I wish I had the answer to that question. I don't feel like there is enough information about the applicants and what their views on the major issues are. Only Mr. Lowenstein gave any indication of where he stood on the issues. I hope the board plans to interview these candidates to obtain more information. I am torn on applicants who are not interested in running for a seat on the board. I just can't decide if that is a plus or a minus. I am pleased that most of the applicants seem to genuinely care about the students and aren't trotting out the "no taxes" mantra. From what has been presented so far, I think any one of the candidates would be a more positive force on the board than some previous or current members.
So what do you think?
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
WHAT SHOULD THE BOARD DO NOW?
Well I find myself without an opinion, which is very rare for me. Turns out due to the date of the resignation, the open seat will be on the April 2010 ballot... so should the board appoint someone to serve until April, or should the seat remain vacant and be filled with the #3 vote getter in the April election?
I can see pluses and minuses to both options. Any thoughts out there?
I can see pluses and minuses to both options. Any thoughts out there?
Monte has Resigned from Board of Education
I just received an update Board of Education package for the Dec. 2nd meeting and Resolution #4 reads:
*4 Acknowledgment of Board of Education Member Michelle Monte’s Resignation Board President
# 11 reads: *11 Calendar to Fill the Vacant Board of Education Member Position
I guess even Ms. Monte understands that missing that many meetings in a row makes one ineffective, I am glad she is doing the right thing in resigning. The effective date of her resignation is Nov. 24, 2009
Wonder how long it will take to get 4 votes for a replacement?
*4 Acknowledgment of Board of Education Member Michelle Monte’s Resignation Board President
# 11 reads: *11 Calendar to Fill the Vacant Board of Education Member Position
I guess even Ms. Monte understands that missing that many meetings in a row makes one ineffective, I am glad she is doing the right thing in resigning. The effective date of her resignation is Nov. 24, 2009
Wonder how long it will take to get 4 votes for a replacement?
Monday, November 30, 2009
SO MUCH FOR 100%
I know I haven't posted in almost a year...lots of reasons, my frustration at the makeup of the board, lots of time spent at my daughters' sporting events, very busy at work and just not very motivated to write.
That has now changed, two topics have me interested and motivated, this post will address the first.
When I was a candidate for the board in 2007 Ms. Monte was a candidate as well and she made a big deal in her opening and closing statements at the League of Women Voter's Forum about how she could vote on 100% of the resolutions...a dig at me.
As a guest on Eye on Oshkosh the issue came up again, here is one of Ms. Monte's quotes from the show on March 15, 2007:
“Mrs. Thiel, while very diligent – she’s been to the board meetings, she has a lot of knowledge, and she has experience – while she has all of those positive qualities, her husband’s a teacher, which means that when contracts are under negotiations, she can’t vote on the budget. She can vote on the budget reconciliation plan, but if we did the budget right we wouldn’t need the reconciliation plan, and because she works for CESA, there’s even more limitations. And as a taxpayer, that bothers me. If my tax dollars are going to pay someone to do a job, I would hope I’m getting my money’s worth. And if they have to continuously abstain from votes, I don’t feel that I am.”
I responded that my voting record was at 96 percent, to which she responded, “But you cashed 100 percent of the checks. That’s my point." She also stated on that show: "I will vote for the person that can do the entire job because that is a paid position."
Fast forward to 2009... Since Ms. Monte was elected there have been 14 regularly scheduled board meetings and Ms. Monte has missed the last 4 board meetings (29%) and yet she has cashed all her board checks up through November 11, 2009. In 3 years I never missed a regularly scheduled board meeting (and only missed one special meeting) yet she criticized me for cashing my checks. How hypocritical!
Of course I didn't vote for Ms. Monte, but if I had, I certainly wouldn't feel that I was getting proper representation. Whatever the reasons for her absence, the fact is she has not come close to voting on 100% of board resolutions. Can you imagine Ms. Monte's blog post had Mrs. Weinsheim missed as many meetings in a row?
Why is it no one seems to care that Ms. Monte appears to have better things to do than attend or at least participate in board meetings? She could at least participate by phone if it was illness that prevented her from actually attending meetings. I have heard no explanation from Ms. Monte as to why she is not attending meeting after meeting, after meeting, after meeting, after meeting. The rumor mill says it is a job out of town that is keeping her from attending meetings. I think she owes it to the voters to explain her repeated absences. Whatever the reason, don't Oshkosh voters deserve a board member who attends most if not all meetings each year rather than one who has already missed 4 meetings in a row? One of those missed meetings contained a workshop on the Superintendent Search, arguably the most important duty for board members this year.
There is a board meeting this Wed. Dec. 2nd I'll update on whether this is another missed meeting for Ms. Monte.
Any thoughts?
That has now changed, two topics have me interested and motivated, this post will address the first.
When I was a candidate for the board in 2007 Ms. Monte was a candidate as well and she made a big deal in her opening and closing statements at the League of Women Voter's Forum about how she could vote on 100% of the resolutions...a dig at me.
As a guest on Eye on Oshkosh the issue came up again, here is one of Ms. Monte's quotes from the show on March 15, 2007:
“Mrs. Thiel, while very diligent – she’s been to the board meetings, she has a lot of knowledge, and she has experience – while she has all of those positive qualities, her husband’s a teacher, which means that when contracts are under negotiations, she can’t vote on the budget. She can vote on the budget reconciliation plan, but if we did the budget right we wouldn’t need the reconciliation plan, and because she works for CESA, there’s even more limitations. And as a taxpayer, that bothers me. If my tax dollars are going to pay someone to do a job, I would hope I’m getting my money’s worth. And if they have to continuously abstain from votes, I don’t feel that I am.”
I responded that my voting record was at 96 percent, to which she responded, “But you cashed 100 percent of the checks. That’s my point." She also stated on that show: "I will vote for the person that can do the entire job because that is a paid position."
Fast forward to 2009... Since Ms. Monte was elected there have been 14 regularly scheduled board meetings and Ms. Monte has missed the last 4 board meetings (29%) and yet she has cashed all her board checks up through November 11, 2009. In 3 years I never missed a regularly scheduled board meeting (and only missed one special meeting) yet she criticized me for cashing my checks. How hypocritical!
Of course I didn't vote for Ms. Monte, but if I had, I certainly wouldn't feel that I was getting proper representation. Whatever the reasons for her absence, the fact is she has not come close to voting on 100% of board resolutions. Can you imagine Ms. Monte's blog post had Mrs. Weinsheim missed as many meetings in a row?
Why is it no one seems to care that Ms. Monte appears to have better things to do than attend or at least participate in board meetings? She could at least participate by phone if it was illness that prevented her from actually attending meetings. I have heard no explanation from Ms. Monte as to why she is not attending meeting after meeting, after meeting, after meeting, after meeting. The rumor mill says it is a job out of town that is keeping her from attending meetings. I think she owes it to the voters to explain her repeated absences. Whatever the reason, don't Oshkosh voters deserve a board member who attends most if not all meetings each year rather than one who has already missed 4 meetings in a row? One of those missed meetings contained a workshop on the Superintendent Search, arguably the most important duty for board members this year.
There is a board meeting this Wed. Dec. 2nd I'll update on whether this is another missed meeting for Ms. Monte.
Any thoughts?
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
LET'S LOOK AT SOME FACTS
FACT:
Oshkosh has the lowest tax rate of 9 comparable districts for 2007-2008 school year:
Sheboygan $10.10
Kimberly $ 9.25
Eau Claire $ 9.15
Janesville $ 8.34
Neenah $ 8.33
Menasha $ 8.25
Fond du Lac $ 8.15
Kaukauna $ 8.13
Appleton $ 7.88
Oshkosh $ 7.39
Oshkosh has 4 more Elementary Schools and 2 more Middle Schools than similar sized districts in WI--- Eau Claire, Janesville and Sheboygan all have 12 Elementary schools (Oshkosh has 16) and 3 Middle Schools (Oshkosh has 5)
Oshkosh School District mill rate in 1992 (over $15 per $1,000 equalized value)
Oshkosh School District mill rate in 2008 ($7.39 per $1,000 equalized value)
What does that mean?
I'll use my house as an example --- in 1992 my house was assessed at $39,900 which means my school tax in 1992 would have been approximately (I don't have the exact rate but I know it was over $15 so I just used $15 as the rate) $598.50 ($39,900/1,000 =39.90 X $15 = $598.50)
In 2008 my house was assessed at $73,000 which means my school tax was $539.47
Well look at that my 2008 school tax was $59.03 LESS than it was in 1992 (that isn't even accounting for inflation) [$598.50 was worth more in 1992 than it is today].
If your house was assessed at $100,000 in 1992 and $200,000 your school taxes would have been:
1992 --- $1,500
2008 --- $1,478
That is what the revenue controls have done, in Oshkosh, they have cut the mill rate by more than half. I have to wonder about those who say the school district keeps increasing taxes. The facts just don't seem to bear that out.
If you compare Oshkosh with surrounding and like-sized communities Oshkosh's tax rate is significantly lower, which means we have done more with less dollars than other districts.
Oshkosh has the lowest tax rate of 9 comparable districts for 2007-2008 school year:
Sheboygan $10.10
Kimberly $ 9.25
Eau Claire $ 9.15
Janesville $ 8.34
Neenah $ 8.33
Menasha $ 8.25
Fond du Lac $ 8.15
Kaukauna $ 8.13
Appleton $ 7.88
Oshkosh $ 7.39
Oshkosh has 4 more Elementary Schools and 2 more Middle Schools than similar sized districts in WI--- Eau Claire, Janesville and Sheboygan all have 12 Elementary schools (Oshkosh has 16) and 3 Middle Schools (Oshkosh has 5)
Oshkosh School District mill rate in 1992 (over $15 per $1,000 equalized value)
Oshkosh School District mill rate in 2008 ($7.39 per $1,000 equalized value)
What does that mean?
I'll use my house as an example --- in 1992 my house was assessed at $39,900 which means my school tax in 1992 would have been approximately (I don't have the exact rate but I know it was over $15 so I just used $15 as the rate) $598.50 ($39,900/1,000 =39.90 X $15 = $598.50)
In 2008 my house was assessed at $73,000 which means my school tax was $539.47
Well look at that my 2008 school tax was $59.03 LESS than it was in 1992 (that isn't even accounting for inflation) [$598.50 was worth more in 1992 than it is today].
If your house was assessed at $100,000 in 1992 and $200,000 your school taxes would have been:
1992 --- $1,500
2008 --- $1,478
That is what the revenue controls have done, in Oshkosh, they have cut the mill rate by more than half. I have to wonder about those who say the school district keeps increasing taxes. The facts just don't seem to bear that out.
If you compare Oshkosh with surrounding and like-sized communities Oshkosh's tax rate is significantly lower, which means we have done more with less dollars than other districts.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Cost of the Referendum
There is a story in the Sunday, January 25, 2008 Northwestern that states that the total cost of the referendum, in year one, if all 3 questions pass would be about $52 on a $100,000 home. As I suspected, less than one month of cable television or two months of the dish and a whole lot less than the new ipod touch.
I don't know how many different ways to let people know that teachers do NOT get a 3.8% pay raise, that if the district offers teachers less than a 3.8% package the teachers can go to arbitration and the district risks losing and if they lose they must give the teachers whatever they asked for in the last proposal that went to arbitration (as well as paying arbitration fees, lawyers fees etc.). It is unfortunate that posters who do NOT at all understand the QEO continue to post misinformation. Moderating comments saves me time in deleting these erroneous posts before people read them.
Back to the referendum. I do not think $52 on a $100,000 home is outrageous, my home is not even valued at $100,000 but I could certainly find $52 a YEAR in my budget. And before you all go on and on about those on "fixed incomes" my 80 year old mother is on a "fixed" income but you know what? Her SS income goes up every year and more than $52... by the way she lives in Milwaukee in a home valued at about $125,000 and her property taxes are well over $3,000 and she manages to pay them. The taxes in Oshkosh don't even come close to that figure.
I must say, reading the comments on the NW regarding the cost of the referendum makes me want to move, then I remind myself that the posters are NOT representative of Oshkosh in general, just a small negative segment of Oshkosh.
Now if you have questions about specifics of the referendum or comments about the capital improvement priorities, please post. If you want to go on about "extravagant teacher pay" find somewhere else to post, I've read more than my fill of those and won't be posting them.
I don't know how many different ways to let people know that teachers do NOT get a 3.8% pay raise, that if the district offers teachers less than a 3.8% package the teachers can go to arbitration and the district risks losing and if they lose they must give the teachers whatever they asked for in the last proposal that went to arbitration (as well as paying arbitration fees, lawyers fees etc.). It is unfortunate that posters who do NOT at all understand the QEO continue to post misinformation. Moderating comments saves me time in deleting these erroneous posts before people read them.
Back to the referendum. I do not think $52 on a $100,000 home is outrageous, my home is not even valued at $100,000 but I could certainly find $52 a YEAR in my budget. And before you all go on and on about those on "fixed incomes" my 80 year old mother is on a "fixed" income but you know what? Her SS income goes up every year and more than $52... by the way she lives in Milwaukee in a home valued at about $125,000 and her property taxes are well over $3,000 and she manages to pay them. The taxes in Oshkosh don't even come close to that figure.
I must say, reading the comments on the NW regarding the cost of the referendum makes me want to move, then I remind myself that the posters are NOT representative of Oshkosh in general, just a small negative segment of Oshkosh.
Now if you have questions about specifics of the referendum or comments about the capital improvement priorities, please post. If you want to go on about "extravagant teacher pay" find somewhere else to post, I've read more than my fill of those and won't be posting them.
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Referendum Issues
I have moved some comments from the "Candidates" thread to this one as they are about the referendum not the candidates. I would really like people to focus on the issues (using facts would be great but I know many bloggers don't want to bother with that). If the post isn't on topic I'll delete, if that becomes too much work I'll have to go to moderating (which I really don't want to do and if that becomes too cumbersome I'll just shut the blog down).
This thread is to post questions, concerns or opinions you have about the proposed referendum, I know there isn't a lot of information out there right now but I expect that to change very soon. We don't need a rehashing of the Ryf Road site, that has been decided, that will be where a new school, if approved, is located. So maybe posters could focus on the other two questions, and if you don't support those, please explain how you think the district should go about fixing up its buildings? Should any buildings be closed? How would YOU decide which buildings to close? Which buildings to repair? Which buildings aren't worth repairing?
If you want to talk about candidates for the School Board, please post on that thread. If you just want to post nasty things, find a different blog.
This thread is to post questions, concerns or opinions you have about the proposed referendum, I know there isn't a lot of information out there right now but I expect that to change very soon. We don't need a rehashing of the Ryf Road site, that has been decided, that will be where a new school, if approved, is located. So maybe posters could focus on the other two questions, and if you don't support those, please explain how you think the district should go about fixing up its buildings? Should any buildings be closed? How would YOU decide which buildings to close? Which buildings to repair? Which buildings aren't worth repairing?
If you want to talk about candidates for the School Board, please post on that thread. If you just want to post nasty things, find a different blog.
Saturday, January 3, 2009
School Board Election
The previous thread has way too many posts and very little discussion. One of the last posts I am moving here. I found it just a little interesting that the "announcement" would end up on MY blog rather than the candidate's.
Here is the post:
Anonymous said...
A friend forwarded this email to me. All I can say is not again.
Good Morning,
Kent and I have weighed the pros and cons of one more run at the BOE. Due to health concerns, I was hesitant to consider a campaign as I do not feel I can give it everything I have in the past. I am not able to do door to door and put up signs primarily. Kent is not able to help as he has to travel to Virginia with his job. Not to mention we have four children.
After much discussion and giving consideration to our school district's current situation, I have decided that it would be a bigger crime not to run. With your help, I can run a great campaign. I believe that there is a better way to address our district's challenges and with common sense budgeting and conservative approaches, we can turn this school district around and take care of our schools.
I am asking for your help. I need to collect 100-200 signatures by the end of the month. I would appreciate if you could take 2-3 sheets and fill at least 1-2. Let me know if you can take nomination papers and I will drop them off for you by the end of this week.
Also, if you could help with my campaign, let me know what you would like to do.
Thanks much and Merry Christmas.
Michelle Monte
Saturday, January 3, 2009 3:44:00 PM CST
It still remains to be seen whether there will be enough candidates to require a primary.
I just hope at least a few of the candidates will have specifics on EXACTLY what they would do differently... saying one will not raise taxes just isn't enough for me. If you won't levy to the limit, then where will you cut/save to balance the budget? If you are going to put $3M in the operating budget to repair our buildings where will those dollars come from. Stop hinting around... if your plan is to offer the unions 2% packages say that, if you plan to increase class sizes say so, I'm tired of people campaigning by having great sound bites but NO substance. Of course they don't want to offend any voters so I'm sure for most their "plans" will be very short on details. Why voters tolerate that is beyond me. I'm just hoping I'll be able to find 3 candidates to vote for.
Once Tues comes we should know who the candidates are. I hope we can have a REAL discussion of the issues the district faces and the "plan" each candidate comes with.
Here is the post:
Anonymous said...
A friend forwarded this email to me. All I can say is not again.
Good Morning,
Kent and I have weighed the pros and cons of one more run at the BOE. Due to health concerns, I was hesitant to consider a campaign as I do not feel I can give it everything I have in the past. I am not able to do door to door and put up signs primarily. Kent is not able to help as he has to travel to Virginia with his job. Not to mention we have four children.
After much discussion and giving consideration to our school district's current situation, I have decided that it would be a bigger crime not to run. With your help, I can run a great campaign. I believe that there is a better way to address our district's challenges and with common sense budgeting and conservative approaches, we can turn this school district around and take care of our schools.
I am asking for your help. I need to collect 100-200 signatures by the end of the month. I would appreciate if you could take 2-3 sheets and fill at least 1-2. Let me know if you can take nomination papers and I will drop them off for you by the end of this week.
Also, if you could help with my campaign, let me know what you would like to do.
Thanks much and Merry Christmas.
Michelle Monte
Saturday, January 3, 2009 3:44:00 PM CST
It still remains to be seen whether there will be enough candidates to require a primary.
I just hope at least a few of the candidates will have specifics on EXACTLY what they would do differently... saying one will not raise taxes just isn't enough for me. If you won't levy to the limit, then where will you cut/save to balance the budget? If you are going to put $3M in the operating budget to repair our buildings where will those dollars come from. Stop hinting around... if your plan is to offer the unions 2% packages say that, if you plan to increase class sizes say so, I'm tired of people campaigning by having great sound bites but NO substance. Of course they don't want to offend any voters so I'm sure for most their "plans" will be very short on details. Why voters tolerate that is beyond me. I'm just hoping I'll be able to find 3 candidates to vote for.
Once Tues comes we should know who the candidates are. I hope we can have a REAL discussion of the issues the district faces and the "plan" each candidate comes with.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)