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
Showing posts with label little blue scoops. Show all posts
Showing posts with label little blue scoops. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Friday, May 21, 2010
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
