Sendik's Food Market 60 Days Later...

I have yet to encounter a Sendik's associate who wasn't happy to be there and who wasn't happy to help me.

I have noted that the facility remains bright and cheery with a very clean floor, which I thought might be problematic given carpeting.  Winter will be a bigger challenge.  Shelves are always fully stocked; delicious samples are scattered throughout the store.

I don't know about you, but I am happy Sendik's selected Germantown as the site for one of their beautiful grocery facilities.

~~~~~~~~~~

Veterans Day 2008...

Remember that the 2008 Veterans Day ceremony will be held at the Veterans Memorial at the corner of Freistadt Road and Park Avenue on Sunday, November 9th at 10:30AM.  If you've not seen the memorial, it is worth your time.

A little history...

Veterans Day was originally known as Armistice Day when proclaimed by President Woodrow Wilson for November 11, 1919 to celebrate all veterans of World War I.  It finally became known as Veterans Day on November 8, 1954 when Congress amended the act to change the name and to have the day honor all veterans who have served their country.  The President was Dwight D. Eisenhower.

The American Legion will also conduct a flag disposal ceremony following the program so that you can properly dispose of any torn, tattered and/or faded American Flag you may have.

~~~~~~~~~~

County Supervisors Cut Property Tax Levy...

The supervisors agreed to take half of the county's sales tax revenue into the operating budget for 2009.

Unfortunately, this budget cuts the $35,000 for the County Convention and Visitors Bureau and cuts $15,000 from the Fair Park.  The Village of Germantown is working to assist the Convention and Visitors Bureau since it receives significant promotion from that organization and felt that the funding cut by the county would have consequences for the community and its merchants.

The county set a 2009 tax rate of $2.71 per $1,000 which is down about $0.10 per $1,000 from this year.

~~~~~~~~~~

SRO Officer In Schools...

I had the pleasure of meeting SRO Tim Miller during the Citizen Police Academy session this past Wednesday evening.  He gave us an overview of his duties in the schools and discussed the changes that have been brought about since this program was initiated.  "SRO" means School Resource Officer.  The SRO is a sworn officer and funding for this position is paid jointly by the school district and the police department on a 75%-25% ratio, respectively.

Our high school is a much quieter place of learning than before the initiation of this program several years ago.  Student fights seldom occur now; the SRO has formed relationships that help both students and administration.  And, students develop, I suspect, a much different view of police officers having had this experience.  The SRO is available for class instruction whenever the subject matter entails.  SRO Miller, in this case, can 'tell it like it is' during driver education and health classes, for example.

This strikes me as a very good use of taxpayer dollars that provides both a current payback as well as future benefits.

Trick or Treat from 5:30PM to 7:30PM...

Please remember that the little witches, ghosts and goblins will be out and about throughout the village tonight and that they cannot always see well through their masks or costumes.

~~~~~~~~~~

MATC Secession Public Hearings Set...

The Wisconsin Technical College Board has two meetings set for the near future at which citizens can testify for or against the petition filed earlier by the Germantown School District to be permitted to move from the MATC district into the Moraine Park district.

Those meetings are to be held on Tuesday, November 11th at two different times in two different Menomonee Falls locations.  The first is from 2PM to 5PM and is to be convened at the Menomonee Falls Public Library; the second is from 6PM to 8PM and will be held at the Menomonee Falls Community Center.

The chances for a favorable ruling are likely slim already given the history that prevails.  Public testimony on issues regarding access and class selection, for example, might help tip the balance.  Remember that tax rates are not something the Board will take into account in reaching its conclusion.

~~~~~~~~~~

Special Board Meeting Results Unknown...

The village trustees met behind closed doors last evening for the following stated purpose:

Adjourn into closed session under Wis. Stats. 19.85 (1)(c) considering employment, promotion, compensation or performance evaluation data of any public employee over which the governmental body has jurisdiction or exercises responsibility; (f) considering financial, medical, social or personal histories or disciplinary data of specific persons, preliminary consideration of specific personnel problems or the investigation of charges against specific persons except where para. (b) applies, which, if discussed in public, would be likely to have a substantial adverse effect upon the reputation of any person referred to in such histories or data, or involved in such problems or investigations; or (g) conferring with legal counsel for the governmental body who is rendering oral or written advice concerning strategy to be adopted by the body with respect to litigation in which it is or is likely to become involved

A deductive process would reasonably suggest that this closed door meeting pertained to the issue of the alleged sexual harassment recently brought to light.  I know of nothing else that would seem to fit the descriptions provided in the Wis. Stats. section above.  There were allegations that could be damaging.  There is an employee involved.  The employee apparently had threatened legal action if she felt wronged by actions of the Board so far as her position was concerned.

Some three weeks have passed since the story broke, the citizens have no more information than at that time, and don't yet know what is going on.  It seems that there must be something happening, since the Village Board passed its unanimous statement of support for President Kempinski.  It looks as though the Village Attorney was likely in attendance, as one would expect. 

Village Administrator Schornack stated, according to a small piece by Tom Kertscher on the GermantownNOW site, that he would be informing trustees about a personnel issue and that the trustees would not be taking any action.

I certainly hope that we'll all be privy to what has been going on and what may be expected in the future before too much more time has passed.

I had intended to scan a copy of the sample ballot for Germantown however that wasn't sufficiently legible.  So, we'll list the offices for which there are candidate selections to be made by all of us who are registered to vote in the village.

You may elect to vote a straight ticket including, in the order found on the ballot:

• Democratic
• Republican
• Wisconsin Green
• Libertarian

The race for President and Vice President, in the order found on the ballot:

• Barack Obama/Joe Biden (Democratic)
• John McCain/Sarah Palin (Republican)
• Cynthia McKinney/Rosa Clemente (Wisconsin Green)
• Bob Barr/Wayne A. Root (Libertarian)
• Brian Moore/Stewart A. Alexander (Socialist Party USA)
• Gloria LaRiva/Robert Moses (Party for Socialism, & Liberation)
• Ralph Nader/Matt Gonzalez (Independent)
• Chuck Baldwin/Darrell L. Castle (Constitution Party)
• Jeffrey J. Wamboldt/David J. Klimisch (We, the People)
• Write-in________________

Representative in Congress District 5, in the order found on the ballot:

• F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr. (Republican)
• Robert R. Raymond (Independent)
• Write-in________________

State Senator District 8, in the order found on the ballot:

• Sheldon A. Wasserman (Democratic)
• Alberta Darling (Republican)
• Write-in________________

Representative to the Assembly District 24, in the order found on the ballot:

• Charlene S. Brady (Democratic)
• Dan Knodl (Republican)
• Write-in________________

District Attorney:

• Todd K. Martens (Republican)
• Write-in________________

County Clerk:

• Brenda J. Jaszewski (Republican)
• Write-in_________________

Treasurer:

• Janice Gettelman (Republican)
• Write-in_________________

Register of Deeds:

• Sharon Martin (Republican)
• Write-in_________________

Referendum - Germantown School District

Question #1:

Shall the following Initial Resolution be approved?

INITIAL RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $22,500,000

BE IT RESOLVED by the School Board of the Germantown School District, Washington County, Wisconsin that there shall be issued pursuant to Chapter 67 of the Wisconsin Statutes, general obligation bonds in an amount not to exceed $22,500,000 for the public purpose of paying the cost of constructing a new elementary school on school district property next to Kinderberg Park; technology, safety and security initiatives District wide; and acquiring furnishings, fixtures and equipment.

Yes ____

No   ____

Question #2

Shall the following Resolution be approved?

RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SCHOOL DISTRICT BUDGET TO EXCEED REVENUE LIMIT BY $500,000

FOR RECURRING PURPOSES

BE IT RESOLVED by the School Board of the Germantown School District, Washington County, Wisconsin that the revenues included in the School District budget for the 2010-2011 school year and thereafter be authorized to exceed the revenue limit specified in Section 121.91, Wisconsin Statutes, by $500,000 a year, for recurring purposes consisting of costs associated with the new elementary school.

Yes ____

No   ____

~~~~~~~~~~

The ballot is two-sided as you would expect from the many questions.

"Your mission, should you decide to accept..."

That lead-in to the old Mission Impossible television show came to mind as I pondered today's Village Buzz topic possibilities.

I take some of our elected representatives to task now and then, and some of you readers do the same in your comments.  Maybe it is time for us to "put up or shut up" as the old saying goes (not really but it gets the point across).  If we have ideas as to how our governing entities could do things differently, lets put those on the table and see if any grow legs.

For example, we see privatized prisons popping up around the country.  That happened because the private sector found a use for capital that took a burden from the shoulders of the taxpayer.  I read of the latest Scott Walker budget proposals for Milwaukee County and thought that he has to be among the most creative politicians I've seen in some time (and, I hope he runs for Governor again).

What is there in our small world that could be done differently if we were to 'color outside the lines' for awhile?  At the risk of angering entrenched interests, I'll throw out a few thoughts along those lines (remember that there may be some current impediments but that most impediments are man-made and could be altered if we demanded that):

Why not look to the private sector to build a school building that we can lease?  The lessor could be obligated to handle all repairs, for example, over the term of the lease to assure that things that break get fixed on a timely basis instead of being delayed until they manifest as something worse.  I see many former hospitals that have been turned into apartment buildings, for example.  Just because a building is built to house students, doesn't have to mean that it would always be a school building.  As population ebbs and flows, this would give the taxpayer some welcomed flexibility.  Would this be workable?  We won't know unless we ask the questions.

What about a charter school or an Internet school option to take student-count pressure off the buildings now available?  Might that also reduce the personnel costs? 

Many communities have hired assessor organizations and building inspector organizations to do their specialized work instead of retaining this talent on their own payrolls.  Why not go through an extensive review of what we could do along those lines.  That might reduce costs.  It might eliminate our angst over rising benefit costs that have been negotiated and about which we can do nothing even as we watch the private sector deal with those same issues.  Current employees with those skills might welcome the opportunity to become entrepreneurs and build new companies that other communities could employ.

Would it be possible to contract for road repair and shift some of the uncertainties off onto a private sector entity?  Private business is accustomed to taking risk.  Government tends to have to avoid risk and that adds expense.  Road salting and snow plowing, for example, is a real problem given a hard winter and higher salt costs.  If a private firm were contracted, it would bear that risk.  I see many landscape firms that become snow plowers and salters in the winter.  Is that worth exploring?

Would it make sense to lease computer servers for the village's use and have those housed in a private data center that does that as its primary business?  The village wouldn't have need for the IT skills that it might today.  Leasing of such systems might prove more economical and is an expense for which we could plan.

In most of these examples, the private sector would probably be more efficient, less susceptible to the political winds that blow hot and then cold, more intent on running very tightly controlled operations, etc.  Where there is a true risk/reward relationship that is properly negotiated and vetted, I believe that the private sector is simply better at that than is a government body.  And, as the "sidewalk" issue shows, I feel certain that the private sector can get things done in shorter time periods in most cases.

"Your mission, should you decide to accept" is to come up with your own ideas that might be capable of altering the way we look at the world of Germantown government and the Germantown school system today.  I look forward to your comments...if you are brave enough/foolish enough to offer those.  Most of you, at least, have anonymity on your side.  I'm just hanging out there with my zipper down.

Special Board Meeting Follow-Up...

The special board meeting to be convened at 5:30PM tonight deals, in part, with the Waste Management strike and garbage pick-up delays.  I received an email from President Kempinski over the week-end discussing my Village Buzz piece of late last week.

He indicated that the Waste Management topic had been added to the special meeting agenda to "keep the Board apprised as to the status of collection, and determine if the Board wishes to change companies should the company fall even further behind".  He went on to state that he didn't want to change companies but that he felt compelled to explore alternatives in case service should drop to even lower levels.

I had indicated that our personal experience was that Friday's pick-up was made on Friday.  He mentioned that the village had received calls indicating that pick-ups had been delayed two days in some instances.

President Kempinski also discussed the eventuality of switching to Veolia if Waste Management's service degraded to the point where that would be necessary.  His reasoning seemed to be that, if this went on for some time, and if many communities had similar experiences, there could be a wholesale departure from Waste Management that would overwhelm Veolia's capabilities.

He believes that, if Veolia comes back to the village indicating that it would be willing to accept the terms of the Waste Management agreement, the Board would be willing to switch.

A couple of thoughts come to mind:

If the current agreement has a five-day clause and if Waste Management continues to pick up garbage within that time span, does the village have any real recourse?

Even if there is a wholesale move away from Waste Management, maybe Germantown would, by staying with Waste Management after some agreement renegotiation actually see improved service since Waste Management would have less business and would likely be trying very diligently to repair the image damage it would've suffered.

I'll report on the discussion from today's special meeting in a 'Village Buzz' item tomorrow, if not before.

~~~~~~~~~~

School District Budget Deliberations...

An earlier segment on the current budget debate within the Germantown School District referred to some debate as to the size and configuration of the budget for the coming year.

It appears that this debate continues and centers on the draft prepared by the Administration which does not yet meet the constraints that at least some Board members feel necessary.  A target amount of $39,495,814 had been established last spring.  The administration has continued to stand behind a proposed budget that is some $650,000 higher.

Obviously, the school district has a relatively new business manager although he did have experience gained as a member of the school board when assuming that position.  There was over-spending in several accounts that were discretionary in nature as opposed to accounts that are relatively 'locked in'.  This apparently has caused some concern as to fiscal constraint. 

We also have a new superintendent who certainly has been working hard to learn his new district's idiosyncrasies and needs while also working to build his board and staff relationships.  That may be at work to some degree but it seems that staff would be anxious to follow its new leader rather than 'stand in the doorway'.

I suppose that staff might be expected to seek more money than the board is willing to provide, but, at some point, posturing has to give ground to reality.

That was the title of an editorial appearing this morning in the Journal Sentinel.  It went on with a header that read: "Germantown officials should drop the effort to secede from the Milwaukee Area Technical College.  The savings aren't worth the cost."

I was quite interested to see what logic had led the editorial group to reach this conclusion.  Even though the petition cannot be about money, they admit that this would probably save the Germantown taxpayer with a home valued at $300,000 about $129 per year, or a little more if the change requested led to a slight decrease in the tax rate for the new district, MPTC.

They opined that this was simply not worth the cost...not to those of us in Germantown necessarily, but to the seven county metropolitan area.  It would "deprive" MATC of some $5.5 million in revenue.  They talk about this being harmful to the students of MATC including those from Germantown.  If there are 100 students from our area attending MATC, the cost to the Germantown School District taxpayer has to be in the range of $55,000 per student per year.  If there are 200, then we drop all the way down to an average of $27,500 per student per year.  That is an over-simplification but it helps put all this into perspective.

They discuss what they see as the poor timing of this and, in essence, lay blame for whatever happens to the seven county area economic development efforts at our feet if the petition is approved.  Wow!  If only we'd known what power we had before this, we could've really gone for something big!

We now become an integral part of the Milwaukee metropolitan region.  Funny how that is always the case when they seek our money, but is never the case when they're formulating some master plan.

The editorial does finally admit that MATC's taxes are too high, and they say that officials there need to place "some restraint" on expenditures.  That message doesn't seem to get through, however, to an appointed (unelected) board that rolls over every time MATC President Darnell Cole says "roll over".

Now, back to that $129 that we're not supposed to be concerned about.   For the Germantown School District, that could easily have been converted to a new elementary school.  That would've taken some $84 of the tax relief had this been available when we all voted on that issue...before prices climbed.  It could've likely funded our village road repair coffers very nicely on the balance of $45 per $300,000 of home value.

$129 isn't 'chump change' as so many would try to shame us into believing. 

And why is it our responsibility to pump more and more money into MATC so that it can try, unsuccessfully, to repair some of the MPS damage?  Why is it our responsibility to sit out here in 'the boonies' (from the perspective of the decision-makers in Milwaukee) and continually cough up more money for their needs.  When do they reciprocate? 

MATC Secession...

It appears that we're finally moving ahead in the effort to have ourselves removed from the MATC district and moved into the Moraine Park Technical College (MPTC) district.  In spite of some village officials' assertions, the timing of this filing and its date of effect wouldn't have changed by filing three months earlier.  That complaint is a 'straw man' from my perspective.

I would suspect that a filing made on behalf of a school district would receive more consideration than had the village filed its own petition.  The school district speaks on behalf of the area while the village would speak on behalf of only the Village of Germantown.  While we're a significant part of the school district, we're not all of it by any means.

Can we make history and become only the second such petition to be successfully brought?  Wouldn't it be interesting since the first and only successful petition was that filed by our area to be removed from the MPTC area and realigned with the MATC area in 1971, if memory serves?

What goes around, comes around...maybe!

~~~~~~~~~~

Waste Management Strike...

The village is, of course, served by Waste Management.  The Local 200 teamster members who are employees of Waste Management went out on strike, as you've probably heard, after some four months of trying to resolve issues on behalf of those members.

Village President Tom Kempinski has reportedly threatened to terminate the village's contract with Waste Management apparently to protest the company's inaction, and has supposedly sought an opinion from the village attorney as to whether or not this is possible.  Kempinski is affiliated with Local 200 although he denies that has any direct involvement in this action.

Two things: 

Our service with Waste Management is much improved over that we received from the former servicing company.  I presume that many of those current teamster members were probably also former employees of the last firm that had the Germantown contract.

This seems a very convenient time for Kempinski to be pushing a termination; he appears to be using the village's business to bring even more heat on the Waste Management negotiating team in favor of his fellow teamsters.  That is inappropriate if true, and an unfortunate confluence of events if simply coincidence.

His two lives must be kept separate and distinct.

~~~~~~~~~~

The Harley Rumble...

The "Harley Rumble", as I'll call it, has returned to our area.  As I lay my head on the pillow last night, I could hear the sounds that are only made by Harleys waft through the open window.  We're a couple of miles away from Hwy 41/45 so my joy may well have been another's dismay, but it is a great sound that we last heard some five years ago.

Quite a tribute to the small motorized bicycle shop that started in a shed.

And, quite a bump for the local economy.  I had begun to see out-of-towners in Harley garb already patronizing local stores and hotels and watering holes yesterday. 

News reports indicate that Village President Tom Kempinski is considering asking the Board to approve a referendum that would appear on either the September ballot or the November ballot.  This referendum would deal with just how Germantown voters desire to fund some $2,000,000 per year in road repairs, if they desire to do so.  The choices apparently would be borrowing, increasing property taxes or a combination of both or none.

The referendum could be advisory or binding in nature.  Obviously, if advisory, the Board would then decide what, if any action it would take, but it would do so with some idea of the public's mood.  If binding, the results would stand as the electorate decided at least until the Board was reconstituted or until the Board found some other approach to achieve the end if that were possible.

If property taxes were increased by $2,000,000 annually, the increase in village taxes over 2008 would be some 20.5% without consideration for any other line item increases in the village budget. It is unrealistic to assume that all other expenses will remain constant.  If the amount were to be borrowed, the debt service would be part of the tax increase each year so that both the amount spent each year plus interest would be added to the tax bills over a number of years.

The village's portion of our total tax bill in 2008 was 24.52%; that share would climb to 30.67% if all other taxing units remained at 2008 levels which, unfortunately, is very unlikely.  The actual increase in total property taxes due to the village's portion of the total could be something in the range of 1% to 2% I would suspect.

Use of a referendum will please some people and anger others.  Some will say that this gives the voter the direct voice on specific items that they otherwise lack in representative government.  Others will say the referendum gives the Board a place to hide; still others will say that there should be no referendum.

There are several questions that come to mind about which you may wish to make your views known:

1.  Do we need $2 million worth of road repair every year?  For how many years?

2.  What portion of the village's road surfaces need to be repaired today? 

3.  Have past Boards avoided their responsibilities and not funded road repairs properly?

4.  Is a referendum a good idea or is it a convenient tool for a Board that doesn't wish to stake out a position that may be very unpopular?

5.  If this referendum appears on the ballot, what impact will that have on any issue the School Board may advance at the same time?

6.  If we are to see a referendum, should it be simply an advisory referendum or should it bind the Board to a specific direction?

What think you G'town?

I don't know if the MATC has a public relations agency under contract but, if it does, they deserve a raise..more than the president of MATC deserves the one he just received!  It is impossible for any PR firm to cover the smell of this institution.

That's right.  The president of MATC, Darnell Cole, just received a pay increase of 5.2%.  This is the same Darnell Cole that was trying to get out of MATC by applying for a position with Lansing Community College in Michigan.  This is the same Darnell Cole that thumbs his nose at the constituency and gets higher and higher budgets passed that take more and more of our money in property taxes.

This almost seems like the college basketball coaches and football coaches who apply for other jobs simply to 'justify' increased compensation when they change their minds and stay in their already over-paid positions.  Maybe this is the way of the world of academia.  Maybe I simply am so out of touch that I can't comprehend that fact.

Cole now receives, effective today, $223,675 in base salary.  That's not all, of course.  He gets a total of $259,131 which includes retirement plan contributions and travel allowance.  The base pay increase was 3.25%.  The retirement supplement increase was 6.7%, and the travel allowance increase was some 44%.  His travel allowance doesn't cover the trips he takes by plane, etc.; it covers the cost of him driving around the MATC world in his automobile.  The retirement supplement is in addition to his already very attractive retirement under the Wisconsin Retirement System.  A little gravy for the gravy, as it were.

Even worse, if that is possible, is the fact that three of the nine members of the MATC Board didn't think it worth their while to be in attendance at the meeting where this was approved.  The remaining six voted, 5-1, in favor.  The sole dissenting vote was from Rep. Pedro Colon (D-Milwaukee) who felt Cole's long-term commitment to MATC was called into question by the recent attempt to leave the college for a better-paying job. 

Kudos to Rep. Colon!  Was his decision prompted by the fact that he must face the electorate?  Obviously, if the full MATC board were comprised of people who were forced to face the electorate, we would very likely see a much different MATC. 

There is but one conclusion.  MATC simply rubs our noses in it every chance it gets.  MATC is impervious to our scolding.  It never has to face the music.  It simply goes on its merry way increasing programs whether or not there is a return on that investment.  It simply goes on providing largess for its own.

This is an example of why the overall tax increase caused by the recently approved MATC budget was 4.9%.  Of course, we weren't told, before the budget was cast in stone, that Darnell Cole had yet to get his.  That might have been too obvious...even for we members of the great unwashed who only pay the toll on this road to nowhere!

Where does the secession petition stand?  Will it be filed on time?  Will the school board and the village board see eye-to-eye on the desired district?  Will our elected officials, both local, county and state, get behind this is a vocal and meaningful way? 

MATC has now ended the suspense.  Whew!  It has officially increased its tax take by the 4.9% that it miraculously managed to get down to from the original 'straw man' of 6.4%.  This codifies the fact that MATC's appetite for tax dollars has risen by some 30% over the past five years.  MATC's leadership, if it can be called that without demeaning the word, just can't seem to understand that, while it is impervious to the wants and needs of the citizenry it serves, it really has permitted its reach to exceed our grasp.

MATC strikes me as an iceberg looking for a ship to sink.  It is floating along with the tip showing while the bulk of the 'bloat' lies just under the waterline, out of sight and, too often, out of mind.  Until it hits the ship of taxpayers yet again.  The taxpayers on this 'ship of fools' have finally come to understand, at least in Germantown, that they would be better-served if they were permitted to disembark from the current ship that continues to be victimized by the MATC iceberg...year after year after year after year!

That disembarkation is, however, contingent on so many disparate factors as to seem nearly unachievable.  First and foremost is that failure to make the petition to the state technical college board seeking a move from MATC to another contiguous tech college district renders all the other points moot.  If that is filed, then we wait and see what the august state tech college board members decide is to be our fate.  The last such application was made in 2004 and was denied.  That doesn't necessarily mean that this petition would suffer the same fate...but it is probably a decent precursor.  The only other successful action of this nature involved Germantown's petition to be moved into the MATC district back in the early 1970s.  (Ironic, isn't it?)

Back to the basics, however.  This rate of increase could've been far better controlled if the governing board for MATC were subject to re-election.  It isn't.  It is subject only to the parochial appointment desires of MATC.  Talk about a great deal, huh?  If I'm going to be governed by someone, I'd love the opportunity to pick the person without any outside interference over things such as how effective they'd be in administering their responsibilities.  If I 'accidentally' picked someone that was in lock-step with my positions and goals, could I possibly be faulted?  Sure, but it would be meaningless because no one could do anything about it except maybe move away to escape.

Maybe more to the point, I could've used the euphemism of a polar ice mass, a glacier, grinding everything in its path into submission.  Pretty soon there'll be nothing left here to tax.  It'll have been destroyed by the taxes rendered.

I guess the good news is that you can't tax the same dollar for more than 100 cents, so there is some ultimate end point.  Yet, there are so many taxes being levied against each of our dollars that we get less and less while everything costs us more and more.

Maybe, IF we pursue the change in tech college districts, and IF the state tech college board approves, we can rid ourselves of MATC President Cole, his board and his kingdom of fire-breathing dragons that burn everything of value they can identify in their domain.

I believe a full scale audit of that institution is called for and I believe one or more of our elected officials at the state level needs to pick up that banner and carry it high for all to see.  This is way past the point of being mere Blog fodder, although it sure has been good for that!

The move toward filing the documents necessary to seek secession from the Milwaukee Area Technical College tax district has begun to draw some debate amongst the politicos in Germantown.

Village President Kempinski has been quoted as being concerned with the seemingly slow movement in this process, and School Board President Erdmann says that we shouldn't worry because it is being taken up in July for ultimate filing in August.

Some have pointed to the earlier appointment of Superintendent Victor Rossetti as the death blow to any secession movement since Germantown is now directly represented on the MATC Board.

Mr. Rossetti will serve his last day as superintendent on June 30th.  What happens then?  Does he have to step down or is he permitted to serve out his term since he is then a 'former' superintendent.  What happens if he moves from the MATC district?  Is he immediately susceptible to removal if he doesn't resign?

Interesting questions all.  I have written earlier of some concern since the MATC discussion had been quiet for a seemingly long period of time.  Then we were advised that we shouldn't worry since the school board would resume its discussion in July. 

We are still a long way from the actual filing of documents and then we must await the decision of the state technical college board that is due within ninety days of the filing.  Then, even if we were to be successful...and that is far from a certainty...the actual secession wouldn't occur until the start of a new fiscal period for technical colleges.

And, of course, while this all plays out, we are being over-taxed and under-served by the money-eating monster that we know as MATC.

What we don't need are any artificial obstacles cropping up along the pathway to change.

We are, by all signs, involved in an oil cost run-up driven by demand being greater than supply.  It is exacerbated for us Americans because our monetary policy has seen an intentional softening of the dollar (our money is worth less than other peoples' money, so it takes more of it to buy a barrel of crude oil).  I paid $4.20 per gallon yesterday with the price of crude oil standing at about $130 +/- per barrel.  Predictions of crude oil prices of $150 per barrel or more are seen or heard regularly now.  And, the cost of oil could well be higher than that by year-end.

How did we get to this point?  We got there by congressional law making, by presidents rolling over and signing those bills, and by our country's increasing needs/demand for gasoline and diesel fuel.  Why would we permit ourselves to become part of such a quagmire?

Politics!  Politics played by those on both sides of the aisle.  Conservatives seem to have lost their voices.  Liberals never seem to lose their voices.

Laws were re-written more than thirty years ago to make it nearly impossible for a new refinery to be built.  Those were the result of congress being rolled by the environmentalists and presidents either believing the rhetoric of the day or fearing the backlash should they stand up to the rhetoric.  This has continued to this very day.  We are forbidden from drilling within 200 miles of the California and Florida coastlines but the Chinese are already doing so as we sit on our thumbs.  We are unable to pursue the shale oil deposits that span our northern plains and southwestern states.  We have ample untapped resources that are readily available but our laws don't permit us to make use of those resources.

We see the 'global warming' group and the 'environmentalist group' driving our economy into the ground...and we have not found the moral outrage/courage to stand up to them and say "no more"!  We could easily build new refineries in any number of locations around our country but we're not permitted to do so.  We know how to drill and refine today without ruining our world.  It takes from 6 to 10 years to bring a new refinery on-line so the time to have declared a moratorium on the rules that made it impossible to build new refining capacity has come and gone.  But, the typical congressional response of "that will take ten years" should remind us that if we don't roll back those silly laws today, it'll take ten years from whenever we do roll back those silly laws.  The time to begin is now, not next week or next month.

We witnessed the ridiculous 'hearings' held by congress in the past few weeks.  We watched as Sen. Herb Kohl embarrassed himself by chiding the 'big bad oil companies' for making a profit.  He is a former businessman who certainly understands that profit must be derived in order for businesses to exist and grow.  He knew how that worked when he ran Kohl's Food Stores.  He certainly must have some comprehension as the owner of the Milwaukee Bucks.  His statement to the oil company executives that their profits didn't seem fair gives one a lot of insight.  He knows better but he will play/pander to the crowd he favors.  He 'feels' as do most liberals.  He doesn't necessarily reason.  He has his millions, so he can set out to control everyone else who aspires to similar success.

Sen. Kohl is but one of the 535 members of congress.  Too many of those men and women are too intent on keeping their offices to actually vote the way they probably know they should.  You have probably heard the old phrase that states you must "go along to get along".  That should be inscribed over the doorways leading to the House and the Senate chambers since it is the rule that is followed by the vast majority of people who walk through those portals.  That is true on the national stage, the state stage and the local stage.

The people who go to Washington and who do not give in and play by the Washingtonian rules are few and very far between.

Whose fault is this dilemma in the final analysis?  Yours and mine. 

We're the men and women who have permitted this to happen.  We don't vote in the House or the Senate, but we do elect those who do...and we do not seem to unelect people very often once they've gotten into office.  Rep. Steve Kagen (D) from the Appleton area stands for re-election this November.  He is at his most defeatable point historically.  If he survives the first re-election campaign and keeps his seat, he is likely to be in that seat for so long as he desires without regard to how he votes or doesn't vote.

We're so unconcerned about our vote, it seems, that we don't even think voting is sacrosanct enough to require valid photo identification before we're permitted to cast a ballot. 

So, all this angst has been brought to us by us.  Remember that the next time you buy gasoline or diesel fuel.  Remember that the next time you go to the grocery store and try to make your food budget stretch.  Remember that when you ponder whether or not you'll be able to take a vacation this year, or buy new school clothing for your children, or go out for a fish fry.  Remember that when you try to stretch your retirement income to cover your basic needs.

And, when you've gotten yourself all 'cranked up', if that happens, make a resolution to get involved and stay involved and to talk with your elected representatives at every level of government and let them know what you think and what you want them to do on your behalf.  And, if they fail you, fire them with your vote at the polling place.

Had you and I done that two decades ago instead of simply going with the flow, maybe we'd not be in the situation we find ourselves in today.

The MATC has developed yet another draft budget after the first such exercise produced the need for a 6.4% property tax increase (see Blog of April 23rd).  At the time of that budget draft, the governor apparently said he would not countenance such an increase.  MATC announced then that it would go back to the old drawing board and see what could be done to get down into the range of 'as little' as a 5.0% to 5.5% property tax increase.

Guess what?  They can now apparently declare victory in this onerous task since the finance committee is only proposing a revised draft budget that would consume another 4.9% increase in property taxes.  The proposed draft will come to a vote by the full board on May 27th.

MATC has developed budgets since 2004 that will have caused property tax increases of more than 30% if this draft is ultimately approved.

Has your personal income increased by 30% in the past four years?  Has your savings account grown by 30% in the past four years?  Has yours become a single income family instead of a dual income family in the past four years?  I doubt it.  But, if so, congratulations!  Even with such an increase, if that has happened for you, I'll wager that you have better places to put your hard-earned money.

The MATC finance committee says it has cut all it could cut from the budget.  Jeannette Bell, committee member and former West Allis mayor, was in favor of not only this 4.9% property tax increase, but also favors reducing the reserve account held by MATC which has been done as part of this draft. 

People costs are budgeted to increase significantly.  Wages and salaries will go up about $1.5 million.  Health care costs will rise by some $2 million.  Other 'fringe' benefits will add another $4.5 million, including  $2 million required to bring the recognition of accrued benefits onto the MATC books like any other 'business' must do today.  That is $2 million of 'funny money'; where else would we find accounting tricks employed if we were to subject this institution to the standards maintained by businesses?

I cannot accept the statement that MATC has cut 'everything possible' and still needs this kind of increase budget over budget.  The paragraph above suggests to me that people costs are way too high, and a very quick way to achieve reductions there is to have fewer people.  Maybe MATC should think about outsourcing certain functions.  Maybe they should think about 'tough love' negotiations with union representatives.  There are or ought to be limits even for tax-funded entities.

Maybe MATC needs to review its class demand and determine the bottom third by attendance and end those classes.  If there is insufficient demand, there is apparently not an identifiable 'significant' need.  MATC cannot be providing services to a market that doesn't exist in sufficient numbers to show demand.  That would free up space for other uses, and it would, or should, enable staff cuts that will reduce costs.

It is impossible to forget, in this debate over MATC, that there is a very real problem with the Milwaukee schools system and we must recognize that some of MATC's costs should rightfully be paid for by the Milwaukee school system since MATC is mopping up after that dismal performance.  Adult high school education classes and GED classes are an example of how the public education structure in Milwaukee fails its students and the residents of the community.  Interestingly enough, this may well be an intended consequence rather than an unintended consequence.  It gets non-Milwaukee taxpayers to pay more of the Milwaukee education costs than is already done through state tax distribution formula.

Finally, I suggest once again that MATC needs to clean up its many acts.  It needs to get out of the failed business incubator function.  It needs to quit building physical monuments to itself and its leaders.  It needs to look at sale and lease-back arrangements.  It needs to reduce staff. 

Frankly, it is becoming more and more apparent that significant leadership changes may be required, as well.  MATC leadership seems to be ignorant of the public's needs.  This is an institution answerable to no one other than the governor through his ability to appoint members to the state technical college board.  The state legislature and the governor must act to bring this renegade system under absolute control.  There must be a change in the manner in which the state board and the district boards are created; voters need to determine who sits on those boards.  The current incestuous approach simply doesn't work...for anyone other than the leaders and those who sit on the rubber stamp boards.

All this brings me to the next obvious question:  Where do we stand in the quest for permission to move to another technical college district?  There seems to have been a long delay in the process; maybe it is justified.  I hope it doesn't mean that the movement has been quietly put to sleep.

We've gone a long time between Blogs centering on MATC, but it is again time to take a critical look.  A 'headline' from some time ago suggested that MATC just can't help itself.  That seems to be the case.  They certainly don't seek out the kind of news coverage they tend to generate.  No organization would want to be in this type of 'limelight' and yet they do it to themselves over and over and over again.

Yesterday we learned that poor old MATC was being chastised by the 'state' for having proposed a budget that would require a property tax increase of some 6.4%.  It seems that even Governor Doyle thought that was too high, and that is going some when you think about all the tax increases and fee increases he has dumped in our laps.

So, having had their knuckles rapped with a ruler, they are being forced to the unthinkable...they may have to make some cuts in their expenses!!

They are now talking about cuts that will get the property tax increase down to as little as 5% to 5.5%.  These people do not live in the world that you and I populate.  They must breath some other life giving gas other than oxygen.  Maybe they're actually in a different orbit.  It seems obvious that they are not bound by the same life rules that we, the taxpayers, are bound to follow.

Hammering at an old theme again, if you and I have too little income for our expense load, we usually will look at our expense first and make the necessary adjustments.  In the world occupied by MATC, it seems that you first look at raising your revenue before you even give any thought to reductions in budget.

An article today centers upon the 'incubator boondoggle' that MATC created for itself many years ago.  We've Blogged about that before, as well.  Some of the businesses aren't real businesses with any hope of survival in the real world.  Many are considerably behind in their rent payments.  Now MATC is looking at actually closing or modifying the two incubators but it may have to give some money to those businesses that are to be displaced apparently according to some language in their agreement with each.  I've not seen those agreements, but I can't imagine that even MATC would give money away, much of it probably to those same businesses that are behind in their rent payments, if it were not bound to do so by the agreements.  Let's hope that MATC is sharp enough to hold back funds from this payment to at least recover the rental payments owed to it and to us taxpayers.

I have a high degree of difficulty in imagining that there is nothing else that can be cut out of the MATC budget.  How is it that MATC will cut expenses and still have to take us taxpayers to the cleaners for 5% to 5.5% more property taxes than we paid last time?  There are things that can be cut.  Let's talk about staff positions to begin with.  Let's look at the benefits next.  Let's review the travel expenses; it seems to me that was sort of a bloated area the last time we went down this pathway.  Maybe they need to sell off property and lease back the portions they actually need.  Maybe they need to shake up the status quo and actually take some real action like ending the deal with the current 'King' and getting a replacement that doesn't suffer from such egotism and illogical sense of institutional direction.  The Board should be capable of changing this direction unless it also suffers from something similar.

In the meantime, maybe the petitions to be removed from this system should be filed quickly and the case pressed while this iron is still hot enough to burn some sense into the directors of the state technical college system. 

By the way, Waukesha County Technical College has solidified its budget with a 3% increase in property taxes.  It is in the same geographic area, and faces most of the same issues.  What is the difference?  It seems to be leadership from my perspective.

Random thoughts:

• The turn-out by voters in Germantown was reported to be some 34%, as contrasted with the statewide prediction of only about 20%.  That may well be a 'victory' for the group that was pushing its agenda using postcards and telephone calls.  I suspect that this group stimulated a greater turnout than would've otherwise been the case.  That is a good thing.
• It seems though that the voters were not swayed sufficiently so as to follow the suggestions made by this group.  Those who were criticized by this group seem to have fared well enough to win.  Those who were 'favored' by not being attacked by this group didn't fare as well.  Are we likely done with this kind of electioneering in Germantown?  I am admittedly naive, but I'm not that naive.  I expect these tactics will continue to be seen in future Germantown elections.
• The need for some kind of solution to the school crowding in the Germantown district will have to be addressed at some point in the future.  It may be that a scaled down version of the defeated proposition will find its way to a ballot later this year.  If so, I suspect we'll see higher interest rates and increases in all the associated costs so that, even if the total bond issue were to be reduced, the ultimate costs could very well exceed what would've been the case with this issue.  The reported 55% to 45% margin was a bit surprising; I had suspected the issue might have been outvoted by a larger number.  The smaller turn-out obviously included a higher number of voters who favored the referendum.  That might be expected in a non-Presidential election.
• The face of the School Board changes a bit.
• The state Supreme Court race was critical, in my view, and the conservative won albeit by a relatively slim margin.  That bodes well for the state.
• There is a large segment of new members elected to the Washington County Board.  What that will mean can only be determined as we see the outcome of the various issues that will face this new board.  I hope that we will see special attention paid to holding down spending and thus taxes.  Maybe my naivite' is showing again.
• And, the 'Frankenstein Veto' has died at the hands of the voters.  That, also, is a very good thing without regard to which party might control the Governor's Mansion.

All in all, the voters have spoken and our representative form of government is working as was intended.

Wisconsin citizens get the opportunity to vote on whether or not the 'Frankenstein Veto' should be eliminated by constitutional amendment.  This was made possible when the Assembly gave its final approval yesterday. 

The question will appear on the April 1st ballots.

As you'll probably remember, Governor Doyle found letters, numbers and punctuation marks across many pages of the budget to enable him to cobble together a new budget item that transferred some $470,000 from the transportation fund to another pet program that the legislature had not given him.

His spokespersons, of course, decry the elimination of this 'tool' since it gives them the opportunity to protect us from the evil legislature whenever it is misguided from Doyle's perspective.

I often disagree with legislative actions, but I have to believe that we're better off not having the governor armed with this ability.  No matter your feelings about the current governor, do you want future governors to have this kind of a tool?

You will also have the opportunity to help shape the future of the Wisconsin Supreme Court, choose your state senator, vote on the school referendum and school board members, and elect county supervisors and village trustees.  Mark April 1st on your calendar (and ignore the fact that this is also "April Fool's Day').

"Timing of gift questioned" was the headline of Tom Kertscher's column in the morning Journal Sentinel.  That may well be a classic understatement, although I'm sure Mr. Kertscher needs to remain less 'curmudgeonly' than do I.

This is a blatant attempt to grease the skids for the denial of Germantown's soon-to-be-presented petition to the state technical college board.  MATC has not presented "free" computers to any other community and yet it has done so twice now for Germantown.  This coupled with the recent appointment of Germantown's Superintendent to the MATC board certainly shows that MATC is where we need to be sending our money.  This provides the technical college board a 'hidey-hole' from which they can summarily dismiss our petition.

These so-called "free" computers carry a very heavy price in my opinion.  The property tax increase alone to be collected from Germantown citizens will be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.  Let's say, for argument, that the increase in MATC's property tax collection will be $300,000.  If that were the case, then the "free" computers cost only about $15,000 each.  Too tough on MATC?  Okay.  Let's say they'll gather only $200,000.  Then each "free" computer will have only cost us about $10,000.  If we add the historic annual over-payment extracted from us without a voice, the cost is in the millions of dollars for "free" laptop computers.

Then there is this whole question of accountability.  Actually, there is a question as to UNaccountability.  How in the world is it that this frugally-run institution can come up with this kind of money when we didn't even request their assistance?  How is it that this appropriation didn't even require board approval?  How is it that WCTC actually sells its used computers at the end of their useful lives, let alone not giving "free" computers to communities in its district?

It appears this could well be validation that the inmates run this asylum.

No connection?  Please spare us the obvious truth-stretching.  Why else would we receive this largess at this time without knowing it was coming or even having made a request for such consideration?  Of course there is a connection.  To try to convince us otherwise gives us a very real look into the utter disregard with which us taxpayers of Germantown are held. 

We not only have no voice, we deserve no voice because we don't know enough to come in from the cold!

The boards of the school district and village met last night to discuss common issues.  Those common issues included the construction now taking place at Blackwood Creek across from the high school, the joint intent to push secession from the MATC technical college district, and the TIF district revenue shift proposed by the village.

There were no 'fireworks' as some had suggested; there were also no final decisions taken.

Representatives of MATC seemed 'lukewarm' to the TIF transfers, citing the 2003 transfer that they stated had lengthened the TIF district 3 life by two years.  The school board president, Michael Erdmann, discussed the fact that the school district would be able to reduce the tax levy if the transfer were not to occur.  The school district covers more taxing entities than just the village, so those entities need be considered, as well.

Village president Kempinski stated his hope that MATC would not be seeking 'retaliation' (my word) against Germantown's secession movement by not approving the TIF action.  There was no reaction visible on the part of the two MATC representatives when this statement was made, but I'm sure they've had practice.

The MATC secession discussion focused on the need for uniform positions on the part of the school district and the village (both agreed but neither offered to abandon its position) with attorneys for both the village and the school district present and speaking to the boards.  Since there is no haste required (the earliest date for a change in districts would be July 1, 2009 assuming the petition were filed at least ninety days prior to the end of 2008), both sides agreed to form a joint task force and to continue to work the issue. 

Issues that need to be fleshed out include the negative impact to MATC as well as the positive impact to either MPTC or WCTC if Germantown were to move.  The money we send to MATC is a small part of that budget, while the reduced amount that would flow to one of the others would represent a sizable increase to that district.  Beyond this are all the substantive issues concerning educational opportunities in the other districts as contrasted with MATC, and which of the other districts would seem the best potential overall partner. 

My take-away was this: 

I don't think the TIF deal is necessarily a slam dunk, although a new project soon to commence in TIF district 4 carries much promise. 

I continue to be all for the secession but am honestly skeptical as to the ultimate outcome given how everything appears stacked against us.  This is a highly political battle.  My estimate of the odds against our success would be in the range of 10-1, and that is probably being generous to our side.  We're playing with the 'big dogs' now! 

If there were any schisms between the two boards, they were well-controlled, almost to the point of being too saccharin.

The village board and the school board are running on nearly parallel routes as each researches and prepares its petition to be presented to the state technical college board.

They are each in agreement that we need to leave the MATC district for a variety of reasons.

They do not, however, appear to be in agreement about the district to which we'd prefer to be tied.  The village president appears to favor Moraine Park Technical College (even thought the tax rate would be higher) while the school board vote specified Waukesha County Technical College (with the lowest tax rate of the three choices).  I have been told by other trustees that the village president's position has two elements:  He recognizes that we must not be a 'one-trick pony' focused solely on the tax side of the question; and that MPTC appears to be more oriented to working with Germantown on courses that are needed by our businesses.  

Certainly we know that taxes alone will not suffice as the driver for our petitions.  Similarly, there would be little question as to whether MPTC or WCTC would be responsive to our needs. The marketplace is driven by the hirers, not by the educators...except, of course, in the MATC system...but I digress.

The certainty that emerges is this:  If we present a unified position, we stand a better chance of emerging victorious.  If we present a split position, we'll almost assuredly see both petitions rejected.  The state technical college board is not likely to view our petitions very favorably simply based on everything we've been told and have read.  We cannot afford to be anything but fully aligned if we have a hope to prevail.

We need the village board and the school board aligned in their positions.  The differences in apparent positions are not huge.  The 'issues' will resolve themselves if our petitions are approved.  We