GreenfieldNOW.com
search all things local
     
Blog Home |  Email Author  |  About this Blog       Welcome to MyCommunityNOW - Blogs Sign in | Join

Curmudgeon's Corner

cur-mud-geon: anyone who hates hypocrisy and pretense and has the temerity to say so; anyone with the habit of pointing out unpleasant facts in an engaging and humorous manner

Village Buzz - July 29th

By Al Campbell
Tuesday, Jul 29 2008, 08:25 AM

Board of Education Meeting Review:

The agenda item concerning the secession petition involved some back and forth amongst board members.  Mr. Warnimont pointed out that the Board was already on record with its action of September 24, 2007 to the effect that the secession petition would go forward.  There was some discussion as to which district would be preferable to MATC.  Mr. Bowe indicated that his position favoring WCTC would probably change given new information he had developed.  Among the reasons was the indication that fire fighters seemed to favor the program offered by MPTC over that offered by WCTC.  Mr. Warnimont indicated that he remained in favor of WCTC based on his analysis.

The long and the short of this discussion and the ensuing vote is this:  The Board will have the petition in its hands by the meeting on September 8th, will make its final decision on desired district and will proceed with the filing prior to the deadline established by the Technical College System.

There was some consternation amongst Board members that they were being castigated in the press for having delayed this process.  It was pointed out that, given the Technical College System process, filing last year or filing this year prior to the deadline would have no effect on the actual date the secession could occur if approved.  The date of such a change, if approved, is set forth and is inflexible.

Discussion concerning the building referendum issue included a review of the findings from the recent survey.  There were 11,647 pieces mailed to district homes, and a response rate of some 15% had been logged.  This was felt to be a good return at a total cost of $4,200.  The results seemed to echo the election results in terms of the number in favor and the number opposed.

Mr. Warnimont indicated that recent reviews of the cost changes since the referendum was defeated showed an overall increase of about 20% if no changes were made to the plan as presented earlier.  This increase was caused by the general increase in prices being felt in most sectors of the economy.

If I had to guess as to what direction the Board will take regarding the referendum, I would expect that we'll not see the question on the ballot again until possibly in the spring of 2009.  I would also expect that the proposal for the elementary building will have been revised.

~~~~~~~~~~

Tax Knowledge Test Answers:

Remember that the questions asked for a true or false answer.

  • Property taxes pay for most of the costs of the K-12 public schools in Wisconsin.
    • False.  The most recent data we have available states that in 2004-05, gross property taxes paid for 38% of school districts' budgets in Wisconsin.  During that same period, inter-governmental aid paid for 56% of school districts' budgets.  The public opinion survey showed that 65% of survey respondents believed that property taxes fund the majority of costs for public K-12 education.
  • Wisconsin taxpayers pay more of their personal income toward state and local taxes today than they did 10 years ago.
    • False.  In 1994, the Wisconsin tax burden as a percent of personal income was 13.5%.  The most recent data available is for 2006; that year, Wisconsin taxpayers paid 11.6% of their income in taxes.  The public opinion survey found that 78% of respondents believed the statement was true.
  • Wisconsin collects more money from sales taxes than it does from gasoline taxes and corporate taxes combined.
    • True.  In 2007, sales tax accounted for 19% of all state and local taxes collected.  Corporate and gasoline taxes accounted for a total of 9% combined.  The public opinion survey found that only 26% of respondents believed the statement was true, while 35% believed the statement was false.

 (This courtesy of The Wisconsin Way.)

Comments

GTT   

Al,

With the arrogance that this school board has shown in the past it would not shock me in the least if they tried to put another school referendum on the ballot this November. I believe they will keep trying to wear down the taxpayers untill they get what they want, even though both the questionnaire and last falls vote results show that the majority of this community does not want to build a new school. I am not sure how many different ways you can tell this board no before they understand!

July 29, 2008 11:21 AM

Concerned GT Resident   

Arrogance how?  By consistently delivering lower tax bills for the past several years, while the Village and MATC continue to compete for largest annual increase?

GTT, please provide another alternative to the very real space problem.

July 29, 2008 11:38 AM

Irwin Fletcher   

Well the School Board finally decided to act on this issue, It's about time. What the School Board doesn't seem to get is that by dragging thir feet they may have pushed the actual change date back to 2010. If the

technical college board does not act until after January 1st the change wont take affect until 2010. That is why they should have acted earlier to avoid the posiibility that the state wont act on it in time to affect the 2009 tax bills.

Also as our students can attend any Technical School in the state, why are school board members arguing over which district to join? It does not seem to matter. So if the firefighters want to got to MPTC let them go there, its not like it will cost us more to send them to classes there. So the board will argue and fight about this and drag this on farther than it needs to. Lets hope that they dont miss the Sept 15th deadline.

In regards to the referendum, if it didnt pass at $16M how does the board think it will pass at a 20% higher cost? According to RWB that is what the new cost might be with increased construction and materials costs. Not going to happen.

It seems that the Village Board is also getting a cold dose of reality that they cannot continue to spend like drunk sailors either. It amazes me that the board had no funds for three years in the budget for road repairs. What were they thinking? Freeze your spending, reduce your budgets and fix the roads and maybe the Villages portion of the tax bill will be the lowest for once.  

July 29, 2008 12:24 PM

GTT   

CGR, once again you jump to the defense of this school board! I am not going to rehash how they have shown their arrogance you can go back a reread my other posts, I have spoken to a few of them in person and the condescending attitude that they answered my questions with was enough. But just the fact that they want to put the exact same referendum on the November ballot without trying to change what they are asking for shows just some of their arrogance. Tell me why they/you cannot accept the fact that the majority of this community has shown in black and white that they do not want to build a new school not once but twice?!

As far as MATC goes I am absolutly against the fat tax increases they continue to pass without any taxpayer input or ramifications! Hopefully, if our school board doesn't continue to drag their feet they can get the paperwork filed as soon as possible and maybe we will be able to remove ourselves from the MATC tax hell district.(I have my doubts though).

As far as the village goes I have already voiced my opposition to one of our trustees about increasing taxes, there are many areas that could be looked at for budget cuts/freezes to prevent a substantial tax increase!

July 29, 2008 1:06 PM

Concerned GT Resident   

Correction GTT, the new school was only on the ballot one time, not twice.  Where did you read that it is going back on the November ballot?  And with the same proposal?

Oh, facts probably don't matter.

July 29, 2008 10:16 PM

GTT   

CGR,

I don't believe that i ever said that it was on the ballot twice, but it is nice to know that you are willing to spin my comment in a way that suites your argumennt!

Let me explain to you what I said so you might understand. The new school was on the ballot once and was voted down, then a few months later a survey was sent out and again the majority said they did not support a new school. This feedback from the survey is a direct reflection of how another referendum would most likely end.

So again I ask you the question, why can you and the board not accept the fact that there is a lack of support from the majority at this time.

It is clearly evedint at this time the majority doesn't want to pay for a new school.

July 30, 2008 8:56 AM

Leave a Comment

Please Sign In to post comment.