
• Over $55 for B.O.S.S. subs (Big Oversized Sub Sandwiches)
• And none of this includes the cost of things like sunscreen, sunblock, alka seltzer, swim suit, pruner

...and these costs are not for an entire year, but just a few months of purchases!
The district really wants to fund some new initiatives, including stipends for "Response to Intervention" (RTI) one-on-one tutoring assistance.  They want to raise your taxes to do it.  Do any of those highly paid educators understand that the $2,000 spent on candy alone over this finite period would pay for 80 hours of RTI assistance???

Like chewin' a little Juicy Fruit, PBIS may be good for the soul, but it has to be done with a non-food based reward system. Obesity is a major problem in this country, and whether you agree or disagree, the facts support that food-based reward systems are only contributing to the problem. From yet another angle, we're buying these "rewards" (candy) with taxpayer dollars. And that is unacceptable. If the district management--our leaders-- insist that the only way to reach these kids is through food, then let them obtain funding from School-Community Organizations (SCOs) or booster clubs. Maybe even the SP Education Foundation will play Santa in bring us a whole bagful of Starlight mints. They sure have taken in a great deal of cash from naming rights for pieces of the high school!


I've been impolite and ornery
My teachers ask me,
“Is something wrong with you”
My mama always told me
I need to say “please” and “thank you”

But PBIS packs quite a punch
It's not difficult to understand
Why I’m only polite at lunch

I do it for the mints…
I do it 'cuz my mouth comes alive
I do it for the rush…
That I get from the Starlight Mints they give us
---with apologies to Smile Empty Soul and  “Bottom of a Bottle”

Who Are You?...And What Have You Done With Caren Diedrich?

At the Finance Committee's budget discussion this past Monday, Caren Diedrich, or someone who looked a lot like Caren Diedrich, suddenly roused the audience.

At issue was the idea, of which Jim McCourt clearly supported, was adjusting the board's budget parameter regarding the tax levy increase ceiling from 3.5% to 3.95%.  [can we just say 4%, people?] The additional increase would allow the district to spend $220,000 on new initiatives favored by the district [currently diversity and response to intervention (tutoring).

Tom Weber cautioned that while these initiatives are worthwhile, we should be able to find money within the existing budget to support them.

Diedrich sat very quietly, listening to several teachers pleading for more initiatives.  Finance chair, Jim McCourt, started out in favor of increasing the tax levy and funding the initiatives.  He even pointed that "there was a fair amount of support at public hearings to do this".Yeah, Jim...but how much of that support was from teachers...or their spouses?  Eventually McCourt came around and discussed finding money within the existing budget.

Diedrich saved up for one of her infamous diatribes:

"So far, I'm hearing a lot about the kids. 
There's never been a time when there were enough resources available to meet all the needs.
The number of parents [and individuals, Caren] without children exceeds the number with children and these people aren't facing the same problems as others.
Some of these people cannot come up with another dime.

I'm not saying that teachers are not strained, but we can't keep going to the well when it's dry.  And it's dry!
If we can find the money within the budget to fund these initiatives...fine.  But 3.5% [levy increase] is my line in the sand."
---Caren Diedrich

Wow!
And it's not even an election year for her!
Could it be that the seniors that got her re-elected have kept her phone ringing off the hook?

These are uncharted waters for Ms. Diedrich.  Historically, she's never seen an initiative she wasn't willing to toss tax dollars at.  Especially one that Tim Culver is pushing.

District Dials Back Desire

The 2011-12 budget is the main agenda item for tomorrow's Finance Committee meeting (6:00pm, City Municipal Bldg).

The Management Team believes that all of the unfunded budget initiatives are very important. At this time, we recommend the first two of the unfunded budget priorities be put in the budget:

1.      Respond proactively to diversity and improve equitable learning opportunities for all students with an action plan funded at $54,000. (Attachment 1)

2.      Provide $165,000 to increase Reading and Math intervention services for struggling elementary level students. (Attachment 2)

The cost of these two initiatives is $219,000. This would require increasing the tax levy to 3.95%

To do this would require modification of the School Board’s Budget Parameter #8. (Attachment 3)

Hmmm...is somebody partially listening?
Now, the next step is for them to give something up to get something....and drop the tax levy below 3.5%

Guarding Against Dropped Toast

More doublespeak from school board member and Finance chair Jim McCourt.

We found it noteworthy that at one point during the July 18th budget hearing, a woman expressed concern that if we fund the $600K initiatives for $2011-12, would that be a recurring expense.

Jim McCourt's response was that (unfortunately) ,

"yes...once something's in the budget, it stays in the budget."

Not 10 minutes later, in response to another question, McCourt said,

"Everything in the budget doesn't necessarily stay in the budget...things do drop out"

Which is it, Jim?????
Do you butter your toast on both sides?  
You know..in case you should drop it.

Who's "WE", Jim?

Slide from the July 18th public hearing on the school district budget:

How can the School Board fund the [$600K] budget initiatives?

n Reduce other areas of the budget, which is not recommended by administration.

n Increase the tax levy to support the budget initiative(s).

We found it very interesting that school board member and Finance Chair Jim McCourt very clearly stated at the July 18th public budget hearing, "

"WE don't think we can reduce other areas of the budget"

Who exactly is "we", Jim?

Were you speaking as if you were part of administration?  Because you're not?

Were you speaking for the Finance Committee?  Because you can't.

Hopefully you weren't speaking for the entire school board, Jim.  Because this issue has never been discussed at the board table.  How would you even know whether a majority of the board feels this way?  Can you say, "walking quorum"?  There...we knew you could!

WE think that you owe the public an explanation.  To whom exactly were you were referring when you said, "WE don't think we can reduce other areas of the budget to fund these initiatives."?

Enquiring minds would like the answer.

Oh...and on behalf of the multitude of senior citizens on fixed incomes (because Social Security has been frozen for 2 years)...you know...the ones that supported this district for many years....need to know why a 3.5% tax levy increase isn't more than enough already, let alone 4.8%

Blurring the Lines?

The scene:  last Monday's public hearing on the 2011-12 school district budget.

At issue: Increasing the tax levy beyond the current school board parameter of 3.5% tax levy increase to fund $600,000 in new educational initiatives.

The cost: We were told "about another 1%" increase to the tax levy (making it a 4.5% increase).

The fact-check:  We have been repeatedly told that each $45,000 of additional spending will raise the tax levy 0.1%.  Did these guys that make up the budget flunk basic math? If the additional increase to the tax levy were to be "1%", that would mean spending only $450,000...right?  You know ...10 times 45 = 450 and 10 times 0.1 = 1.0.  But...they're SEEKING $600,000 of spending!!!  That additional $150,000 will add another 0.33% to the tax levy.  So, let's be 100% above board, gentlemen...funding all those initiatives would raise the tax levy increase to 4.83%!!!!!

The secondary concern:  We sincerely appreciate the impassioned plea from the teacher who spoke in favor of the additional spending.  She spoke well, and she spoke convincingly.  Actually she's better at public speaking than a lot of the usual talking heads.  What deeply concerns us, however, is that she doesn't even live within the Sun Prairie School District!  How nice to put out a plea for spending additional monies when you won't have to bear the burden of the additional property taxes.  More to the point, you may even personally benefit from the move.  We do give her kudos for at acknowledging that she does not live within the district.

The takeaway: Isn't it enough that Troop Culver is quietly operating behind the scenes pushing parents groups (not to mention teachers and administrators) to "flood" the public hearings to speak out in favor of additional spending? Certainly, there are no flies on Timmy C!  He learned from October 2009 that he's gotta get his peeps to outnumber the seniors and other taxpayers who oppose runaway spending.

However, there's a very blurred line when it comes to public hearings on a budget. Those who speak have their comments become part of the record. That record theoretically could in turn influence the school board's decision whether or not to increase spending. That becomes a problem, when those who speak do not live within the school district and therefore are not affected by subsequent tax increases. It is against state statute for such people to vote at a public hearing. Shouldn't that extend to speaking at the meeting? Or even attending the meeting?

If you are a resident of the district, by all means, speak your mind, pro or con. But if you are part of the school district machine--and especially if you do not live in the district-- then you either shouldn't be there, or be part of the administrative panel in order that it's very clear that you have a conflict of interest.

Food for thought:  Does the school board EVER consider, before they vote, what the rest of the school districts are doing?  Read the papers people.  Phil Frei likes to point out that we're in the minority on many things spending-wise.  Well, for 2011-12, we're in the minority of districts that are raising taxes.  And those few that are increasing levies are nowhere near increasing them by 3.5% let alone 4.8+%.    Google "2011-12 Wisconsin school district budgets" and check it out for yourselves.

So...What's the Mill Rate Looking Like?

We could be looking at as much as a $180 increase in taxes on a home assessed at $200K if the school board approves additional $600,000 in spending and equalized values drop 2.5% (as anticipated).  That could set the mill rate at it's highest point over the last 15 years!

What recession!

Scenario                                                 Mill        Cost / $200K  Increase
The current picture with no additional spending and Equalized Value stays flat
Levy up 3.50%    Eq Value up 0.0%     $12.55     $2,510             $ 86


The picture with with no additional spending and Equalized Value drops 2.5%
Levy up 3.50%    Eq Value up -2.5%    $12.87     $2,574            $150


The picture with $600K additional spending and Equalized Value stays flat
Levy up 4.75%    Eq Value up 0.0%      $12.69     $2,538            $114


The picture with $600K additional spending and Equalized Value drops 2.5%
Levy up 4.75%    Eq Value up -2.5%    $13.02     $2,604             $180
Note: The mill rate has not topped $13.00 since the 1996-97 school year!


The picture with with only a 2% tax levy increase and the Equalized value stays flat 
Levy up 2.00%    Eq Value up 0.0%      $12.36     $2,472             $ 48

Innovation Vs. Expenditure...Now There's An Idea!

How much has the Sun Prairie School District wasted...er....spent over the past decade on software or purchased services from some questionably qualified "trainer"? You want money to fund initiatives? How about taking this idea and running with it.

Complete an Open Education Resource Scan - What are you paying for in your district with educational technology? What outcomes have you realized? Is there an open free alternative? Can this resource be shared among multiple users for multiple purposes?
Example: Are you paying for a learning management system and creating your own content? Or, are you using a free engine and wrapping it around content not just for instruction but for professional development as well.

After all...we are one of the most technically competent districts...right? And don't we have the most talented staff? So...how about looking into open source software and inserting our own knowledge to produce training materials? Why don't we let our staff learn from each other? They are not all clones. They all have different skills...why don't we put them to good use? Or is administration afraid that they'd be shown up?

http://www.schoolinfosystem.org/archives/2011/07/school_district_35.php

Sensible? Responsible? Not the Sun Prairie School District

There's a great article in the Wisconsin State Journal today regarding the looming national debt crisis. The parallels here in Sun Prairie are simply uncanny. Here we are facing massive cuts to education in the form of state aid. The governor has declared that, "Wisconsin is broke".

"A family, if they get over-extended ...what they do is, they say, how do we start cutting our monthly costs?
We don't stop sending our kids to college, we don't stop fixing the boiler or the roof that's leaking. We do things in a sensible, responsible way."
---President Barack Obama

What the President is talking about is MAINTAINING.  He's talking about choosing NEEDS over WANTS.  Our school district administration wants to discuss MORE spending tomorrow night. Their own public hearing slide show (slide19) says:

Ok...so we added in the individual costs of each initiative...which the district conveniently left out. "Let's not talk cost...let's just look at the value and not worry about cost, eh?" Do any of you REALLY just go buy something without looking at the price? (Ok...so maybe if you are in the $100K club, that's how you operate). When you go buy a car...do you just write a check for the sticker price plus tax? (please, please, say no) Or do you negotiate...haggle? Do you maybe decide that as much as you'd like to get a Mercedes, you're going to settle for a nice, sensible, reliable, economy car?

So...when a family (or the nation) is struggling, what they do is they cut costs. What does the school district want to do? Keep spending and simply raise your taxes!
Why can't this school district say, "Hey...maybe we could do without that administrator position...after all we managed just fine for a number of months with a substitute for far less cost"?
Why can't the district say, "Hey..maybe our principals' cabinet money is being used too much to stock up on Twinkies and Ho-Hos. Maybe we cut that expense."?

Certainly some of the district's initiatives are worthy of funding. But there's only so much money to go around, and we can't just keep on tapping the taxpayers for every whim. Many average Sun Prairie families (not one of the $100K club) says, "Gee, it would be really nice to spend a couple of days at the Kalahari and enjoy the awesome waterpark, but money is tight, so why don't we just go camping instead?". Or, maybe they're saying, "Ok, let's spend the money and go to the Dells, but in return, there'll be no dining out for the next month". Reasonable people make reasonable compromises. If the district wants to fund some of their desired initiatives, they need to take the taxpayer off the table and give something else up instead.

How come the district was able to (using their words here), "aggressively bid the district’s insurance (worker’s compensation, liability, and property), such that the district will save $150,000", yet they seem incapable of "aggressively" scrutinizing their own internal spending?"

Over the last few years, we've heard these property tax increases likened to "just a couple of less pizzas per month" for the average family. Has anybody actually thought about how many pizzas per month we've done away with over the past 5 years? Did any of us really ever eat that much pizza to begin with?  And what is the long-term increase we've paid?

More to the point...what "bang" did we get for all our bucks?  Well...other than a few palatrial schools? Are our kids any brighter?  Absolutely... if your metric is the honor roll or the number of graduates receiving "high honors".  But what if you look at a less skewed metric...like...say...WKCE scores relative to districts our size?  How about National Merit Scholars (or scholarships) relative to other districts our size?  How about grades in college relative to grades in high school?  Is SPASD really juicing our kids' brain cells?  Or are they just juicing the GPA?

Just sayin...

Monday July 18th Agenda: Attend Public Hearing on the Schools Budget

Note:  The district wants to spend more money and wants to exceed the school board's budget parameter of having the tax levy increase not exceed 3.5%.  Of course, they don't want to give anything up to accomplish this, they just want to raise property taxes.  


The Sun Prairie School Board Finance Committee will hold another Public Hearing on the proposed budget on Monday, July 18, at 7 pm at the School District Office (501 S. Bird St.).  We were pleased to see more than 40 community members at the June public hearing and hope even more will be able to attend on July 18th. Your input is very important to the budget process and the future of Sun Prairie's schools!
 
Recent developments since the last public hearing include:

1.  The State of Wisconsin released it's first state aid estimate for our school district.  Unfortunately, Sun Prairie's state aid is projected to decrease by 6.2%, which represents an additional $730,000 loss in aid than was discussed at the June public hearing.

2.  The total loss in state aid from 2010-2011 to this year will be over $2 million.  We had expected and planned for a loss in aid of $1,300,000, but did not expect to lose the additional $730,000.

3.  The School Board will be discussing options to address the loss of state aid.
 
More information is available on the district website.  Link is:  
http://www.sunprairie.k12.wi.us/budget_planning_2011_12.cfm#d159570

The Discussions We Will and Won't Have

It's kind of a moot point now that the state aid projections have been released, but as a lesson for the future, we still think the District and Board need to get on the same page.

The discussions we no longer need to have.

The School Board approved spending $350,000 of fund balance.
Partial credit.  Absolutely, the board voted that.  BUT...what they leave out is that the board made that vote with the express purpose of reducing the tax levy.  NOT as a placeholder to spend additional money.  We suppose in some warped thinking pattern, one could rationalize that since (in the district's eyes) the $350,000 was still earmarked for spending, as if the school board's action was simply a means to justify the district's end to spend $350K more.  In that case, using the money from fund balance actually ends up serving to reduce the levy which could have been.  But that thinking is seriously messed up.  For $120,000+ per year in salary, we expect more pragmatic, fiscally sound, thinking.  Shoulda...coulda...wouldas have no place in budgeting.

The school board removed $75,000 [from the budget] for the Human Resources & Recruitment Specialist.
Yep...they did. But what part of "remove" don't you people understand.  A visit to Webster will tell you that "remove" means to eliminate, to take away.  And...oh most highly paid ones....if something is removed, it's not there to be spent.

The School Board reduced the Building and Grounds budget by $150,000+.
Again with the Language Arts problems.  Now we see why SPASD will never hit the 90% Proficient/Advanced mark on the Language Arts portion of the WKCE.  Hello!  McFly!  If the budget is reduced, then THAT money is no longer there either.  And how can something not there be unallocated.  You've heard of the un-cola?  This is like un-money.

The district will save $150,000 on insurance (worker’s compensation, liability,& property).
We'll give 'em partial credit on this one too.  Yes, it is indeed an awesome thing that the district negotiated this savings. And because they did, we think this is the kind of money that COULD be available to support additional budget initiatives.

The parallel here is in your own household budgets.  If you budget for monthly gasoline costs based on a $3.75/gallon rate and the cost of gas drops to $3.00/gallon (yeah...right) then the difference in cost is additional money for which you budgeted (and for which one assumes you have the revenue).  Therefore you could instead use the savings to take your significant other out to a fancy restaurant....(but probably skip the $350 bottle of "Ryan" wine).  The difference here, folks, is that the district gets HALF its revenue from the taxpayers.  So...does spending this $150K come at a cost to the taxpayers?  Or should it be up to the taxpayers to decide whether it gets spent, or put back into the taxpayers' pockets?   See the problem?


Gone, Baby, Gone
This slide is great.  This is where the District finally sees that there is no unallocated money.  Granted, they still don't understand that there was never any money to be available to be unallocated....but at least they understand that there is no money now.

The discussion we now need to have

We have 3.5%....Do We Hear 4.7%?
This energizer bunny of a district just will not quit!
So, we have "no more unallocated money"...
The district would like to add one or more initiatives, the total tab for which is $$600,000...
They don't think they should have to cut anything...
...and so the only other option is to change the school board's budget parameter of a tax levy increase not to exceed 3.5%.  If the board votes to fund all of these initiatives, that's a 37.5% increase in the tax levy we've discussed thus far.  The tax levy increase would rise to 4.7% (or more).

And this when other districts are REDUCING the tax levy from 2010-11 levels.
WTF! 

32 More Local Scholarship Winners; Zip for Sun Prairie

The nerve of these people!
Don't they know that 1 in 4 of our students graduates with high honors?
Someone needs to investigate the bias.

Thirty-two area students are among 112 Wisconsin students and nearly 4,800 students nationwide who received National Merit Scholarships from U.S. colleges and universities this year.

In Dane County the recipients were from 
Edgewood High: 2 
Madison East: 3
Madison Memorial: 1
Madison West: 6
Madison Shabazz:1
Marshall High: 1
Middleton High: 4
Stoughton High: 2
Verona High: 3
Waunakee High: 1
Home Schooled: 3 (all of Madison)


Verona and Middleton--schools roughly our size--had 3 and 4 respectively...but none from Sun Prairie.


http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/education/local_schools/article_35690b9e-ac24-11e0-84dd-001cc4c002e0.html

The Little District That Could? Or Not?

We've all heard how school districts across the state are reeling from Gov. Scott Walker's idea of a budget.  We all heard an 8.4% cut to state aid.  Yet the average turned out to be -9.1%, or 8.3% higher than projected.  Worse still, the median (a more accurate figure given the size and spread of the dataset) slashing was 10.13%, a 20% greater reduction than projected.

Then there was Kaukauna, the little school district that could.  On June 30th (actually from a late April presentation), the district released a budget projection that declared to the entire state that Walker's budget was so awesome that they actually would have a surplus!  They vowed to REDUCE class sizes, and hire new teachers.  Wow!  Plan Walker Works!  Right????

It's All-Star time in the world of Major League Baseball...what a fitting time to look at Gov, Walker's batting average.  If one were to count Kaukauna as the singular success among 424 school districts, that would translate into a batting average of 0.002.  Or a solitary base hit in a season's worth of at-bats (424).  That's not even Pee Wee League, folks.

"In the Kaukauna schools, the world is not only not falling apart -- it's getting better."--Byron York, The Examiner's chief political correspondent

And then, on Friday July 1, the DPI general aid estimates were released, and Kaukuna's delusions of grandeur appear to have been squashed like the other 423 school districts.

• $1,905,609 is the projected loss in the state revenue limit formula
funding from the proposed state budget ($527 per pupil decrease)  

---Kaukauna budget presentation 

Suddenly 2,757,698 is the ACTUAL estimated reduction in general aid based on DPI's July 1st data

Which means an additional $852,089 reduction.
Ruh, Roh, Shaggy!
Maybe the cheap tinting has started to flake off of those rose-colored glasses of yours.
It would seem that the boasted $1.5M in surplus was quickly reduced to $650K.

One also has to consider how Kaukauna arrived at it's wonderful position.  After all, they were using the identical set of tools that Walker so graciously provided to all the other school districts.  What did they do OTHER than require employees to pay 5.8% of their retirement and 12.8% of health insurance premiums?   Well...if you look at their budget document, they did a number of things that are responsible for $1.5M in savings.  Hmmm....that's exactly what they said they had as a surplus!

• Buildings and Grounds Cost savings – $275,445 (reduce maintenance budget 50%, reduce overtime 60%, eliminate Custodial Supervisor position, eliminate summer maintenance workers)
• Information Technology Cost Savings –  $248,064 (45% budget cut, reduce staff)
• Other District Operations Cost Savings –  $127,500 (payroll processing changes, reduce contracted services, cut $100K post-retirement benefit payment)
• Co-curricular Activities Cost Savings – $43,529 (eliminate some clubs, reduce budgets, reduce travel)
• Student Transportation Cost Savings –  $180,000 (change to 2-mile limit for busing)
• Administrative Assistants Cost Savings – $95,121  cut one FTE, reduced hours for others)
• Modified 4K Program Cost Savings –  $306,889 (All day, every other day, every other Friday program for 2011-12)  4 year olds ALL DAY?  Right!  That'll work!
• Close 1 Elementary School Cost Savings –  $253,066

They've cut and slashed where other have not ventured...NOW where are they going to come up with the unanticipated $850K hit?

All that and a tax increase too!
The best part about Kaukauna's "success" is that they are planning on a tax INCREASE!
That's right...a $400K increase to the tax levy which translates to a 22% increase in the mill rate ($0.20, or $40 on a $200K home...but all that is based on a 0% growth in equalized value)

Something to write home about?  We don't think so.  A victory?  Not a chance.
_____________________________________
Read more :

http://appletonhub.postcrescent.com/article/20110629/APC0101/110629072/Kaukauna-Area-School-District-projects-1-5-million-surplus-after-contract-changes-health-care-retirement-savings

http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2011/06/union-curbs-rescue-wisconsin-school-district

Quietly On the Radar - 8th Elementary School

You may have missed this one..it was discussed briefly at the May 23 school board meeting as an "infomational" item


Included in the May 16th meeting of the FTT Committee was an agenda entitled, "Planning for Elementary 8 Timeline".  The Situation Report included the following timeline.


Sept to Dec. 2011- - - - Review enrollment projections
                            - - - - Verify capacities of schools
                             - - - - Review if school still needed in 2015
2012 - - - - - - - - - - Evaluate and select site
March 2012 - - - - -School Board Policy approved on changing boundaries process
January 2013 - - - -Select Architect
March 2013 - - - - -Concept Design
November 2013 - - Referendum (TBD, not an election date in 2013)
December 2013 - -Select Contractor
February 2014- - - Final Design
March 2014 - - - - - Construction
Jan. – Feb. 2015- -School Board approves boundary change.
September 2015 – School Opens


RECOMMENDATION:
Management Team approves the following timeline of milestones for the 8th elementary school.


Hello!  See anything missing here?
Can anyone say, "Are there alternatives to building another school"?
And if we really need an 8th elementary school, are we stuck with the expensive blueprints used for Horizon and Creekside?
How about something more toned down?  How about establishing a maximum cost before we select an architect?
Could we (gasp) build something more conservative?
We WILL be actually bidding that out this time, won't we?

All good questions...

Gone, Baby, Gone

How did Sun Prairie fare with respect to the eagerly anticipated July 1 DPI general aid estimates?
Let's answer that question with another question:  How accurate/reliable has the quality of data and projections from the district been?
Answer that question, and you have your answer to the first question

Of course, if you've been stranded in Siberia for the last 6-12 months, let us just give you the answer right between the eyes.
In their Traveling PowerPoint Budget Show, Jim McCourt and Phil Frei have told us that their ACME crystal ball projected that we'd see a 4% reduction in our state aid.
Survey says: * buzzer sound *   a 6.25% reduction.

What does a 6.25% reduction (instead of 4.0%)  in state aid mean?
A unanticipated revenue loss of $731,650

Remember that "unallocated" $725,000 in the budget?  Gone, Baby, Gone
Remember that "wish list" of $600,000 in additional spending for which the $725,000 was earmarked?
Gone, Baby, Gone.

And THIS is why the district should have postponed it's June 16th budget hearing until AFTER this information was received.  Now they will have to scramble to try to spin this mess for the July 18th budget hearing.

We really need to get better, more reliable, more accurate data and projections out of the district office.  We spend a lot of taxpayer dollars on salaries. In theory, those expenses should net us better information than we are receiving.

State Aid Cuts Out; Deeper than Expected

Yesterday the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) released its estimate of general aids to school districts.  Of course, the disclaimer on this has to be that these estimates are based on information available as of July 1, 2011, and are subject to change.

   DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION

11-12 JULY 1 ESTIMATE VS. 10-11 OCT 15 AID CALCULATION

                                                TOTAL GENERAL AID ESTIMATE
                                                                                       
                                                13    DISTRICTS THAT INCREASE             1,073,642
                                               410    DISTRICTS THAT DECREASE          -399,800,040
                                                 1    DISTRICTS WITH NO CHANGE                    0
                                                                                  =================
                                                                                                                    -398,726,39
Read them and weep.

Recall that Gov. Walker's budget called for an 8.4% decrease to school funding.
These data reflect an average decrease of 9.1%.
For a dataset this large, and with this variability, the median is a better value to focus on than the mean (average).  For the 424 school districts, the median decrease in state aid is 10.13%.  In fact 230 out of the 424 districts received a cut of exactly 10.13%.

73% of districts had their state aid slashed by MORE than the average.

Is Walker's plan really working??

Greed: First DeForest Administrators; Now Milwaukee Teachers

Check this out!
From the people that demanded their Viagra at a cost to the taxpayers of $1M, now comes a refusal to capitulate to what most other teachers' unions have already accepted.  The cost?  The jobs of as many as 354 of their own.  Yes, Virginia...Milwaukee teachers apparently do eat their own.

Education Action Group: Milwaukee school board and teachers union – not the state – to blame for 354 teacher layoffs

Seven months after painting itself into a financial corner, Milwaukee Public Schools did the inevitable yesterday and laid off 354 teachers and 165 staff members.
    The layoffs come after teachers union members made it abundantly clear they had no interest in helping alleviate the district’s financial woes by agreeing to contribute 5.8 percent to their own pension plans, a move that would have allowed 200 teachers to remain employed, according to CNN.
    “We are not willing to negotiate,” MTEA President Mike Langyel recently told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. “We have concluded bargaining. We are willing to work with the school board to get proper funding from Madison.”
    Translation: We got ours, so tough luck to the students as well as the younger teachers who will lose their jobs.
    In addition to the huge number of teacher layoffs, MPS said that students will have to make do with old textbooks and larger class sizes. We’ll wager that students will also have fewer academic offerings from which to choose.

Certainly, the school board was foolish to offer a 4-year contract when the smell of wholesale change was wafting through the air.  No one was offering lengthy contracts.  But now is the time to sacrifice for others, to protect your brethren.  We wonder how interested these young teachers, who lost their jobs, will be in maintaining their union status.  Walker may have delivered a crushing blow to unions, but the old guard of MTEA have themselves delivered what may be a finishing blow to the union.  Remember, folks...Walker's law requires unions to re-certify annually...or be gone.

 Yes...things are tough.  NO ONE wanted to accept these cuts disguised as  increased payroll deductions. Our own Sun Prairie teachers didn't like it either.  But they accepted their Governor Walker imposed fate and took the high road.  Our teachers understand that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.  They understand that Walker has his way...for now anyway.