Category Archives: Budget

by | October 2, 2009 · 10:55 am

WAES School-Funding Reform Update — “Pennies for Kids”!

waesgraphicFrom the Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools.  Table of contents below, click here for the a pdf of the full update, click on linked items for related content on AMPS.

I also want to highlight the most important and exciting item:  the “Pennies for Kids” dedicated sales tax campaign.  This is a major initiative to try to get our state lawmakers to enact a new revenue source for investments in education.  Although not the “big fix” comprehensive reform so many of us have been working for, it would provide crucial resources to meet the growing crisis caused by decreased state aid and rising school property taxes, while simultaneously moving Wisconsin closer tor adequate, equitable and sustainable school funding.  Watch for more in the coming weeks and months (Disclosure:  I am on the Board of WAES).

Here is what the WAES update has to say:

As crisis grows, WAES goes after “Pennies for Kids”

The crisis of funding in Wisconsin ’s public schools is so deep and so wide that immediate legislative action is needed to just protect the education our children have now─much less the education they deserve in the future.

To address that crisis, WAES has launched “Pennies for Kids,” a campaign to raise the sales tax one-cent to help fill the gap in public school funding created by the 2009-11 budget and to try to keep the lid on property taxes. At the same time, WAES will continue to work for comprehensive reform, understanding the long-term answer to the problem is a new, sustainable funding system that recognizes the needs of children and the goal of quality education for every student.

If passed, a one-cent increase in the sales tax will raise about $830 million annually. According to the plan being worked out by WAES members, the largest portion of that revenue would be devoted to children in classrooms through increases in categorical aid. Additionally, because it would increase the state’s share of school aid “Pennies for Kids” would slow increases in property taxes expected in the wake of the most recent state budget. To find out more about this new initiative — and to find out how you can get involved — got to http://www.excellentschools.org.

WAES School-funding reform update, week of Sept. 28

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under "education finance", Budget, Contracts, education, finance, Local News, Pennies for Kids, School Finance, Take Action, Uncategorized

Tagged as

by | September 25, 2009 · 4:34 pm

MMSD & MTI Contract “Tentative” Settlement

According to a Madison Teachers Inc. press release and NBC15, a tentative agreement has been reached between the Madison Metropolitan School District and MTI on the July 1, 2009 to June 30, 2011 teacher bargaining unit contract.  MTI members will vote on the terms October 15 and the Board of Education is tentatively scheduled to consider the settlement on October 19.

The base salary increase is 1%, the total package 3.93%.   There appears to be some tinkering and savings, but no major changes in health insurance provisions.   This is about what would have happened if the QEO was still in force.

Provisions to enable 4 year-old kindergarten are included.

The key players — Dan Nerad and John Matthews —  had somewhat different spins:

Superintendent Daniel Nerad said, “I am very pleased that we have reached this tentative agreement after an extensive period of bargaining. We have addressed a significant number of contract language related items. A key example lies in the area of elementary planning time. Of greatest significance to the District is an agreement over language that would allow for the implementation of a four-year-old kindergarten program.” “Also, in working with MTI we have been able to provide a salary increase, in part, as a result of reductions in health care costs. I appreciate working with John Matthews in accomplishing these insurance savings. I look forward to presenting this tentative agreement to the Board of Education in the near future.”

John Matthews said, “But the economic provisions do not adequately reward those who have made the Madison schools among the best in the country. With the State usurping local control as regards to school funding, this is a matter that the State must fix; there is nothing local school boards can do, given the State’s heavy hand. The State must realize that their funding formula for education is inadequate, and that it is causing the dissolution of the great education once available to Wisconsin children. That must be fixed and it is up to the Governor and the Legislators to do it.”

One thing I like about John Matthews is that he always can be counted on to focus attention on growing need for our state government to enact comprehensive school funding reform.  An agitator after my own heart.

As one who follows these things, I have to note that the press release includes MTI and MMSD contact info, but is only posted on the MTI site (not the MMSD, as of 4:30 PM, 9-25-09).

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under "education finance", Budget, Contracts, education, Local News, School Finance

by | September 18, 2009 · 4:51 pm

No to the Max: The New Trend in School District Tax Levies?

not to the maxAt a discordant meeting last night, the Kenosha School Meeting approved a 2.17% tax levy increase.*  The maximum levy allowed under the state budget — after the Governor and Legislature slashed  state aid and lowered revenue limits — was 6.03%.

This trend of not taxing to the max deserves lots of attention, but a few words about the discord first.  The Kenosha case is strange, but the state level refusal to take bold action to reform the revenue and budgeting policies for adequacy, sustainability and equity has shifted many of the cuts and the tax increases to local governing authorities making them the focus of misdirected complaints from both the Right and Left (here is an amazing example from the Right — the blogger is an aide to Senator Mary Lazich, accuses the distict officials of dishonesty based on the state created shift to property tax revenues and also has the gall to call the School Meeting “undemocratic” because only people he disagrees with were in attendance). This frustration needs to be directed at the state officials who can actually enact real reforms).

The meeting described in and the comments appended to this news story demonstrate that the state’s shift of a larger share of under-funding education to property taxes has given the anti-tax crowd a new place to vent and perhaps some new adherents.  What is interesting about Kenosha is that unlike in Washburn —  where the teabaggers came out to protest the mil rate is going up 15% —  there is little or no basis for their sentiments.

The 2.17% levy increase is not large, the resulting 7.37 mil rate is not large, in four of the last eight years the mil rate in Kenosha has been reduced and the 2009-10 mil rate is significantly below the 2003-4 rate of 7.72 and far, far smaller than the 1991-2 rate of 9.54 (all figures from the preliminary June budget).

The gap between the 2.17 mil rate approved and the allowed 6.03 and the $3.5 to $5.0 million in additional cuts mandated by this budget are both large and will have a large, negative impact on education in Kenosha.  These cuts have to be sen in the context of a school funding system that has all but mandated annual program and service cuts for the last 16 years (I am not clear what cuts are being contemplated and it appears that some use of the Fund Balance is likely).

The combination of cuts, property tax increases and  under levies is happening all over the state.  In counties, cities and school districts, most of the attention has been on the first two and few realize that many of  their beleaguered local officials are not taxing to the max.  Even fewer are thinking about what this means in the short and long term.  I don’t know how extensive this trend is, but it is worth keeping an eye on.

School districts that I am aware of who will not tax to the max include, Madison, Kenosha, Appleton, Janesville, New Berlin, Whitnall, Oshkosh (I think), Greenfield (if those who attended the School Meeting have their way), Turner,  and I am sure many I’ve missed and more to come (please let me know of other districts in the comments).

In the short term it means more cuts and often lower Fund Balances (which may lead to higher interest rates for borrowing — see Dane County for example).  In the current economy, more cuts will mean trying to do more with less.  That usually can’t be done and certainly cannot be sustained.  It means closing schools and limiting educational opportunities, it means not filling potholes and plowing streets, it means telling the cold, the disabled and the hungry “no,” it means that investments that would form the basis of future prosperity aren’t being made, it means less safe streets, delayed infrastructure, and lowered expectations for the present and the future.  This is what is happening every day at every budget hearing.

I am not clear on the mechanisms for any adjustments that are made to state aid due to levies that are below those anticipated.  I’ve got a couple of queries out and will pass along the wonky details as soon as I am able.

Cuts and lower levies this year will also shape the perceptions of budgets and levies in future years.  Every cut that officials make regretfully, every fiscally based redefinition from essential to discretionary, every abandoned cost of living adjustment, every potential investment to create growth that is passed over…provides ammunition to those who rail against activist government, those who refuse to recognize that government is the mechanism by which a humane society cares for the neediest, an engaged society shapes the present, and a wise society invests in the future.

The precedent of smaller levies will make future levy increases seem larger.  In Madison, the current plan is to split the huge two-year levy increase into two very large levy increases, with the first (this year) being well below the allowed amount (such bad choices, there is no good way to handle this).  This make a certain kind of sense from both a policy and a public relations perspective.  Still I worry about the message, the precedent, the impact and even the public relations.  On the last, part of me says just get the worst of it over with, enact as much as you can this year, take the heat and move on.

Fiscally, school districts that do not levy to the max for two consecutive years lose that authority in the future.  Their future levy limits are based on the lower amounts actually levied.  Madison will avoid this by levying the general fund to the max and cutting the debt service levy (if I understand correctly).  Other district may not have that option, so the underfunding will be compounded in future budgets.

As I’ve said in past posts, the shift to property taxes is wrong and I have sympathy for those are saying “this is too much” and asking local officials to limit their levies.  I also have sympathy for the local officials who are hearing those voices and limiting their levies.  I just want all who are involved to act with an awareness that this is a partial and temporary solution that is harmful in many direct and indirect ways.  I’d also like all those involved to join those of us pushing state officials to take the steps that only they can take to get us out of this destructive cycle.

There is one more thing I’d like and that is to see our State Senators and Members of the Assembly attending the county, city and school budget meetings; hearing the voices that cannot penetrate the closed doors where they cut their secret deals; witnessing the local officials struggle with the hard choices the state officials largely avoided (read Brenda Konkel’s report from one of these meetings: “Raise My Taxes!“); and maybe, just maybe explaining to one and all why they believed their work was something to boast about.  Senator Fred Risser and Representative Mark Pocan, consider this a personal invitation from one of your constituents who has supported you in election after election.

Thomas J. Mertz

*KUSD is one of the districts in Wisconsin that continues the old tradition of the Annual School Meeting handling budget approvals.

Leave a comment

Filed under "education finance", Budget, education, finance, Local News, School Finance, Uncategorized

by | September 15, 2009 · 9:06 pm

Recipe for Disaster(s), Or the Wisconsin Democrats’ Fall Agenda

I just read the release and memo on the Democratic agenda for the Fall legislative session.  The agenda is  a recipe for disasters.

The disaster that matters to most of us in the state is already in progress as school districts cut programs and services while raising property taxes at rates that have not been seen for years (read this report from Kenosha, look at Rhinelander); as municipalities trim essential services, cut investments that would lead to recovery and growth while also raising property taxes  and fees (here is the latest from Eau Claire); and counties axe public safety and  safety net programs, close nursing homes and like everybody else, raise property taxes and fees (here is a recent report on Dane County).  This Fall budget season is bad; the 2010-11 will be worse if there isn’t bolder action from the state.

The disaster that probably matters most to the Democratic leadership will come in the 2010 elections.  Their vulnerable members will lose if all they bring back to the voters is window dressing campaign finance reforms and tougher drunk driving laws (this isn’t quite fair, some of  the agenda is good — Green Jobs in particular –,  but it is not anywhere near sufficient to meet the crises we are facing).  Even the Democrats in “safe seats” (like in Madison) may well find themselves surprised by challengers from the left who demand better and bolder action.

I don’t care what their polling says, they need to take their heads out of the sand and look around at what is happening with the schools, with the counties, with the cities and most of all with the families they claim to be “Standing Up” for.  They need to look beyond November 2010 and act in the long term interests of our still great state.  Mostly they need to recognize that the revenue and budgeting assumptions they have been working from cannot be sustained.

Some realize this.  Representative Cory Mason is proposing a jobs program funded by higher taxes on those earning over $1 million annually.  A “Save Our Services” campaign has started, seeking to fund essential services via an expanded sales tax base (info on the October 1 Madison rally here).  Last night the Madison Metropolitan School District Board of Education voted unanimously in support of a resolution calling for a sales tax increase dedicated to school funding.  This idea is the focus of a “Pennies for Kids” campaign that the Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools is in the process of initiating (this is just beginning, stay tuned).

Many of us would like to see even broader changes in our state’s taxation, budgeting and investment policies, but something has to be done to meet the crisis and these are good steps.  the Institute for Wisconsin’s Future and Wisconsin Council on Children and Families Catalog of Tax Reform Options for Wisconsin is still the best place to begin thinking about revamping the entire system in order to achieve adequacy, equity and sustainability.

If the Democrats stick with their “do little or nothing” agenda, the crises will grow all around the state and come back to hit them hard in November 2010.  When that happens they will have no one to blame but themselves.  With power comes responsibility, with failure of effort and accomplishment comes accountability.

One closing observation:  There is nothing in the Democratic agenda about Governor Jim Doyle’s “Scramble for the Crumbs”/ Race to the Top package.  I hope this indicates that many in the party are too smart to sell what is left of  their souls for a lottery ticket in a rigged game where the payoff is one-time funding far below the needs of our schools ($80 million is what I hear).

Thomas J. Mertz

2 Comments

Filed under "education finance", Accountability, Budget, education, Elections, finance, Gimme Some Truth, Local News, Uncategorized

by | September 9, 2009 · 3:58 pm

Wisconsin School Referenda in Tough Times

20081008_mpls_levysign_33With most Wisconsin school districts contemplating or committed to sizable local property tax increases for 2009-10 and looking at continued service and program cuts combined with more property tax increases in 2010-11, this is not the best time to be asking the voters to approve a referendum.  Personal budgets are tight, the economy is uncertain and there is a delicate balance between program and service cuts as demonstrations of fiscal responsibility and program and service cuts undermining quality to the extent that it is difficult to garner further support (the “starve the beast” idea).

Yet because the problems caused by the latest state budget were piled on top of 16 years of struggles due to the broken state school finance system, some districts feel they have no choice.  These include ones seeking building projects, ones who feel they cannot endure any more cuts and continue to provide the quality of education they are committed to, and ones that are anticipating the expiration of a non-recurring referendum and the budget gap this will produce.

Although there has been little or no official acknowledgment or discussion, the Madison Metropolitan School District is in this last category.  At the end of the 2009-10 fiscal year, Madison will lose about $5.5 million in revenue authority for ‘maintenance and technology.”   The probable cuts for 2010-11 are bad; without this money they will be more horrific than anything we have experienced lately.  If the district wants to extend this authority, the time to start making their pitch is now.   I hope they do and I hope they get started.

Madison has not begun discussions, but others have.  There are five referenda on the ballot at special elections in October and November 2009 and more being contemplated.

Two of the ones that are set are for building projects.  These are being fast tracked in order to try for the 0% interest ARRA srtimulus bonds.

On November 3, voters in Pewaukee will vote on $24.95 million in debt authorization for classroom construction and other renovations, including a swimming pool (more from the district here and from a pro-referendum community group here).  That same day the Trevor-Wilmont voters will  decide on an $11 million plan to build an addition and renovate (more from the district here).

Pewaukee is also asking for $400,000 in annual recurring authority for general operating purposes for the new facilities.

Wheatland will go back to the voters on October 27, asking for four years of nonrecurring authority in the amount of $300,000 per year.  Nonrecurring authority in this amount expired at the end of the 1008-9 year, so this is in a sense a renewal.

A similar referendum failed last April (here and here).  The language is a great example in truth in marketing:

BE IT RESOLVED by the School Board of the Joint School District Number 1, Towns of Wheatland, Brighton, Randall and Salem, Kenosha County, Wisconsin, that the revenues included in the School District budget for the 2009-2010 school year and for three school years thereafter, to and including the 2012-2013 school year be authorized to exceed the revenue limit specified in Section 121.91, Wisconsin Statutes, by $300,000 a year, for non-recurring purposes in order to maintain the current educational level of the District and cover shortfalls due to decreased funding.” (italics and bold added).

Sad but true, the shortfalls are bigger than ever and referenda continue to be the only way to fully fund education.

On October 6, 2009 the Whitehall district has a three year non recurring maintenance, technology and infrastructure referendum on the ballot. The amounts are $200,000 for 2009-10, $150,00 for 2010-11 and $100,000 for 2011-12.  Superintendent Mike Beighley explained the thinking behind the referendum:

“When we look at the ability to improve our district with the limited increase in taxes, I think we have an obligation at least to present that to the public as an option,” said Beighley.

All across the state other districts see similar opportunities to “improve,” yet know that refrerenda are difficult and the odds of passage are less than 50%, so they don’t even ask.

Two districts struggling to finalize referenda plans are Wisconsin Dells and Rhinelander.

In the Dells, the possibility of the ARRA 0% bonding makes building an addition for 4 year-old kindergarten an attractive option. The district is holding a community meeting on September 9 and may go for the November 3 date.  They are also considering an operating referendum to make up for part of  the state budget created mess:

[District Administrator Chuck] Whitsell also said the district is facing an $800,000 budget deficit next school year, and because of no raise in the per pupil taxing authority it has been given from the state, the district might ask taxpayers to increase the revenue limits in another referendum question.

I hope they do ask for the operating money and get it.

In Rhinelander the need is clear, but the path to meeting the need has been continually blocked.  It is one of those districts that has been caught in almost all the faults of the current school funding system.  The district is geographically large, but the economies of scale are small or negative.  Enrollment has declined and incomes are not great, but property values remain relatively high.  Referenda have repeatedly failed.  There have been cuts for 16 years, 150 positions have been lost in the last seven years and more are on the table.

Here in Madison we think we have experienced the failures of the school funding system (and we have to a great extent), but I talk to my friends in Rhinelander and can only shake my head and think how lucky we are to have avoided the full weight of these failures.

Dating back to 2004, 10 operating referenda have been voted down in Rhinelander.  Yet it looks like they will try again.  I am filled with admiration for their perseverance and commitment.

The date hasn’t been set, but the word is  Rhinelander voters will get two questions this time.  One will ask for three years of $1,5 million revenue authority for operations and the other is for $13.7 million in construction bonding to maintain and remodel facilities.

Superintendent Roger Erdahl summed up the situation succinctly:

“It would stop closing buildings, it would stop laying off staff, which are the techniques we currently use to balance our budget.”

Here is what will happen if there is no successful referendum (from NewsoftheNorth.Net):

The following actions would be taken in the year 2010-11, in order of priority:

  • Close and sell South Parking building, requiring a mandatory grade re-configuration, for a savings of $117,000.
  • Close and sell Cassian-Woodboro building, with an accompanying grade re-configuration, for a savings of $120,000.
  • Reduce extra-curricular activities for a savings of $27,800.
  • Reduce custodial staff, for a savings of $472,000.
  • Reduce regular education paraprofessional staff, for a savings of $200,000.
  • Reduce full-time teaching staff by 12.5 by raising class sizes from the current low 20s to low to mid-30s in grades 4-12; or by reducing electives at the middle and high schools; or by doing a combination of larger class sizes and the reduction of electives, for a savings of $1 million.

In the year 2011-12, the following drawdown actions would be taken:

  • Reduce full-time staff, raise class sizes and reduce electives to achieve a savings of $296,000.
  • Decertify the elementary and secondary charter school and absorb these students into the other district school buildings for a savings of $240,000.
  • Reduce high school graduation requirements and move to a six-period day; reduce staff at the middle school and eliminate all professional travel and staff development, for a savings of $160,000.
  • Eliminate all Fund 10 staff development and travel and impose a moratorium on the acquisition of textbooks and instructional materials; eliminate middle school activities and travel; reduce administration staff, for a savings of $320,000.
  • Move 7th and 8th grade to the high school building; with grades 3 – 6 moving to the middle school building to reduce full-time staff, for a savings of $240,000.
  • Close and sell Crescent school building for a savings of $125,000.
  • Moratorium on all maintenance upkeep and repair of buildings, except for emergencies, for a savings of $500,000.

This is the destruction of public education.  This is the inevitable result of what Ruth Page Jones has called the “Going out of Business Plan” that is Wisconsin’s system for investing in education and the future.

Next time the Governor or a Legislator starts gabbing about how “education is a priority we protected in the state budget,” drop them a line and ask about Rhinelander.  Ask them if education has been “strengthened” as their political mouthpiece claims. Ask them what they are going to do to fix the mess they have made and inherited.

And be proactive.  The best way to help the children of Rhinelander and Wisconsin is to work for change via the Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools (WAES).  Our state needs to look  for ways to fully fund the education of every child in every district, we need to consider a “Cents for Schools” dedicated sales tax, we need to make sure that the money is going where it is needed most, we need to do better.  WAES is the loudest and clearest voice saying these things.  Lend your voice and make the call for reform even louder.

Thomas J. Mertz

1 Comment

Filed under "education finance", Budget, education, Local News, Referenda, referendum, School Finance, Take Action, Uncategorized, We Are Not Alone

by | September 4, 2009 · 7:08 pm

Right and Wrong — MMSD Board Members on School Finance, State and Local

I had not recently thought about what was said by Madison Metropolitan Board of Education members as they passed their initial budget in May, but the happenings in Washburn brought them to mind and reminded me that the struggle to recognize that investments in education are a state responsibility requiring a state solution isn’t over in Madison.

As we now know the state budget produced multiple financial problems for MMSD (we know this, but you wouldn’t know it by going to the MMSD budget page or the news releases, or the “recently in the news” — they missed this from Board President Arlene Silviera and everything else that has happened since January).  As a result, the entire Board of Education has been in one way or another looking to the state for long and short term help.

Back in May, that was not the case.  One member got things right; most were too happy with what then seemed like a positive budget to bring up the long term state issues; one got things wrong in an offensive and dangerous manner

Johnny Winston Jr. is the one who got it right.

He revealed the truth, school finance is a state and federal problem and requires at the very least a state solution. Recent developments at the state finance level have moved us further from that solution.

For a variety of reasons (listed below), until the latest state budget Madison had enjoyed relatively painless budgeting in the most recent years. At the same time, the state school funding system remains broken, any of the varied nips and tucks that have been made at the local level have only provided limited relief, they’ve only been partial remediations – and temporary. The real fix has to come at the state level, it must be comprehensive and it must be sustainable.

Lucy Mathiak is the one who got it wrong.

In addition to her misguided championing of local solutions to a state created problem (see here for MMSD’s official and correct position), Mathiak mostly misidentified and wrongly interpreted the main factors that contributed to the recent lack of major harmful budget cuts in Madison.

Here is my list, in approximate order of importance:

  • Tax Incremental Finance District closure windfall (over $5.4 million).
  • Successful Operating Referendum, ($5 million for 2009-10).
  • Confused and overzealous fiscal conservatism in the 2007-8 budget (scroll down), resulting in a $4.3 million general fund surplus (added to the Fund Balance).  Astute readers will remember that the 2007-8 fiscal year was the year that MMSD was a rough budget season and that schools were almost closed and many harmful cuts were made (in my opinion, the two biggest factors in this surplus were underestimates for state special education funding and local salary savings, see more here).
  • A new management team. Superintendent Dan Nerad and Asst. Superintendent Erik Kass have brought new eyes to the budgeting process and found some savings and efficiencies. However, as their experiences in Green Bay and Waukesha demonstrate, there are serious limits to what any management team can do to stave off harmful cuts.
  • Losing students to open enrollment. This made FTE cuts less painful for the 2009-10 budget. The benefits of this are limited and only work when efficiencies of size are present, but because the structural gap in the state finance system is based on per pupil funding, fewer pupils means a smaller gap.

Right and wrong, partial and temporary, these factors are all about played out. The party is over and the bills must be paid.

As Asst. Superintendent Erik Kass said, 2010-11 is looking “ugly,” and I’ll add that this ugliness has nothing to do with mythical local mismanagement (in fact the recent surpluses and the harm caused by the cuts and conflicts that created those surpluses reveal that the very Board members Mathiak praises had pushed the district too far on issues of  budgeting and were the ones closest to mismanaging) and the solution will not be found via equally mythical miraculous local administration and governance.

The new state budget has brought back to MMSD the hard choices needed to make the cuts that do the least harm and to find the fiscal strategies that can be sustained. The Title I and IDEA stimulus money will soften the blows, but that is yet another partial and temporary band-aid.

The self-serving myths Mathiak mouthed back in May are dangerous because they make it harder to convince people that school finance reform must be a priority.  I’m glad I remembered what she said, because these falsehoods must be countered at every opportunity.

Join the movement for real education funding reform.  Check out the School Finance Network; become a member of the Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools.

If you do these things, you will be going a long way towards righting some very significant wrongs.

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under "education finance", Budget, education, finance, Gimme Some Truth, Local News, Referenda, referendum, School Finance, Take Action, Uncategorized

by | September 4, 2009 · 3:32 pm

Sandbagged! Now Teabagged?

School districts and school finance reform advocates were sandbagged by Governor Jim Doyle and the Democratic controlled Legislature.  For years they had said “if you put us in control, fixing school finance will be a priority.’  We helped put them in control, districts built preliminary budgets based on the assumption that even if they wouldn’t enact a fix right away, they also wouldn’t make things worse.

But that is exactly what they did, make things worse.

They did this in many ways.  They cut the money targeted to the neediest students and districts via categorical aid.  They cut the amount of total revenue available to districts to well below “cost to continue.”  They upped the property tax credits, money that never goes near a classroom, and called it more money for education. They saddled school boards and districts with the unwelcome dual tasks of finding new savings and raising property taxes (for more on how this is playing out in Madison, see here and here).  Sandbagged.

Now — as districts are finalizing their budgets,  setting their tax levies and raising property taxes — the teabagger anti-tax crowd is coming out.  So far the only report I’ve seen is from Washburn, but more may well be on the way.

The Ashland Daily Press reports that   80-90 people showed up at the district budget listening session, many came to protest.  On August 18th, the Board of Education had passed a preliminary budget with what is being called a 24% tax increase in the local property tax contribution (I did the math and the mil rate will go up about 15%, not small, but not 24% either).  Like in Madison, there is a combination of a recent referendum, high property values, and most of all, the miserable state budget.  At the time the budget was passed District Superintendent Sue Masterson laid out the choices:

“We are not happy about it, but there is nothing we can do about it.”

… Masterson said cutting back to what would essentially leave “reading, writing and arithmetic” would be damaging to the community. She said that as part of the referendum process, many cuts had already been made and that the district had made as many cuts as they could without cutting the quality of instruction. She said that further cuts could result in dramatically larger class sizes and might require building changes that the district couldn’t afford in any event.

“The only way you cut now is putting 40 kids in a classroom, eliminating programs, which will result in an exodus of new families and existing families from local schools,” she said. “Consumer science programs, music programs, tech ed programs — when you start cutting those kinds of things… well, today’s public education families expect a rounded education,” Masterson said.

This hasn’t changed, but now the voices from the community are louder and more strident.  The Daily Press described the message from the September 1, 2009 listening session (let me note that MMSD has scheduled no listening sessions on their budget revisions):

One message came across loud and clear: The amount of the increase is unacceptable — and they expect the school board to go back to the budget and rework it so the increase is much closer to the 9 percent increase approved last November in a referendum allowing the district to exceed revenue caps. The tough economy makes a big tax increase especially difficult, many said.

…”The bottom line is we need to cut, and we need to keep Washburn houses filled with families.”

As is usual with these things, they were less forthcoming when asked for suggestions about what to cut and how to save:

Many at the meeting were unhappy they were being asked for suggestions for cuts when they didn’t have a line-item budget to look at for ideas, and others said the reason they hire an administrator and elect a school board is to make intelligent fiscal decisions on behalf of their constituents. Still, some suggestions were made.

Those included delaying improvements to the bleachers, cutting the food service program, and cutting administration costs by sharing an administrator with other school districts.

It is likely that there are some savings to be had, but after 16 years of struggling with annual cuts due to revenues that have been inadequate by design, the potential savings are minimal.

I have some sympathy with the people who are unhappy with the tax increase.  They are correct that too much of the investment in education is coming from property taxes.

I also have much admiration for the Board and administrators who are defending education as a valuable investment and have not yet given in to the anti-tax sentiment (contrast with Madison, where sometimes it is hard to tell the difference between the district and the anti-taxers).

The ones I have no use for are the those who say –as one attendee did — they are  “sick of hearing the excuse ‘the state did this to us.'”

This is both wrong — the state did do this to them — and counter productive, because  it cuts off productive protest directed at the state officials who actually have the power to make things better and electoral action directed to replace the ones who sandbagged us.  Getting mad at district officials over this makes no sense.

We’ve heard this sort of thing in Madison before (one sitting Board member still mouths these ridiculous ideas on occasion), but mostly the message that school funding is a state responsibility in need of a state solution has been heard.  This needs to happen all around the state.  Join the Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools to help make that happen.

Thomas J. Mertz

1 Comment

Filed under "education finance", Budget, education, Elections, finance, Local News, School Finance, Take Action, Uncategorized, We Are Not Alone

by | September 3, 2009 · 1:17 pm

MMSD Budget and the Death of Journalism

Vodpod videos no longer available.

On August 10, 2009 the Madison Metropolitan School District had their first public discussion about how they might address the the multiple fiscal messes handed them by our state budget-makers.  AMPS previewed this meeting that day.   No professional media saw fit to do likewise.  The issues on the table involve tens of millions of dollars and the the future of the children of Madison.

I attended the meeting and can report that there was not a professional journalist in the room.

Five days later, WISC-TV broadcast the story that appears at the top of this post.  Yesterday morning, the Wisconsin State Journal front page, headline, above-the-fold article was on the MMSD budget and what was presented and discussed at that meeting almost a month ago.  I want to note that there is nothing in the WISC-TV report or the State Journal story that was not before the public back at the start of August.  I have not seen any other stories on the MMSD budget.  Both stories are “competent,” neither was timely and there are some important things that our local media missed.  So new(s)?

Because they were not in the room and apparently did not bother to view the video of the meeting, both reporters missed some fairly big news.  That evening Asst. Superintendent Erik Kass revealed that for the 2008-9 school year MMSD will likely run a $5 million to $7 million surplus.  That’s a lot of money and directly effects the current options before the district.  This surplus follows a $4.3 million surplus in 2007-8 (also largely or completely ignored by the media, despite the fact that MMSD almost closed schools that year and did make major cuts that now appear to have been unnecessary).  The rebudgeting of teacher and substitute allocations being proposed by the administration is based on these surpluses (there was also some cuts that weren’t called cuts back when the preliminary budget was passed and they appear to have been based on similar rebudgeting).

This sad state of  journalism is hardly breaking news.  To cite three recent treatments, Robert Godfrey previously posted on the death throws of education reporting; Andy Hall — a great education reporter — saw the handwriting on the wall and moved on; Brenda Konkel has been noting the dearth of good local journalism and how this diminishes the basis for engaged citizenship; and my old friend Bill Wyman gets a lot right in his “Why Newspapers are failing” post.  I want to add my voice to these and fill in some of the of the other gaps left by our so-called reporters.  Here goes.

If you accept the lowered standards of television news in 2009, the WISC-TV report is actually pretty good.  It gets the basic facts right, gives at least minimal context and even includes multiple sources (two to be exact — Supt. Dan Nerad and MTI Union President Steve Pike).  I’d like more on the wider context of a broken state finance system, the dilemmas of other districts and maybe some reactions form Governor Doyle and the legislative leaders who thought the choices they made were good policy (hello Mark Pocan, hello Mark Miller…we won’t forget who is responsible for this mess).  Even the presentation of the financial information is relatively clear and relatively complete (at least in comparison with the State Journal), something which is not easy to do in a television news report.  My biggest complaint on this one is the lack of timeliness

If you don’t know the topic, The State Journal article  reads like a competent by-the-book, fill-in-the-blanks, news piece.   The problem is that journalists are supposed to know more about their topics than most  readers.  When they don’t, they miss things that the public should know.  Gayle Worland,  State Journal, misses some things.

I want to be clear that this is not about Ms Worland’s failings; I understand that the pathetic business model of local reporting doesn’t allow for, value or reward the development of expertise or the kind of digging beyond the quotes from easily accessible sources that real quality journalism is based on.  I also want to offer a special tip of the hat to Ms Worland for at least doing the leg work to get Andy Reschovsky’s perspective.  In this day and age even a little thing like that shows some professional pride.

One reason the WISC-TV story gets higher marks is that it gives passing mention to an option being floated by the district to refinance debts and use this opportunity to avoid paying $6.69 million in debt service in 2009-10,  a development that does not appear in the State Journal.

I have some questions about this idea and how much is being saved in the long term, whether is best to both refinance the debt and pay some or all of the debt service in 2009-10, and perhaps most significantly are we getting a second opinion on this move; because the proposal was designed in consultation with the Robert W. Baird company, who will profit from refinancing and whose current Managing Director of public finance in Wisconsin is David W. Noack, who, in his last job, sold Wisconsin school districts some “dubious securities,” which have since collapsed (there has been no publicly released documentation on the debt refinance proposal yet).  Lots of questions, none of which are even hinted at in either news story.

Given the centrality of taxation to both stories (especially the State Journal’s) I have to wonder why neither story saw fit to mention that under MMSD’s current plan the property tax levy will be about $7 million dollars less than is allowed under state law.

Again, this is big news. and the reporters didn’t get it.

Among other things it means that the authority granted by the November, 2008 referendum will not be employed (technically, the referendum authority will likely be used and other authority won’t be used but the dollars and cents come out the same).   It also means that for the first time in recent memory (ever?) Madison will not be providing the maximum possible financial effort on behalf of our children.  That gives me pause.

I’m guessing that some of the blame for missing this fact should be allotted to incompetent public relations and spin by the district.  We’ve been hearing about the “Partnership Plan” ad nauseum but now that there is a real action on the table which will mitigate potential local property taxes and can be expressed in dollars and cents, they miss the opportunity to shine the light where it would be most impressive.  You need big screaming headlines:  MMSD REFUSES TO TAX TO THE MAX:  TAXPAYERS SAVE $7 MILLION. Instead this fact isn’t even part of either story.

A side note:  Regular readers will know that I believe a big part of comprehensive school finance reform has to reverse the trend of increased reliance on property taxes, so I have some sympathy with the anti-property tax rhetoric.  However, I do think that much of the what we have been hearing since Superintendent Nerad arrived is subtly counter-productive for comprehensive reform.  Two big parts of the Partnership Plan were that “Mitigating property taxes is good” and that “We can continue to cut and not harm education.”  The anti-property tax message sounds a whole lot like a general anti-tax message unless presented very carefully.  When there are cuts in services and allocations we are being told either that there are no cuts or that the cuts will have no impact on the education being offered.  This invites people to say “keep on cutting” and to forget that there have been cuts for 16 years.  Nerad has made a good case for supporting education and comprehensive reform in other contexts, but the result of these mixed messages is cognitive dissonance.

Back to the State Journal story for two last, quick items.  First, other than the Reschovsky quote, there is little in the way of context or the state finance system or even the local context of 16 years of cuts.  Last, the quote from Erik Kass on the 2010-11 budget near the end is true and needs to be heard:

“These (numbers) are ugly.”

Local news sources have an essential role into play in keeping local institutions and government vital and honest.  To fulfill this role requires that reporters develop expertise and have the time and space to cover stories in some depth.  If the reporters don’t tell the public what is going on, most people won’t bother to seek out the information themselves and will consequently neglect opportunities for involvement and vote from ignorance.   This is what is happening in Madison.

I read school related news from around the state and in the local weeklies and I find a much higher level of coverage of local news than we see in Madison.  These papers serve their communities.

As Bill Wyman notes in the essay linked above, one reason that newspapers are failing financially is that they aren’t providing news.   So, as the Wisconsin State Journal and Capital Times parent company touts their revamped (and ugly and hard to navigate) madison.com,  perhaps offering timely and well-informed stories about local matters could be given some consideration too.

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under "education finance", Budget, education, finance, Gimme Some Truth, Local News, School Finance, Uncategorized

by | August 25, 2009 · 5:03 pm

Ready, Set,…No

traffic light redGeneration X, “Ready, Steady, Go” (click to listen or download)

1910 Fruitgum Company, “1, 2, 3 Red Light” (click to listen or download)

With  much joy and no little fanfare, the preliminary budget passed by the Madison Metropolitan School District in May restored the “Ready, Set, Goal” conferences that teachers and parents found so valuable.   With the opening of school less than one week away “Ready, Set, Goal” conferences are not on the schedule.  At best they are on hold — perhaps until after the potential to shape those crucial days and weeks –; at worst they will not happen at all.  Very disappointing.

Apparently there are contractual issues that have not been settled.

I don’t know what the issues are.  I do know that with most of four months to work with, there should have been a way to make the conferences happen.

There had been or is  a memorandum of understanding in place  to establish “the terms… should finances become available to reinstate the program.”  MTI included a desire to renew that understanding in an April 2009 negotiations update.  I can’t find a copy of the memorandum, so I don’t know what those terms are/were.  I also don’t know if one or both parties are seeking changes to those terms.

While on the topic of “I don’s know,” (lots of them today) I’d like to know what is being done with $267,000 cost included in the preliminary budget (since shifted to stimulus/ARRA sources).

I’d also like to know why at their last meeting the Board was told that they needed to approve $98,918 in ARRA IDEA funding and $160,576 in ARRA Title I funding for “Ready, Set, Goal” conferences in 2009 and what will happen with that money?

Mostly, I’d like to know how such a positive thing went awry.

Thomas J. Mertz

3 Comments

Filed under "education finance", Best Practices, Budget, Contracts, finance, Local News, School Finance, Uncategorized

by | August 20, 2009 · 12:04 pm

Schools and (Property) Taxes — Misdirection, Wrong Direction

conjurerAs the state budget was being finalized we heard a lot from the Governor and legislative power players about how they had not raised taxes significantly (and here).  That talk was meant to direct attention away from the the very significant increases in property taxes that the state budget required from school districts who needed to honor contracts and preserve as much in the way of educational quality as possible while dealing with the biggest gap in recent memory between revenues allowed and/or  provided by the state and educational costs.

This misdirection has bled into outright falsehoods when the Governor has asserted that ARRA stimulus money will provide sicgnificant property tax relief (see here also).

I don’t like this misdirection and I really don’t like that the shift to property taxes is the wrong way to go with school funding.  Governor Jim Doyle knew this in 2005 when he issued a column titled “Freeze Property Taxes, Not Education.”  Both the budget he signed and his recent proposals that would allow districts to raise property taxes if they jump through a series of hoops indicate that he has lost this knowledge.  See here for a position paper from the Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools and here for a plan from the School Finance Network that would adequately fund education and provide property tax relief.   Maybe someone from the Governor’s office could take a look and refresh his memory.

A recent editorial from the Oshkosh Northwestern asserting that “Property tax bills will define Doyle’s legacy” indicates that the misdirection didn’t work.  I hope not, I hope that when the bills come due the anger is directed at state officials and not the struggling local school districts.

School property tax levies will not be finalized until October and the bills won’t hit taxpayers until December, but the size of these property tax increases is starting to become clear as districts around the state consider how they will balance the books.

Racine is considering a 12.08% , mil rate increase.  At a community meeting on the proposal the message was that raising property taxes isn’t good, but it is better than more cuts to education:

Speakers favored raising taxes over cutting district staff or programming, which they said would harm children’s education and subsequently harm the local economy and the future.

“We can’t expect our children to be productive and informed citizens if we don’t adequately invest in their success,” said Jennifer Levie, 39, of Racine, a Unified parent and educator. “It’s unacceptable that we would have to make additional cuts to other critically needed programs.”

Taxpayers seemed to feel this way despite the recession and Racine’s high unemployment rate.

“I feel the crunch sometimes when our taxes are raised but I know it is worth it,” said Maria Morales, a Racine Unified grandmother, senior citizen and city taxpayer who supports a tax rate increase. Morales was one of 13 people who spoke at the budget hearing, attended by about 50 community members.

At the local level the choices are tough because at the state level our elected officials refused to make the tough choice to revamp Wisconsin’s revenue system.

Things mostly are in place for for very bad school budget choices in 2009-10 and 2010-11 (a “Cents for Schools” sales tax could provide some emergency relief as well as the basis for longer term school funding improvements).  If we want to stop this trend from extending further, the time to act is now.

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under "education finance", Budget, education, finance, Local News, School Finance, Take Action