This weeks meeting was the best ever! We had our very own attendace bonus! I'd like to see that kind of turnout for every important issue we discuss. It was standing room only. Everyone wanted to hear what the Plan for Excellence committee was submitting as their recommendations for next year. I was so happy to see around 75 people show up to see the presentation. It doesn’t surprise me. Transportation, configuration, boundaries, bell times, increasing instruction time, all day kindergarten, hiring a communication specialist, and many, many other important issues were discussed. Much to my surprise the only citizen comment made regarding these recommendations came from a high school student. He made the point that it was stated several times at public dialogues that the high school bell times would remain unchanged. But it turns out the times were changed. Starting next year the recommendations are as follows:
Elementary 8:45- 3:20
Middle School 7:55- 2:50
High School 7:45- 2:40
You think you have middle and high school tardiness and elementary kids arriving way too early now? Just wait ‘til these times kick in! Madam Kellie predicts many high school kids will be hungry and paying the consequences of severe tardy overages. As you can imagine Mr. High School was not happy. He made some excellent points and I hope his input will be considered, as he made some very good points.
I have been waiting for several weeks for the numbers on the amount of district students we bus. I don't have them yet but I suspect we are disrupting the schedules of a large portion of the non bussing populace to make it convenient for about 500 people. One offering of a solution was to add more kids to bussing! It’s like these people have never heard of cutting back! It was readily admitted to me that we could eliminate a few busses if we did zoned neighborhood pickups. Yes that means putting your elementary Johnny on the bus with your middle school Jane. And like I said before and cannot say enough: Your start and end times can be closer, therefore not inconveniencing the much larger majority of driving and working parents.
The communications specialist is another biggy that no one commented on. We have fewer and fewer students each year yet we have new and improved reasons for continuing to add administrators. The job description here can be done on a part time contracted consultant basis. Biggest bonus is… WE WOULDN’T HAVE TO PAY BENEFITS. Benefits are the only area on our district profile report where we are above the state and similar district averages in expenditures. Benefits are going to put us back in the same position we were in two years ago if we are not careful. We faced a 42% increase a few months ago in premiums and administrative costs, but our dear CFO negotiated it down to a mere 28.8%. Now I’m no math whiz but it smells like more money from the taxpayer to me. I’d say we should consider contracting out any services that we possibly can just to avoid paying benefits and fringe.
Of course these are just my sensible opinions. I will fully disclose that I am completely biased because they are after all my opinions. But I have the unique gift of looking at things from all perspectives. If we are “celebrating” neighborhood schools, then start treating them as neighborhood schools. Do we really need to bus kids 8 blocks? I’m sorry but prepare yourselves because I’m gonna say it- We have a lot of little chunky monkeys that need to walk more, not less. I have not received one phone call, E-mail, or letter in support of the changes. The new proposal would put my kids on a bus and save me gas. But the larger portion of our population would be adversely affected by the time changes being considered to accommodate bussing. It’s not worth it financially or aggravationally. Yes I made that word up. I do that sometimes when it is needed. Somebody else made up all the other words we use. Why shouldn’t I get to add one to Websters?
Friday, May 18, 2007
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
Levies for Dummies
Let’s talk about levies. I never cease to be amazed at the number of people who are clueless about how they work. For those of you who get it, bear with me or skip this blog.
First you need to know a levy can expire or be continuing. A continuing levy never expires. The only way we can stop paying on a continuing levy is to put it back on the ballot for voter removal. I don’t know of any school district willing to do this, so obviously a regular citizen would have to take it upon him or herself to do it. A pretty daunting task for Joe Schmoe. Needless to say it rarely if ever happens. Next we have expiring levies. They are put on the ballot for approval with a set amount of years. Usually 5 years. All CF levies are either continuing (3) or expiring 5 year (3). We also have one, 20-year bond issue passed in 1998 due to expire in 2017.
Now it gets hairy. I am going to use the last new levy CF passed as my example. In May of 2005 the voters of CF passed a 7.9 mill levy. We now find ourselves in May of 2007 and are actually paying 7.3 mills. Huh? See back in 1976 the State of Ohio passed a law that said the dollar amount passed at the time of a school levy will stay that dollar amount. So forget about those confusing mills for a minute. Think of it this way. If a new levy passes today, and because of the value of your home, your actual new tax amount is $250 per year. Next year your home value rises (hopefully) but you still pay $250. After 5 years you are still paying $250 on the levy but your home value, it is assumable has gone up. Now one of many things can happen. There is simple, confusing and confusinger. The district can let the levy expire. Simple. Hah, fat chance! They can ask for a renewal. A renewal will simply keep your rate at that $250 per year. You’re just renewing what you’re already paying. They always back this one up with the familiar “it’s not a new tax” mantra. But really it is a new tax because I voted for a 5 year expiring tax. What they really should say is “we didn’t ask for a large enough or long enough tax last time.” The other common thing districts ask for is a replacement levy. A replacement levy should really be called a restorative levy. Now the amount you pay goes up. The county takes a look at the current value of your house. We already know it has gone up in value over the last 5 years. So now your $250 is $325.
Now I don’t want you to think these are the only things a district can do. There are many variations of the above that can happen that I will cover in “Levies for Dummies part 2”.
A quick myth I want to cover is the renters don’t pay property taxes myth. Surprisingly to me many renters believe this myth as well as the many property owners who tell me to stick it in my ear when I attempt to debunk this one. Renters pay property tax. It’s as simple as that. I will break it down in simplistic terms. Pretend you own your home and three other houses in CF that you rent. A new tax levy has just passed. All four of the homes you own are valued at exactly $100,000. Your new tax amount is $250 per home per year. Now if you are a really nice person with a trust fund from Uncle Bill Gates, you write a check to the county each year and pay all your taxes yourself. But if you are a normal person trying to survive in this world, you are now going to raise the rent in your three rentals. Probably $50 per month per house. Renters usually take a harder hit when a tax levy passe because not many landlords only raise the rent for the amount of the tax. They round up. They didn’t have new math. I know, I rented here for 5 years. If you don’t believe me, ask any of our local landlords. We have plenty from what I’m reading and seeing.
Now I’m going to give you some gobbledygook. But I think these are numbers that are important for you to know. Our district will “earn” almost fourteen and a half million dollars for the January through June 2007 period. This is only from local money. Property taxes. The rest comes from the State and Federal coffers, which is also your hard earned dollars in different tax forms. To give you another example of how millage amounts are actually disappearing revenue for a district we must go back in time. Back in 1976, all CF current continuing levies were combined into one giant 31.8 mill levy. Wow! This amount was the entire local contribution for the next 8 years. But as you know from the example above, the cost of doing business went up yet the money the district collected remained the same. That same 31.8 mill levy is now actually a 7.3 mill levy. What was 100% of our local money 30 years ago is now 21% of our money. Or look at it this way: Imagine trying to live today on the same amount of money you made 30 years ago. That’s what the case would be if we did not have the 6 other levies and a bond issue on our tax bill right now.
I’m not promoting either side. I just think it is important that people understand the entire scope of the problem when voting. My personal feelings are a sales tax or earned income tax would take care of part of the problem. At least then if money were approved by the voters, it could grow with inflation. I know many spending problems exist within the walls of education that need fixing too. But give me a break. One blog at a time!
First you need to know a levy can expire or be continuing. A continuing levy never expires. The only way we can stop paying on a continuing levy is to put it back on the ballot for voter removal. I don’t know of any school district willing to do this, so obviously a regular citizen would have to take it upon him or herself to do it. A pretty daunting task for Joe Schmoe. Needless to say it rarely if ever happens. Next we have expiring levies. They are put on the ballot for approval with a set amount of years. Usually 5 years. All CF levies are either continuing (3) or expiring 5 year (3). We also have one, 20-year bond issue passed in 1998 due to expire in 2017.
Now it gets hairy. I am going to use the last new levy CF passed as my example. In May of 2005 the voters of CF passed a 7.9 mill levy. We now find ourselves in May of 2007 and are actually paying 7.3 mills. Huh? See back in 1976 the State of Ohio passed a law that said the dollar amount passed at the time of a school levy will stay that dollar amount. So forget about those confusing mills for a minute. Think of it this way. If a new levy passes today, and because of the value of your home, your actual new tax amount is $250 per year. Next year your home value rises (hopefully) but you still pay $250. After 5 years you are still paying $250 on the levy but your home value, it is assumable has gone up. Now one of many things can happen. There is simple, confusing and confusinger. The district can let the levy expire. Simple. Hah, fat chance! They can ask for a renewal. A renewal will simply keep your rate at that $250 per year. You’re just renewing what you’re already paying. They always back this one up with the familiar “it’s not a new tax” mantra. But really it is a new tax because I voted for a 5 year expiring tax. What they really should say is “we didn’t ask for a large enough or long enough tax last time.” The other common thing districts ask for is a replacement levy. A replacement levy should really be called a restorative levy. Now the amount you pay goes up. The county takes a look at the current value of your house. We already know it has gone up in value over the last 5 years. So now your $250 is $325.
Now I don’t want you to think these are the only things a district can do. There are many variations of the above that can happen that I will cover in “Levies for Dummies part 2”.
A quick myth I want to cover is the renters don’t pay property taxes myth. Surprisingly to me many renters believe this myth as well as the many property owners who tell me to stick it in my ear when I attempt to debunk this one. Renters pay property tax. It’s as simple as that. I will break it down in simplistic terms. Pretend you own your home and three other houses in CF that you rent. A new tax levy has just passed. All four of the homes you own are valued at exactly $100,000. Your new tax amount is $250 per home per year. Now if you are a really nice person with a trust fund from Uncle Bill Gates, you write a check to the county each year and pay all your taxes yourself. But if you are a normal person trying to survive in this world, you are now going to raise the rent in your three rentals. Probably $50 per month per house. Renters usually take a harder hit when a tax levy passe because not many landlords only raise the rent for the amount of the tax. They round up. They didn’t have new math. I know, I rented here for 5 years. If you don’t believe me, ask any of our local landlords. We have plenty from what I’m reading and seeing.
Now I’m going to give you some gobbledygook. But I think these are numbers that are important for you to know. Our district will “earn” almost fourteen and a half million dollars for the January through June 2007 period. This is only from local money. Property taxes. The rest comes from the State and Federal coffers, which is also your hard earned dollars in different tax forms. To give you another example of how millage amounts are actually disappearing revenue for a district we must go back in time. Back in 1976, all CF current continuing levies were combined into one giant 31.8 mill levy. Wow! This amount was the entire local contribution for the next 8 years. But as you know from the example above, the cost of doing business went up yet the money the district collected remained the same. That same 31.8 mill levy is now actually a 7.3 mill levy. What was 100% of our local money 30 years ago is now 21% of our money. Or look at it this way: Imagine trying to live today on the same amount of money you made 30 years ago. That’s what the case would be if we did not have the 6 other levies and a bond issue on our tax bill right now.
I’m not promoting either side. I just think it is important that people understand the entire scope of the problem when voting. My personal feelings are a sales tax or earned income tax would take care of part of the problem. At least then if money were approved by the voters, it could grow with inflation. I know many spending problems exist within the walls of education that need fixing too. But give me a break. One blog at a time!
Tuesday, May 01, 2007
Board Member 101: Rule #1, Do Not Repeat Mistakes of Former Board
I want to start out with this week’s meeting agenda. First up is a presentation from our Six-District Educational Compact. For those of you not in the know- this is a vocational education sharing program between the Falls, Hudson, Kent, Stow, Tallmadge, and Woodridge. Next is a presentation from the High School Business Department. Last but certainly not least is… Transportation. We will finally get to hear where the wheels on the bus go ‘round and ‘round to.
Now let’s talk about what everybody else is talkin’ ‘bout. Levies and evaluations and bell times and bussing. Ok I can’t really talk about all that on one blog and since I’m not allowed to talk about levies on here we can scratch that one. But it was nice to see the Falls News print a fair and balanced 3 “For” and 3 “Against” letters. Then there was the seventh letter.
The writer feels the evaluation is the boards “latest folly”. He opines that the board has failed “Board Member 101” despite the many training sessions we have attended. He then goes on to point out that the board has only two jobs- to hire and supervise the CEO and CFO and to set policy. He then goes on to say that the board minority, meaning Mrs. Gunter and myself, are somehow to blame for the problems of this board. I must respond to this outrageous claim. I put the two jobs in bold to remind everyone as I write that this is the point I am referring to.
Let’s start with the first part- to hire and supervise. A board hires and then directs its employees. In February of 06, I asked this board to set goals. As a member of the minority I was ignored. Then talks of raise came about and not only I, but also the board attorney expressed concerns that goals had not been established, nor had evaluations been conducted. The board majority ignored these concerns and handed over raises anyway. Is that what the voting taxpayers wanted from their elected officials or is this what the professors of “Board Member 101” expected? We are a board of education expected to give direction and set policy that benefits the voters of this district. The professors of “Board Member 101” are former school administrators who now still earn a living off taxpayer money teaching propaganda to newly elected board members on how to behave in a board room. They say things like “support the decisions of the board”. So if the board decides to jump off a bridge I should follow? With this philosophy I am supposed to say it was OK to be bullied into a new contract and a raise because a majority was willing to give in to threats of leaving for greener pastures?
Now let’s do the next part- to set policy. A board majority also passes policy in our district. So once again meaningful changes cannot happen in this department until our district has a board majority that is setting policy that will make a difference. We have policies coming out the wazoo “against” certain things. Bullying, drugs, weapons, etc. But no clear-cut rules, and more importantly consequences for when these policies are violated. There seems to be rules and exceptions and much is left to the discretion of teachers and principals. I have said many times that we need to have some clear cut guide lines and consequences but the majority representing you and setting policy do not think it is important.
If memory serves me correctly, the letter writer is a former board member whose lessons in “Board Member 101” led us to financial disaster and two neighborhood school closings. Anyone needing a refresher course on “screwed taxpayer 101” see this blog. (Scroll to “The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly Truth). He’s right about one thing. The next election will be very important. We need responsible money minded people that understand the impact the districts spending has on the education of kids but the impact our spending has on the taxpayer as well. The one mistake he makes is assuming students are a part of his constituency. Their parents are and they are also taxpayers. I want to give my kids every opportunity the world has to offer. Unfortunately I can’t afford to. I must draw the line and say we only have so much money to fund your activities with. The same mentality should apply to all taxpayer funded agencies. There is not a money tree in my back yard. I cannot endlessly fund you.
We dump more money than ever into public education yet enrollment continues to drop, administrative employees and costs continue to rise, yet not surprisingly to me, graduation and standardized test scores have remained flat for the last 30 years! Yes I said 30 years! The obvious conclusion is throwing money at the problem is not going to solve it. Innovation, dealing with reality, and leading kids into the world with a grip on a profession or vocation as well as the knowledge you need to perform basic daily functions like banking and bill paying and credit sense is a must in today’s world. The middle class jobs of General Motors and Ford are gone along with their benefits and retirement packages. No longer are people doing fairly well with few skills or an 11th grade education.
As for the letter to the editor in Monday’s Beacon Journal, the writer states that is no is no bank account in Columbus with my children’s names on it. I beg to differ. That account follows my family to whatever city I chose to open enroll my children in or move to for that matter. If my local public school is failing, that account can even follow my kids to private school. Districts need to strive to succeed academically and fiscally or watch the flight of desperate parents and their money continue.
Now let’s talk about what everybody else is talkin’ ‘bout. Levies and evaluations and bell times and bussing. Ok I can’t really talk about all that on one blog and since I’m not allowed to talk about levies on here we can scratch that one. But it was nice to see the Falls News print a fair and balanced 3 “For” and 3 “Against” letters. Then there was the seventh letter.
The writer feels the evaluation is the boards “latest folly”. He opines that the board has failed “Board Member 101” despite the many training sessions we have attended. He then goes on to point out that the board has only two jobs- to hire and supervise the CEO and CFO and to set policy. He then goes on to say that the board minority, meaning Mrs. Gunter and myself, are somehow to blame for the problems of this board. I must respond to this outrageous claim. I put the two jobs in bold to remind everyone as I write that this is the point I am referring to.
Let’s start with the first part- to hire and supervise. A board hires and then directs its employees. In February of 06, I asked this board to set goals. As a member of the minority I was ignored. Then talks of raise came about and not only I, but also the board attorney expressed concerns that goals had not been established, nor had evaluations been conducted. The board majority ignored these concerns and handed over raises anyway. Is that what the voting taxpayers wanted from their elected officials or is this what the professors of “Board Member 101” expected? We are a board of education expected to give direction and set policy that benefits the voters of this district. The professors of “Board Member 101” are former school administrators who now still earn a living off taxpayer money teaching propaganda to newly elected board members on how to behave in a board room. They say things like “support the decisions of the board”. So if the board decides to jump off a bridge I should follow? With this philosophy I am supposed to say it was OK to be bullied into a new contract and a raise because a majority was willing to give in to threats of leaving for greener pastures?
Now let’s do the next part- to set policy. A board majority also passes policy in our district. So once again meaningful changes cannot happen in this department until our district has a board majority that is setting policy that will make a difference. We have policies coming out the wazoo “against” certain things. Bullying, drugs, weapons, etc. But no clear-cut rules, and more importantly consequences for when these policies are violated. There seems to be rules and exceptions and much is left to the discretion of teachers and principals. I have said many times that we need to have some clear cut guide lines and consequences but the majority representing you and setting policy do not think it is important.
If memory serves me correctly, the letter writer is a former board member whose lessons in “Board Member 101” led us to financial disaster and two neighborhood school closings. Anyone needing a refresher course on “screwed taxpayer 101” see this blog. (Scroll to “The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly Truth). He’s right about one thing. The next election will be very important. We need responsible money minded people that understand the impact the districts spending has on the education of kids but the impact our spending has on the taxpayer as well. The one mistake he makes is assuming students are a part of his constituency. Their parents are and they are also taxpayers. I want to give my kids every opportunity the world has to offer. Unfortunately I can’t afford to. I must draw the line and say we only have so much money to fund your activities with. The same mentality should apply to all taxpayer funded agencies. There is not a money tree in my back yard. I cannot endlessly fund you.
We dump more money than ever into public education yet enrollment continues to drop, administrative employees and costs continue to rise, yet not surprisingly to me, graduation and standardized test scores have remained flat for the last 30 years! Yes I said 30 years! The obvious conclusion is throwing money at the problem is not going to solve it. Innovation, dealing with reality, and leading kids into the world with a grip on a profession or vocation as well as the knowledge you need to perform basic daily functions like banking and bill paying and credit sense is a must in today’s world. The middle class jobs of General Motors and Ford are gone along with their benefits and retirement packages. No longer are people doing fairly well with few skills or an 11th grade education.
As for the letter to the editor in Monday’s Beacon Journal, the writer states that is no is no bank account in Columbus with my children’s names on it. I beg to differ. That account follows my family to whatever city I chose to open enroll my children in or move to for that matter. If my local public school is failing, that account can even follow my kids to private school. Districts need to strive to succeed academically and fiscally or watch the flight of desperate parents and their money continue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)