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

Lawyerin' Up!

A very simple, yet obviously several hundred thousand dollar question was asked by a community resident last night at the 2nd budget hearing.

Question: Can you tell us what the district used as a percentage in the budget for potential raises for administration and Local 60?

Answer: Phil Frei and Jim McCourt paused, looked at each other, and then jointly said, "Our legal Counsel has advised us not to share that specific information."

WTF?

Excuse us...but you want us to VOTE on the tax levy which results from this budget but you're not willing to tell us how much you might potentially dole out in raises?

We don't freakin' think so.

Let's get past the fact that what you said was legal counsel "advised" you...not instructed you...not mandated. It was advice. You can take it or leave it. Obviously this is kind of a game of poker where the district is afraid to "share" what it put in the budget as a "placeholder" because it represents a conservation/high, "worst case" percentage to which they would agree. We get it...you don't want Local 60 or the administrators to feel entitled to exactly the amount that you factored into the budget. So...why don't you say THAT instead of that lame, "our lawyer says we shouldn't tell" line.

But, on the other hand, we are the shareholders of this "company", and we have a RIGHT to know how you plan to spend our money. And that RIGHT trumps your "advice from legal counsel".

Suckering in the Electors?

So ...is the game here to get the electors to pass your tax levy with some 3 or 4% raise craftily hidden within the budget (dum dee dum...let's see...artificially inflate this line here and that line there...) and then...once it's passed in October, then you can dole out fat 3-4% raise to your Administrator pets and screw Local 60? And all the while laughing, "Ha Ha...we got 'em to approve the tax levy!".

This school board continues to find new ways to piss off the public. They must WANT to see the tax levy given a Mr. T style mohawk again this year.

What's so silly

What's REALLY silly is that it doesn't take all that many brain cells to "tease" out of the salary lines what was factored in for raises. What may be a little more difficult is identifying the slush money in the budget that could be privately earmarked for raises. So don't look fo\olish. It pains us as much as it must pain you. Just answer the question.

What? School Board members and administration...you don't like the insinuations here?

Tell you what. Be above board. Answer the public's questions with the truth, the WHOLE truth, and NOTHING BUT the truth. And maybe you might get treated differently.

Treat us like mushrooms...and you most definitely better get your Worry Dolls out come October 11th.

Hrodey Grievance Hearing Tomorrow

Agenda for

Thursday, June 10, 2010

SPECIAL SCHOOL BOARD MEETING (Closed)(Revised)

6:30 p.m. at the District Office (Room 220),

501 S. Bird St., Sun Prairie.

President: John Whalen

1. Opening Items
..... 1.01 Call to Order, Roll Call, Affirmation of Public Notice

2. Closed Session
.....2.01 Go into closed session for the purpose of 1) conducting expulsion hearing(s) and/or deliberating in regard to the matter; and 2) conferring with legal counsel regarding a Level III SPEA grievance, followed by hearing and deciding said grievance [Wis. Stats. 120.13(1)(c), 19.82(1) and 19.85(1)(a), (c), (e), (f), and (g)].
3. Discussion/Business Item
.....3.01 Conduct expulsion hearing(s)
.....3.02 Deliberation and action on expulsion(s)
.....3.03 Conduct Grievance Hearing
.....3.04 Deliberation and action on grievance
4. Reconvene in open session
.....4.01 Action from closed session, if appropriate
5. Adjournment
..... 5.01 Adjourn the meeting
.................................................................

Note the difference from the earlier public notice issued 6-3-10:

L E G A L N O T I C E

Agenda for

Thursday, June 10, 2010

SPECIAL SCHOOL BOARD MEETING (Closed), 6:30 p.m. at the District Office (Room 220), 501 S. Bird St., Sun Prairie. President: John Whalen

1. Opening Items

1.01 Call to Order, Roll Call, Affirmation of Public Notice

2. Closed Session

2.01 Go into closed session for the purpose of conducting expulsion hearing(s) and/or deliberating in regard to the matter [Wis. Stats. 120.13(1)(c) and 19.85(1)(a), (f), and (g)].

3. Discussion/Business Item

3.01 Conduct expulsion hearing(s)

3.02 Deliberation and action on expulsion(s)

4. Adjournment

4.01 Adjourn the meeting

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

Notice anything different? Why the two notices? Colonel?

Gee...it wouldn't have ANYTHING to do with the fact that FINALLY the board's feet are going to be held to the fire with respect to complying with Open Meetings Laws

I'll See Your Little Blue Scoops and Raise the Ante

We couldn't sleep in the heat, so we offer this tasty tidbit. It came in smokin' hot over the wires just begging to be posted. Another reader writes about their perspective recent public hearing on the proposed budget. Enjoy...

BIG Blue Scoops
There is an item that a couple people touched on at the hearing, but nobody really wants to go there. I am talking about health and dental benefits and premiums.

For those that don't know the district has an extremely nice benefit package, that most people would love to be on. In the next years budget, the total cost of these two items is approximately $9 million dollars (thats a whopping 12.5% of the budget just for those premiums). [SP-EYE note: that might be a little low. The bill for April was $870,00 for health insurance and $98,000 for dental. Do the math, people] Those of us in the real word either pay for our coverage, if it can be afforded, or we usually pay a portion of the premium and our employer picks up the rest. It is not uncommon to pay 10% or more of that premium.

So, if all employee groups paid 10% of the premium, we would be saving $900K / year, and that is a permanent savings. Now the actual amount would be less than that because the employees already pay some of the health premium (none of the dental). For example, L60 pays 9% (why do they always get the sharp stick), admin and admin support each pay 4%, and teachers pay ....... wait for it......, yes, a fixed $100 / year!! [SP-EYE Note: our copy of the current contract states that the total amount paid is either $200 or $400 per year for a family...the lower amount being paid if the employee agrees to go through a --taxpayer funded---"Health Risk Assessment. Similar, annual out of pocket for a single employee is $75 or $150 ] Yes, in the last contract, they got 3.8% raise two years in a row and did not have to give anything up, great negotiating.

So, why not put a stake in the ground, and say that all groups WILL pay 10% starting in their next contract year, not negotiable, and start your contract negotiation from there? Of course the McCourts and Shimeks of the world will immediately say that they can not do that because we will lose in arbitration, [SP-EYE note: Fear not, citizen! For at least Mr.Shimek has to abstain from any employee contractually related votes because his wife is a district employee.] but they really need to open their eyes to what is going on around them.

There is another little anomaly that this would help get rid of as well. Today, if teachers choose not to be in the plan (i.e. say their spouse has a plan with another employer), we pay them! [SP-EYE: the reader i correct. We PAY employees $300/month---$3,600/yr to NOT take the health insurance] I don't know how many of those people there are, but this practice has to stop. The logic is that if it is free (or really low cost), then they will just sign up if we do not incent them to not sign up. If they have to pay for the benefit, problem solved.

At the end of day, no one wants anything taken away, but the above is reasonable, and it would fund most of the new teachers at the new buildings this year.

---Citizen That Would Rather Keep Their Two Pizzas A Month

From 2 Large Pizzas to Little Blue Scoops

Last night's public hearing on the budget had it's ups and downs. In the credit column, about 40 or so people turned out (normally we can count the attendees on one hand). There was also some good discussion and comments. In the debit column, we have the microphones that weren't working well (nothing new there!) and nearly indecipherable handouts of the budget information slide show.

Two commenters in particular stood out, because they provided diametrically opposed views on the school district budget. Our very own Tale of Two Cities.

The first young woman spoke excitedly about all the wonderful things that the school district has to offer our children. In fact, she gushed so much, the Vegas odds have her heavily favored to either be a district employee, a spouse of a district employee, or someone who's annual income is the the Culver zone. She ended her comments by stating that the proposed property tax increase, a mill rate of about $12.00 , represents a monthly cost of $13 to $15 for a $200,000 home. She liked that to having to her family having to forgo 2 large pizzas per month. And she can live with that.

Then the other shoe dropped. Another woman got up and offered her comments. We didn't catch every word, but it sounded like her message was that her salary had been cut by 15%, health care benefits were reduced, and remaining staff were forced to take one unpaid furlough day every month. She was thankful she had a job.

She also recognized the value of education offered by the school district but shared a little anecdote. If we captured this correctly, it seems that a company known for making cocoa had established a trademark of sorts by including a "little blue scoop" inside the container that was sized to prepare the perfect cup of cocoa. When times were tough,m the company sought ways of cutting costs. One such idea was to cease including the little blue scoop. It seems the little blue scoop--as nice as it was-- was equivalent to a tablespoon which can be founded in virtually every household. Said company was able to weather the economic crisis by making this small cut in its costs. The woman challenged the school district to seek out and eliminate its own "little blue scoops".

We're pretty confidant this unidentified woman is not a school district employee. Nor is her household income in the Culverosphere. She makes do by pinching pennies where she can.

Which one is right?
So...who's right? The woman who insists the proposed tax increase is only "2 large pizzas per month"? Or the woman who challenged the district to find its own little blue scoops?

Ha! It's a trick question! They both are, of course. Each spoke quite candidly about the world they live in...and we sincerely appreciate their coming forward an d offering comments. They just inhabit two very different economical worlds. They both value the education provided by the district. One has enough disposable income such that doing without 2 large pizzas per month is very "doable". For the other, life has become a more prolonged struggle to do things more efficiently, making do with less.

Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics, Part 2.
We are endlessly amused at how the district attempts to present property tax increases in the most positive light. With the pool referendum it was a battle cry of "For only 6 of your favorite coffee drinks...".

We're a little confused by the math this go around however (must be more of that :"new" math). What we learned last night in consecutive slides doesn't seem to add up.

Slide 1: We were told that the projected mill rate (assuming 1% increase in Equalized Value) would be $12.00.
Do the math, folks, for a 200,000 home, that translates to 200 x $12.00 or a $240 increase to the property tax bill of a home assessed at $200,000.

Slide 2. Then we were told that the increase translates to $12.67 per month on a $200K home.
Wait! $12.67 x 12 months (there's still 12 months in a year, right? They didn't mess with that with "new" math...did they?). That comes to $152.04. What happened to the rest of the $240?

Well...see...that's where the statistics comes in. Or...as we said in school...the art of making numbers look like you want them to look. The district isn't wrong...they just chose to show a slice of the pie. A slice that made the pie taste more like apple pie than fruitcake, if you will.

How the District got their numbers of "Estimated Monthly Property Tax Increase"
Here's the deal. What the district was trying to convey with their slide was that LAST year, the mill rate was $11.24. THIS year (2010-11) the mill rate is PROJECTED to be $12.00. The difference between the two mill rates is $0.76. Then, if you multiply 76 cents (per $1000 of assessed value) x 200 you arrive at the district figure of $152. And $152 divided by 12 months is $12.67...,,,or the cost of two medium Pizza Hut or Domino's pizzas (if you stiff the delivery guy).

Why stop there?
Hell...$12.67 per month translates to about 43 cents per DAY! So...is funding the school district budget worth a little more than half the cost of your daily newspaper?

You can twist numbers anyway you like...but at the end of the day, a $200,000 home is going to pay $2,400 in property taxes JUST FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. And you can add in another $2,000--at least--for the city portion, MATC, and Dane County.

Compare that to a certain home we're aware of on Cape Cod...yeah...THAT Cape Cod....right across the road from the water. It's assessed at $550K, and the TOTAL property taxes are only $3,900. That's a mill rate of about $7.10.

And their test scores are better, too.
93% proficient in Language Arts, 88% in Math. Now of course some will cry, "The tests aren't the same!". And they're not. But you get the point. Massachusetts and Wisconsin tend to be mirror states.

You decide...is everything roses, and we should cut down on our pizza and just smell the District roses? Or does the district (as managed by the school board) need to dig a little deeper and find some of thoise "little blue scoops"?

People are still hurting. Well... at least those whose incomes are well outside the Culverosphere. Yes, the school district offers some wonderful things. But that's chiefly due to the teachers and support staff.

Same Old Story...

Funny how many Aerosmith song titles seem eerily appropriate when describing the school district and its budget process.

Same Old Story (Same Old Song and Dance)
Train Kept A Rollin'
S.O.S (Too Bad)
Cryin'
Crazy
Just Push Play

There's a million of em'. All great classic rock n' roll tuneage. Too bad we can't say the same for the district budget process.

So here we are...admittedly earlier than last year's August 13th date for a public hearing on the budget....but then again, we have no significant contract issues this year.

More importantly, it's T Minus 48 hours till the budget hearing and there are NO BUDGET MATERIALS for the community to review prior to the meeting. And who's to say there WILL be anything until just prior to...or even at....the meeting.

Rewind to last year (which was itself a repeat of the prior year):

Public Hearing on the Budget this Week (Aug 9, 2009)
08/12/2009 SPECIAL FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING 7:00 p.m., at the District Office, Yep....at long last there will be a public hearing on the budget. However,...just like last year...there's no information for you to review. Can you say "SHENANIGANS"? What a great game plan: if the district doesn't make all these numbers available to the public until just before the meeting, then there's no way the public can make enough sense of them to formulate an opinion. Therefore, the District can march ahead and do what they want and say, "Well, we held a public hearing and received no comments".


How is the community supposed to provide input on the budget if they don't have anytime to REVIEW the budget?

Or is it that we just talk the talk but refuse to walk the walk?

Is it too much to ask to give the community information and time to digest it and formulate questions? [We guess it must be]. How would the school board like it if their board packets weren't made available until the day before a board meeting. Scratch that....we know at least some of them wouldn't care because it's clear they don't read them beforehand anyway.

And while we're at it....how about a change in format? How about we truly hold a HEARING....you know which implies that the community talks and the Finance Committee listens (hears)?

Ahhh...never mind, as that other Aerosmith tune goes,
DREAM ON.

[P.S. we bet a buck that after they read this, information gets posted to the website by noon tomorrow]

Running With It (With Scissors?)

A long time ago in...well...right here in Sunny Prairie, Chris Mertes and the STAR endorsed Jim McCourt for school board because..

Jim McCourt’s background as a small business owner ...and his statements about bringing decorum back to the board...will be welcome at the board table.
---Sun Prairie STAR editorial 3-24-07

We're not certain which dictionary Editor Mertes uses, but our scan of a number of dictionaries indicates that that hallowed term, "decorum", means

........propriety (The quality of being proper; appropriateness), esp in behaviour or conduct

In most social circles, "appropriate behavior" would mean checking with a committee to ensure that a date works for them before announcing it, right?

But that didn't happen.

We learned this week that mass distribution e-mails were sent out to the "Parent Leadership Council" and then to all district staff, informing them that the school board's "Finance Committee had a scheduled a public hearing on the 2010-11 budget for Thursday May 20, 2010 at the Performing Arts Center in the new high school.

Sadly, they forgot to inform the members of the Finance Commitee. Well...except chair Jim McCourt. He knew.

In fact, when asked to explain the "slight", McCourt said,
" We discussed having it the same date as the parent group meeting and we also discussed having at the PAC at the new high school. When I was given that information I told Phil to run with it. "

Yes, the committee discussed "involving" the parent groups (PLC)--as well as other citizen groups. And the committe discussed holding ONE (of several) meetings at the PAC.

But the committee did not set a date.

And proper etiquette is to check with those that will be involved with a meeting FIRST to ensure that they can make a particular date/time.

The big question is: if members of the PLC and district staff had not shared these e-mails with SP-EYE...would Finance Committee members (other than McCourt, and perhaps other board members Shimek and Diedrich) have ever know about the budget hearing? One would assume that MAYBE committee members would have been told at this Monday's regular Finance Committee meeting. But they should have been asked.

What we find interesting

• The meeting did not appear on BoardDocs until evening on Wednesday May 5...and still only says, "Finance Committee", with no reference to it being a public hearing on the budget.



• Mass e-mails were sent to the "Parent Leadership Council (PLC)" and all district staff, but no such e-mail was sent to the district "Key Communicators" list.



• No notice was posted in the STAR



• No notice was posted on the school district website (at least as of this morning)



• Recall that Mr. McCourt is also the chair--at least as of now--of the Community Engagement Committee. Is this really engaging the community?



• How interesting the line used in both district e-mails, " If the levy doesn't pass at the annual meeting in October, what does that mean for our schools and our students?" Is this a hearing about the budget, or advance planning to ensure whatever levy the district wants gets passed? Because those are two very separate and distinct issues.



• Why do the e-mails state that "the Finance Committee" scheduled the meeting, when it was McCourt and Phil Frei that scheduled the meeting.

So...is the idea to engage ALL of the public?

Or is it to rally certain troops to attend the annual meeting in force with the intent of never again allowing the community to do what they did last fall (vote to reduce the tax levy by $2M)

The question needs to be asked.
And it seems as if battle lines are being drawn....

Stay tuned.