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.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
204 comments:
1 – 200 of 204 Newer› Newest»Teresa,
Your $52.00 cable bill concept is a worn-out theory often now called the "Butter Burger Theory".
An ex-City Council member used to justify on-going expenses using the theory that the added tax was only the cost of a Culvers Butter Burger.
The issue is that voters want NO additional spending while they feel their still is fat to be cut from the current budgets, and that past budgets have shown misguided high cost appropriations that tax payers feel was wasted spending.
I plan to vote NO on all referenda spending in the upcoming ballot.
9:19, not all taxpayers feel the money has been wasted. Additionally, you can not and do not speak for what all voters want, nor do you have any idea what most voters want. Finally, just because you believe a theory is worn out, it still applies. You can't defend your position against it so you make all inclusive statements to suggest you know how all voters are thinking. Go ahead and vote no for the sake of saying no. We've seen that from some board members (past and present) and board member wannabes and we see where that got them. Have a nice evening.
I'm really torn.
I want decent buildings. I want the quality of the buildings to complete the positive educational experience my children are receiving through the OASD. I want better lighting, windows, HVAC and roofing. I want buildings that don't flood when it rains. I want it to look like the people of this community DO care about the type of places their children spend 8-12 hours a day.
BUT... I don't see any clear direction that we're taking with our building plans and maintenance issues. I see lots of talk and no solutions. I see consultants being paid and their advice ignored or not funded. I see Board members approving budgets that don't save for future maintenance needs and underfunded maintenance year after year.
I don't want to vote NO because I'm being spiteful- and maybe don't want to vote NO at all. My kids are being well educated. How can we keep the doors open on old, costly buildings with full staff and only around 100 kids?
When I see a real plan with real cuts and realistic ideas to go along with a spending plan, I may be convinced. I'm not against spending $52 for a better educational atmosphere for our kids and staff.
The radio reports that 39% of economic annalists polled state that the economy will continue to decline throughout 2009 and even worse, businesses will continue to downsize and layoff workers. Only 15% of business’ surveyed plan to add staff.
The $52.00 you mention might very well be a “butter burger” to you, but to families who have had the bread earner lose a job, or is now “under-employed” $52.00 might be a weeks worth of meals or a couple tanks of gas.
I predict ANY attempt to increase taxes will go down in blazing defeat.
I'm with 11:54. I want to invest in our buildings and school infastructure, but I do noyt have faith that the money will be well spent.
The proposed new school is lieu of responsible additions and upgrades is a perfect example of wasteful spending.
I will vot no on all three questions.
If you were honestly interested in investing in our schools you would wait until the committee preparing the information for the referendum discussion before summarily dismissing it. Besides, in a referendum, the money approved must go for what it was intended, so that argument of yours falls flat. You're no different from past and present board members or BOE wannabes who are only interested in saying no for the sake of pandering to the taxpayer for votes. That tactic is more worn out than the cable TV or Butter Burger line someone is tired of hearing.
I'm also torn. I want the district to put forth an entire plan before I vote. They refuse to do that.
What is step two if this is step one? They haven't even figured out for what they are asking in question 3 which tells us the number was randomly generated which is particularly troubling.
It is not possible for someone to defend this referendum with a 'trust the school board' approach. Likewise it is impossible to defend it with 'it's the best thing for everyone' defense.
I'd really like to see the full plan, including their plans for school closings, staff reductions, and/or other money saving measures before we go ahead with any referenda.
My feeling is that maintenance projects are generally part of an operational budget.
New construction is usually part of a capital budget.
Operational budgets are prepared yearly and cover a variety of things which include wages and benefits.
My concern is that maintenance projects have been put off and monies originally earmarked for those projects have been shifted to other areas which may include added wage and benefit enhancements.
Therefore, from a strictly maintenance standpoint, the coffers for those really needed projects have been raided to fund other things, and now we need to go to a referenda to fund an operational expense.
It almost seems like a shell game to me.
Fancy cars, a nice boat, nice house, four kids, education being paid for by we the people (both she and Kent), satellite TV. Wow! Thens he complains how tight things are and how she has to economize. Sounds like she just can't separate those wants from the needs. But everyone else should do so, right? She's a hypocrite.
2:08.
It really doesn't matter because none of the options will pass. Oshkosh isn't a wealthy City. Many have lost their jobs. If the NW does a front page article on how neighborhood taverns are crying at the lack of business, I'm here to tell you that if Oshkosh people can't afford their beer, they sure as heck won't vote for more taxes for the school system.
I don't know how you can say we need to zero base budget or a modication of, and then tell everyone the taxpayers can't afford. Not many drive around in expensive cars, have fancy boats and can't afford a dollar a week for the schools.
Certainly the board incumbents up for election have to answer to the spending, but this 'can't afford this' source isn't too credible.
The last time I checked, my school taxes barely went up last year!
I think that Oshkosh tax payers probably could afforda referendum and they may support one that makes sense. A plan that makes sense could garnere support in even the toughest of times.
The problem here is tha the plan does not make sense.
A new schol in a declining attendance area is simply laughable. The other two questions are like a shell game as 11:54 suggests. The BOE has consistently stolen from the maintenance budget to fund wage increases and additional programs. We need to send them a message that that is unacceptable.
The BOE has consistently stolen from the maintenance budget to fund wage increases and additional programs. We need to send them a message that that is unacceptable.
You would rather have a 4th time candidate that can't even afford 50bucks a year despite having the best Detroit offers in her garage than a board that has produced great results despite being a low spending district?
Have you been out in their boat too? It seems your decisions making skills have set sail!
Perhaps you could afford 50 bucks per year if you didn't waste so much on luxury cars and boats!
I economize so my children can have things I didn't. Like driving around a car that is older. Not going out to eat as much. Try that first and then tell me you can't afford a buck a week for a referendum!
Not a matter if you can or can't afford it. Like the other poster said, it's a "shell game".
They rob Peter to pay Paul.
Peter = Maintenance Budget
Paul = Wages and Benefits
I don't care to pay anymore taxes because my money was spent on other than what it was intended for.
The BOE has not EARNED my yes vote on this matter.
Does anyone know how much money the board has spent the past 3 years on Capital Improvement?
That would be interesting to see since Dennis Kavanaugh was board president for 2 of those years and Wayne Traska was Vice President the past year.
If you have that information, please post it. It seems all this complaining about the board deferring maintenance, it would be nice to see this information so I can definitely make up my mind of who to or not to vote for come election day.
Again, looking for 2006, 2007 and proposed. Thanks!
Ms. Theil,
Please remove the comments that are incorrectly stating the status of my family budget. You claim to dislike misinformation, here is your chance to prove it.
We can and will pay the $82 increase in our property tax if all three questions are passed. Our spending is nobodys business but ours and our creditors.
Thank you and have a nice evening.
KM
Guess what 2:38, some businesses felt a slowdown while others didn't. Maybe the bars that suffered a slight loss just need to do a better job of attracting customers. The weather also was a factor.
Mrs. Thiel, I would rephrase or remove ONLY the comments about the Montes not being able to afford the increase should the referenda pass. But I would not remove the rest of the comments. They do have nice vehicles, a boat, a nice house and they are attending college on our dime as they are both veterans. Those are facts and they are subject to question and comment. Much like Mrs. Monte has allowed comments about others and their personal business. Mrs. Monte is running for office, painting herself as a fiscal conservative. It is fair game to question if she really does know how to put needs before wants, no matter whether they can afford it.
I really wouldn't mind spending the money, but I too believe the BOE is handling budgeting like a "shell game" The $$ that should have gone to maintaining all our current schools was syphoned off to other things that included equipment and wage/benefit increases to the staff. I think that's just wrong and now you want my money to make up for your poor judgement. At least it would've been more honest to use the money for what it was intended, and then have a referendum for extra pay and other things. I may not have voted for that either (especially in the economy we're in now) but it would have been honest,
I really don't like how our School Board is running right now. I just don't have any faith in what they say.
This post has been modified my administrator
Anonymous said...
Teresa, I agree. Our schools need the money and we need to provide so our children can have the opportunities. What is more important that our kids education?
...
Our district is a low spending district and doesn't have any money. If they spent what Milwaukee does, we wouldn't have the problems we face. While it is a tough sell, this board has been working hard on this and their heart is in the right place.
We need to get out there and vote and show the kids we care!
Monday, January 26, 2009 2:08:00 PM CST
I thought I had turned on comment moderation turns out I didn't but posts have been pretty much on topic so I'll leave it as is.
I have a few comments:
First, just a few factual corrections:
The maintenance/capital improvements budget has increased over the last 10 years (nearly doubling) so the board majority has NOT been "stealing from the maintenance budget".
Over the last 10 years the Oshkosh tax rate (that is the $/ $1000 valuation on your home) has DECREASED more times than it has increased.
One year the board went along with Mr. Schneider's suggestion that a budget surplus be given back to taxpayers (0n average $15 per taxpayer(I believe it was over $300,000) rather than use that money to catch up on some maintenance. Just because someone calls themselves a fiscal conservative don't assume that means they will always vote to fix our schools. In fact, I believe Mr. Schneider and Mr. Becker were the only board members to vote NO on fixing roofs a few years back. Mr. Schneider said he found a cheaper bid, but the fact is the bid was only cheaper if the flame retardant materials were eliminated. I'm all for cost savings but not at the expense of safety.
I have a question for those of you who will vote no on the referendum...how do you propose the district catch up on deferred maintenance? The fact is the list is long... we know in the next few years we will have to replace the boiler at South Park if there is no referendum money where what would you propose be cut just to cover the $1,350,000 cost of that one boiler? Please be specific as in lay off 30 teachers (which would result in program cuts and larger class sizes). PLEASE remember that suggesting the board gives less than the QEO comes with the risk the board loses in arbitration and wage and benefit costs would exceed the QEO amount plus arbitration and lawyers fees... and then where will the money come from?
One last thing, I agree this referendum is about priorities, so I see nothing wrong with questioning candidates priorities.
My family has always lived somewhat below its means. Our house is valued at less than $80,000, my husband drives a 2000 Geo Metro, our last family vacation was to Chicago in 2004. I canceled our standard cable when it exceeded $50/month and returned to Basic cable at a cost of about $12/month. I know I can find a dollar a week in my budget to pay for the referendum. I consider that a priority, a much higher priority, much to my childrens' dismay, than cable, itouch phones, American Eagle jeans, Playstation 2, the wii, and numerous other things my children want but don't get.
For all the criticism thrown my way, I really am pretty frugal and would not be supporting this referendum if I thought it was extravagant or had misplaced priorties.
I am disappointed that if the referendum passes only Lincoln and Oaklawn would be closed. We really need to close Green Meadow and Smith and/or Lakeside to save on operational costs. I have not heard either Mr. Schneider or Mrs. Monte state they are willing to close any school but Lincoln. So much for fiscal conservatism closing schools saves hundreds of thousands that could be used to repair the schools worth keeping
Thiel said:
Please be specific as in lay off 30teachers (which would result in program cuts and larger class sizes).
Lay off teachers and freeze or reduce pay (all employees).
If larger classes are the result, so be it.
This is no different than in "real life".
If you lose your job or have to take a job which you find yourself underemployed, you must do things to cut back. You can't go to your employer and say "Gee I need a new furnace at home so give me a bonus so I can buy one"...sorry, doesn't happen that way.
If you have a car with a loan, maybe you have to sell it and get a much older car. If you have a cell phone, maybe you have to cancel it. If you go to the gym, you discontinue your membership. If you went to Festival Foods, maybe now you go to Aldi. If you bought your cloths in the mall, maybe you now go to Shopko or Goodwill.
The point is you cut back in EVERY area you can. You can't go to your boss and demand more money to pay for that furnace or roof, you rely on yourself to do what you have to.
Public sector is simply too entitlement driven. There are areas to cut (teachers included) have the guts to do the hard work of making them.
BTW....20,000+ more jobs lost in the economy yesterday. So most people would have no sympathy if there were some losses in the school system too.
Teresa you mention cutting 30 teachers. Odd but I just read in the Appleton Paper that Kaukauna is also having a funding problem. Here is a cut from that article:
"The (Kaukauna School)board will have the option of accepting all recommendations, including laying off more than 30 teachers and slashing about 4 percent, or $18,000, of the extracurricular budget. It would leave the district with a deficit of about $200,000.
Not wanting to incur the wrath of parents, the board moved away from a plan to reduce the number of bus routes, which would have yielded savings of $105,000. At the February meeting, it will decide whether to increase the cost of school lunches to save $50,000.
Most discouraging to board members was that they had wanted to avoid cutting 13.5 positions at the elementary school. Principals at the four buildings drew up a plan where only four teachers were laid off and class sizes stayed within guidelines of 20 to 22 students. That plan, however, would put the district about $900,000 in the hole.
"The reality is we have to balance a budget," board member Todd Arnoldussen said."
Teresa Kaukauna gets it, the reality is you have to do what you have to do and you can't come with your hands open hoping taxpayers have extra money to bail you out...they DON'T!
Regarding costs.
There was an appropriate comment from a Kaukauna neighbor regarding costs associated with the Kaukauna school budget.
I seems to fit our situation as costs in general drive this entire referenda.
Where are the vast majority of costs expended?
This poster poses a very good question that should be answered by our BOE as well.......
"Kaudirect wrote:
What does it cost the Kaukauna School District to provide health insurance to it's employees? We may think we are paying school district emplyees well because they have a good health care package but who really benefits? Isn't it the health insurance companies? Tax payers are shelling out a lot of money for health insurance not only for Kaukauna school district employees but also for any other government worker that their taxes go to pay for. This is regardless of what level of government we are talking about - federal, state, or local - they all include health insurance benefits that we tax payers keep paying more and more money for. Maybe it is time for more tax payers, including the ones employed in the so called HEALTH CARE INDUSTRY, to take another look at the hugh cost we are all paying to keep our health insurance in the private sector. How much money could the Kaukauna School District save if we had a more equitable health insurance - like a National Health Care Plan?
1/27/2009 9:06:52 AM"
"For all the criticism thrown my way, I really am pretty frugal and would not be supporting this referendum if I thought it was extravagant or had misplaced priorties."
Teresa: You were not too frugal when you were on the school board. Paying administrators pay raises very few in the private sector EVER see. And supporting board members that recently approved 4.7% package RAISES for some staff. When 85% of the budget is compromised of these costs, that isn't frugal. That is just plain ol' irresponsible.
And you indicated you didn't here what schools Schneider would close to pay for the "sins of the pasts". When he was on the board, he never supported irresponsibility. In fact, two years ago, when he opposed the 4.7%increase to staff, I remember him saying "I won't support this as the board will need to close schools to fund or cut programs".
He indicated he would support a lessor INCREASE. (that is not a cut Teresa).
SO MUCH for current board members being advocates for kids as they will RAISE CLASS SIZE to pay for past unrestraint! They pass resolutions that the next years budget can't support and then criticize board members who said he would have supported less increase to AVOID FUTURE problems.
That is great you cut cable out of your budget, however, you are still penny wise dollar foolish!
This board has controlled the budget (as they have always supported what was spent in past), they have deferred maintenance, they support the calendar, they support everything. And it seems, all you can do, Teresa, is blame those that WARNED the board of where they are headed. WE are now experiencing what was predicated and you still support the "leaders" that have produced this.
Come on, Teresa, you are a smart lady, but lets not continue doing the same thing over and over and over and expecting different results!
And do you think people owning $ 150,000 homes will go to raise their taxes by $ 400.00 over 5 years? Give the current school board MORE money on top of what was already given them?
They can't even manage their existing budget (projected deficit of $ 4,000,000 for next year) and they want more?
They just voted to defer more maintenance and want us to give them money (referendum question 2) for catching up on deferred maintenance.
Give me a break.
I can say I have always supported Dennis Kavanaugh in the past 3 elections and supported Wayne Traska 3 years ago but won't be supported them this time around.
They had their chance but I am becoming increasingly frustrated with them, and this board for that matter, as they have not been effective leaders and good stewards.
In past, Dennis has criticized board members for wanting to "raise class size" and yet, his positions and past votes are directing us to that. Massive teacher layoffs will result in higher class size when we need to maintain what we have. I did buy into the board members want to raise class size arguement but those scare tactics won't work this time.
I am voting for someone that actually has common sense, have financial sense and looks long-term at the impact of their decisions. I can't write the name yet (still can't believe I am supporting as a self-proclaimed Obama supporting liberal) but as a younger family, I can't afford this referendum and am frustrated my PTO had to raise money for essential improvements our school district should have made. Only to find out the board cut maintenance recently and that is one of many reasons our schools are suffering.
After 3 terms of Dennis Kavanaugh and Wayne Traska doing nothing in his term, they don't have my vote and nor does this referendum.
I second the most recent post.
I want a board member that doesn't keep blaming others for the problems they created. Frankly, I am surprised these two gentlemen are even running for re-election. They are fine people but have just created such a big mess. This referendum will cost my family $ 494. On top of the registration fees, the fees I pay on the early dismissal days, I can barely afford what I have now. People shouldn't feel guilty they don't support this referendum or the people that got us in this mess.
From what I am told, the budget is a record amount and they need another $ 494 from my family?
"This referendum will cost my family $ 494."
Wow-- your house is worth almost a MILLION Dollars?
Teresa:
Why are we in this mess?
You were on the board for 3 years and have supported the majority of the board members, were you a board member that voted to defer maintenance too?
If you passed budgets that didn't put the necessary amount in maintenance, then I guess you were part of the problem then.
If the refenendum cost you 494, it is over 5 years. Sounds like a house worth about $ 150,000.
Looks like middle class Oshkosh is going to take it hard if they pass this one. Another $ 100 per year for these questions ON TOP OF THE NORMALLY SCHEDULE INCREASE.
Thanks Teresa for your leadership on all this along with your board majority.
Now if you have questions about specifics of the referendum or comments about the capital improvement priorities
Question Teresa on capital improvement priorities:
In 2008, Wayne Traska and Dennis Kavanaugh AND 4 other board members voted to spend $ 100,000 for fencing for tennis courts but spend NOTHING in 2008 for roof replacements. Do you feel these gentlemen have their priorities in order?
Also, these same two gentlemen spent $ 150,000 to increase the rent for JJ. Keller field at Titan Stadium and NOTHING once again for roof replacments. Do you feel spending more money on sports rent than on the amount for maintenance for Oaklawn is frugal, as you indicated you are? Since you are frugal and you supported these people in past, I would like your take.
Thanks!
As usual the naysayers only tell half the story and don't explain the reasons why certain votes were the way they were. One has to "wonder" why they won't tell the other half of the story. I question those motives and the character of those individuals.
while checking the job boards (i lost my job) i came across this site.
based on my current situation, i'll vote no to any of the options. i'm thinking many others in oshkosh will do the same.
not a priority for me. i need to preserve my limited cash reserves.
"As usual the naysayers only tell half the story and don't explain the reasons why certain votes were the way they were."
Yeh, keep justifying the reason we are in this mess and just say the ones questioning are naysayers.
Why don't you acknowledge the bad voting record so we can move forward. You continue to embrace the past and embrace this soon to be doomed referendum. And, you continue to support the candidates that will deliver a massive amount of pink slips to teachers soon, which will result in raising class sizes.
This board couldn't manage things when the times were good (record budgets) how will they manage when times will get challenging?
Kind of like the Big 3. They couldn't sell cars or make money when the economy was roaring, and now they want money to bail them out!
I wonder why people can make ends meet when things are good? Maybe the problem is from within!
Back to the questions;
In 2008, Wayne Traska and Dennis Kavanaugh AND 4 other board members voted to spend $ 100,000 for fencing for tennis courts but spend NOTHING in 2008 for roof replacements. Do you feel these gentlemen have their priorities in order?
I wonder if the Northwestern will publish the voting record of the incumbents come election time?
I sure hope during the debates, the challengers have the guts to ask them about this incompetance.
Pretty cut and dry folks. You waste money, have bad priorities, they ask taxpayers for a bailout package!
"As usual the naysayers only tell half the story and don't explain the reasons why certain votes were the way they were. One has to "wonder" why they won't tell the other half of the story. I question those motives and the character of those individuals."
I am so tired of the term 'naysayer'. Anyone who disagrees with anyone else is a naysayer. The board should be full of naysayers. They should be questioning one another all the time. They should disagree and ask the others to prove their point instead of just being a room full of bobble-heads whose heads nod in agreement with everything uttered.
To the second half of your post, you're right...let's tell the truth. Our BOE did not vote to increase the rent at JJKeller. They GAVE AWAY $150,000 on top of the rent, and they don't know where the money will come from. They didn't know where it would come from on the night they voted 'yes'. Amy W. said she 'always makes contributions and doesn't know from where she'll get the money but it always works out.' And anyone is wondering how in the world the budget got so screwy?
Truth #2: There is absolutely no solid plan to close lincoln. Right now the plan is one for one. Close one school, open one absolutely huge school which now costs $500,000 more than it did last week.
Teresa:
Why are we in this mess?
You were on the board for 3 years and have supported the majority of the board members, were you a board member that voted to defer maintenance too?
If you passed budgets that didn't put the necessary amount in maintenance, then I guess you were part of the problem then.
I personally am open to exploring closing Lakeside, Smith, Green Meadow or Jacob Shapiro. If they are in declining attendance areas and/or they are in need of expensive remodelling and upgrades they should be considered for closing. If there is a cost-benefit clearly identified we should consider closing one or more of these schools.
For the community to support the closing of either of these schools the BOE should seriously consider closing Oaklawn and Lincoln and consolidating these schools with existing Northside schools. This consolidation would cost less than a new school and would create greater efficiencies.
I can't see how anybody could support building a new school in a declining attendance area. I could never support a BOE candidate that supports the new school. It is costly and inefficient.
4:46, I am tired of some of you disagreeing and flaming about anything the board majority or administration brings forward. Again, you only tell the part of the story you want people to hear. As for Amy W's comment she was speaking about herself, not the district. You're either dense or should be ashamed for trying to make a correlation where none exists. It's attitudes like yours that make me want to vote for a referendum just because you are so anti-everything.
On a different note to Mrs. Thiel: I see you made the corrections Kent Monte asked for. I notice he hasn't bothered to publicly thank you after you met his challenge, though. He's too busy to say thanks but not to busy to whine about every little thing that upsets him or his wife. I giggle how they take such offense to remarks about their personal issues but have no trouble at all saying or approving similar things or worse about others, usually their political adversaries.
5:08
You can take solace that I neither flame nor disagree with everything the board does.
When I was a kid I read a bumpersticker that applies to you. It said, "Children: hurry up and leave home while you know everything".
Amy's comment was made when discussing from where the money for the gift to the University would be found. She was speaking for her own personal life when she said that she often makes contributions without knowing where in her personal budget they would come. Then she continued on to apply that principal to the gift to the University. So you stand corrected. I can try to connect the utube feed if you'd like the exact words.
This district needs help. We need a referendum to pass in some respects so that we can get the ball rolling in the right direction. The problem remains that if we give more money to the current boe we'll be in this same situation as soon as that gift runs out. We need to live within our means and stop pinning our hopes lottery tickets.
-please excuse the missing 'from' and 'to' in previous post.
If something was given to the university it was known from where it would come. To suggest otherwise is totally disingenuous. You may think they didn't know, but if no specific designation is made it would come from general funds. Let's also remember she alone didnt vote to make this "donation." Please do find the link and post it for us so everyone can draw their own conclusions, as you have.
You are just negative. You realize a referendum needs to pass in some respects but will vote against it because of your distrust (ie: dislike) of the board majority.It might interest you to know that money approved in a referendum must be spent on what it was approved for. That should allay your concerns.
Ms. Thiel,
Thank you for cleaning up the previous posts with the inaccurate information. It is much appreciated. Sorry that I didn't post sooner but I just got home from work a short time ago and did not get a chance earlier.
I can understand that people may think that our family is well off and we have "nice cars, house and boat" but realistically, we have to pay the bills associated with those things and we do every month. We have never said that we could not afford tax increases but there are many others in the community that can't. Using the term "fiscally conservative" should not be associated with never spending money. It is simply not living beyond a maintainable budget. We have been called this in the past because we believe that money should be carefully managed and not to spend more than what is coming in. Given the shortfalls with the BOE in the last couple of years, they cannot say the same.
I feel that if I can trust that the $82 per year can be spent wisely, I will vote in favor of all three questions. Right now, I am not convinced of that. I don't think that building a new northside school is wise but there may be more information that could change my mind. I am in favor of catching up the deferred maintenance so I will say yes to question 2. And finally, as long as they (the BOE) is up in the air with the money from question #3, I will be voting No.
All that being said, we are looking at around $41 per year and that number would go down in future years.
I would welcome comments and debate as long as we can remain civil and patient as I don't get much time to blog these days.
Thanks again.
KM
I cannot link that video here but you can watch it on the OCAT website. I hope all posters take a peek at it to understand the truth.
6:54
It seems you're just looking to pick a fight, so I will graciously bow out of this conversation with you. Thank you.
What meeting was it from?
First of all not one dollar has gone to the University yet for the stadium, and I don;t think it is irresponsible to pledge to help with the cost fo upgrades to a facility OASD uses almost as much as the University does. The cozt to the district would be MUCH greater than we currently spend to build and maintain our own fields.
Please refresh my memory as to which roofs were slated to be repaired but were deferred so the fence could be built?
Posters keep making ridiculous comments about how we have a budget deficit because of reckless spending. There just isn't a factual basis for the statement. When the tax rate has been more than cut in half over the last 10 years, and when the district is one of the LOWEST spending districts in the state, and is one of only a few districts in the area that has NOT passed a referendum to exceed revenue controls (like Appleton, Neenah, Winneconne and others have done over the years) it is not runaway spending that has gotten us where we are. If you check you will see that the vast majority of districts in the state are in the same boat, having to cut budgets year after year. Part of the reason is the state pretty much requires the district give its largest group of employees a 3.8% package which in effect becomes $4.2% (which the courts have ruled that steps and lanes must be included) but revenues are only allowed to increase by 2.5% AND you have declining enrollment, which even those weak in Math can see results in Expenses outpacing Revenues.
Just because a district has a "deficit" when looking at next year's budget, in no way shows mismanagement. All it shows is that there will not be enough revenues to continue everything as they are today, so then the district must look at what areas should be cut. And that is what the board does every year based on recommendations from administration, who have always tried to keep the cuts away from student learning as much as possible.
I still haven't seen an answer from those who advocate spending more on deferred maintenance as to where in the budget those dollars will come...if you say from employee salary and benefit packages you must remember that is not a sure thing so what is the back-up plan if you lose in arbitration and end up paying employees say a 4.8% package each year of a two year contract and arbitration and legal fees? Where will you then get the $3.5M each year for maintenance/capital improvements?
I'd also like to comment on the statement that we have to close schools because of the salary benefit packages we pay employees...
The fact is if you can save hundreds of thousands of dollars by combining small schools with inefficient staffing, how can someone who is a fiscal conservative dismiss the idea of such savings and efficiencies? The only explanation I can find is pandering to a vocal minority. There is NOTHING fiscally conservative about keeping schools with 80 students and 4 classrooms open.
Terri,
"if you say from employee salary and benefit packages you must remember that is not a sure thing so what is the back-up plan if you lose in arbitration and end up paying employees say a 4.8% package each year of a two year contract and arbitration and legal fees?"
You're right. Many have written about salary and benefit reductions but all we hear is this arbitration axe held over our heads.
So now I think rather than everyones pay/benefits reduced to maintain the positions....its time to cut jobs. No arbitration issues if you cut staff.
Reduce staff, ACROSS THE BOARD including administration and other non-teaching positions. That money can be used on maintenance.
If the teaching staff averages $40,000 - $60,000 a reduction of about 10 would put a half million dollars in the coffers for maintenance needs.
I'm guessing in an organization as large as the Oshkosh school district you should be able to cut 10 people quite easily.
Often in the private sector, arbitrary staff reduction numbers are given. Those tend to be in the 5-10% range. Most business continue to operate with others picking up the slack.
You also said..........
"The fact is if you can save hundreds of thousands of dollars by combining small schools with inefficient staffing, how can someone who is a fiscal conservative dismiss the idea of such savings and efficiencies?"
You and I do agree on this point.
I AM in favor of consolidation, as long as it comes with a HIGH staff reduction component.
If the teachers union actually did go to arbitration in these tough times there would be civic outrage. I'd call their bluff.
This fiscal conservative is all for closing schools IF their is a cost benefit. 80 students is too small of a school. But, I could see how some conservatives might value the concept of neighborhood schools and fully utilizing what our forefathers have left us.
You see, we don't have a new school out the country that is a drag on our budget and there is no good reason to build one. Any candidate that supports the new school is clueless and deserves da boot!
It's true the tax rate has been cut more than in half however, during that time the budget of the OASD has gone up $30,000,000 while the enrollment continues to decline.
Teresa Thiel said...
I'd also like to comment on the statement that we have to close schools because of the salary benefit packages we pay employees...
The fact is if you can save hundreds of thousands of dollars by combining small schools with inefficient staffing, how can someone who is a fiscal conservative dismiss the idea of such savings and efficiencies? The only explanation I can find is pandering to a vocal minority. There is NOTHING fiscally conservative about keeping schools with 80 students and 4 classrooms open
Folks, why even listen to Teresa Thiel??
She wrote "The fact is if you can save hundreds of thousands of dollars by combining small schools with inefficient staffing"
Think about how dumb that above statement is;
She wants us to spend $ 15,000,000 to close Oaklawn and Lincoln (maybe?) so we can be more effiicent by "hundreds of thousands of dollars". Debt service on $ 15 mil is $ 1,100,000 per year Teresa. I guess you want us to spend $ 1,100,000 per year to save HUNDRED OF THOUSANDS.
Thank God Schneider is running and will be a board member to actually inject some fiscal sense in this debacle!
Referendum question 1 should read;
Do you want to authorize the district to spend $ 15,000,000 to build a new school no kid can walk to, that will increase operational costs, reduce revenue (eliminate SAGE)at an annual cost of $ 1,100,000 per year so we can save (Theresa Thiel's definition) HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS PER YEAR?
YES/NO
Class dismissed.
One anonymous said "If the teachers union actually did go to arbitration in these tough times there would be civic outrage."
Really?? I saw and heard NO PUBLIC OUTRAGE at all last year when several groups went to arbitration against the city. Not only was there no public outrage over going to arbitration, there continued to be a lack of outrage when most of them won against the city. So much for calling one's bluff anonymous.
11:23
I say "to heck" with the arbitration issue at all. Clearly the union does not want to partisipate in an across-the-board reduction to attempt to save jobs....so be it.
Cut the positions like the earlier poster said. Cutting 10 positions should make up that $500,000.00 number. Use that for maintenance and don't worry about the arbitration issue at all.
Problem solved!
No problem. But you can only cut so many jobs, just as you can only cut so many programs or other things from a budget. Sooner or later additional monies have to be raised, something some posters just don't get.
No problem. But you can only cut so many jobs, just as you can only cut so many programs or other things from a budget. Sooner or later additional monies have to be raised, something some posters just don't get.
The above point is good.
Sad thing though is this board has not manage our finances when things were good. They couldn't manage and maintain when the budget is at a record amount, how do we expect them to manage moving forward.
They put us in this mess and Dennis Kavaugh and Wayne Traska want another 3 year term in addition to $ 24,000,000? Come on!
One anonymous said "If the teachers union actually did go to arbitration in these tough times there would be civic outrage."
Really?? I saw and heard NO PUBLIC OUTRAGE at all last year when several groups went to arbitration against the city. Not only was there no public outrage over going to arbitration, there continued to be a lack of outrage when most of them won against the city. So much for calling one's bluff anonymous.
Different day and different circumstances.
Why would anyone support the real referendum which is essentially;
Do you want to authorize the district to spend $ 15,000,000 to build a new school no kid can walk to, that will increase operational costs, reduce revenue (eliminate SAGE)at an annual cost of $ 1,100,000 per year so we can save (Theresa Thiel's definition) HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS PER YEAR
I wonder if even Teresa Thiel's buddies, Wayne Traska and Dennis Kavanaugh would even support if the question read the correct way?
But I am sure we will be told it "saves the taxpayers money" somehow. I bet during the debates, the two incumbents will get shreaded trying to justify this joke. I'll have my popcorn ready and watching :)
Anon. said [She wrote "The fact is if you can save hundreds of thousands of dollars by combining small schools with inefficient staffing"]
I guess it wasn't clear to you that I was talking about consolidating Green Meadow, Smith and if there is room Lakeside with existing schools with room (no new construction needed) last time I checked there are about 300 excess elementary seats on the South side. Over 5 years ago the savings figure in operating costs was over $400,000 to close two small elementary schools.
The difference with closing Oaklawn and Lincoln is that there are approximately 50 excess elementary seats on the North side, so construction has to occur. I think it makes sense to build a new school rather than try and add on to 50+ year old schools. For my $12 a year, I consider that a bargain for a new school.
"Different day and different circumstances."
Wrong, anonymous. It may be a different day but there are no different circumstances. People like you keep saying there is public outrage over salaries and benefits, too, yet we see virtually none (other than the token complainers). And the teachers have gone to arbitration in the past and, again, no public outage. Get over your anger and resentment about unions and find something useful to do with your life.
Rather than ask for more money via a public referendum, I think our School Board should look at cutbacks and downsizing just as we have occuring all throughout the nation. I plan to vote no.
4:42 could use some anger management classes too.
I just know that if I was a teacher and I did not get a raise next year and the union asked me if I wanted to either accept that or go to arbitration, I would choose to accept it and go without a raise.
I would be willing to give a little up so coworkers could keep there jobs.
4:42 You are wrong. There most certainly are different circumstances. Diferent unions, different jobs and different pay scales and ,as you agreed, different times. This year will be tougher than last.
If the BOE pays teachers $99,000,000 this year and If the BOE gives the teachers the required3.8% raise every year, how much would that be in 10 years?
If the BOE pays teachers $99,000,000 this year and If the BOE gives the teachers a 4.7% raise every year (like last year), how much would that be in 10 years?
I think most of you will be surprised.
Clearly we have people posting who don't understand QEO, arbitration, or anything else they're talking about. Yikes!!!!
I bet Patrick k. has already figured this out. I would guess that Dan Becker and Ben Schneider have an idea and I would guess that the other six incumbents have no clue and have not even bothered to consider it.
Teresa:
Where can I find the elementary school capacity numbers vs. the actual student numbers? I have a hard time finding my way around the OASD website. Could you please provide a link?
Also, When you say 300 seats on the South side and 50 seats on the North side are you referring to 100% capacity or 85% operational capacity?
Even if we follow Teresa's number of 50 open seats (which I am pretty sure is incorrect) on the North side it still makes more sense to add classrooms to the existing schools as opposed to building an entirely new school.
Well I can't figure out how to link in these blogs unless it is in my post vs. comment but here is the site you can cut and paste or if someone knows how to make it a link please do...
This is for building capacity from OASD website given the definition I would guess it is full capacity but I'm not sure.
"The updated capacity numbers show the number of students a building can hold during the school day, based on current programming."
http://www.oshkosh.k12.wi.us/aboutus/building_capacity_updates.cfm
I got actual student numbers from WINSS site (I used 2006-2007 numbers because when I calculated the seats that was the last year they had data, so the numbers could have changed some, I haven't had time to redo)
WINSS site is:
http://dpi.state.wi.us/sig/index.html
As far as it being cheaper to add on to schools rather than build a new school, that may be true but cheaper doesn't always mean that is the best choice. For example, if I had a 10 year old car that needed a new engine I'm not sure I'd replace the engine, even though that would certainly be cheaper than getting a new car. At some point I'm going with the new car.
I don't like your car analogy. Cars are cars and buildings are buildings. There are buildings in Europe and Asia that have served a useful purpose for over 1000 years.
I re-did the numbers with 2007-2008 school year enrollments and there were 72 excess seats but if you close Lincoln (118 seats) and Oaklawn (243 seats) you have a total of 1521 seats and an enrollment of 1810 so you are short 289 seats.
Do the calculations yourself since you choose not to believe me.
Isn't it funny how when an analogy is made to prove a point, a naysayer comes along to say they don't like the analogy? Or they choose to not believe numbers derived at using plain old everyday mathematical calculations (simple or otherwise)? Like has been said before: there are some that just like to argue for the sake of arguing. Kind of like Dan Becker, Ben Schneider, and Michelle Monte: just say no for the sake of saying no. Good plan.
Ok, what kind of car is it?
If it is a Cadillac, it might be worth the $4000 that an engine replacement would take because the replacement is well over $30,000.
A Geo Metro on the other hand would be lucky to last 10 years much less another 10.
It is comparing apples and oranges. There is little doubt that buildings that were constructed in the 50's or earlier were built with quality and longevity in mind. Today's buildings are with significantly lower standards of materials and will not last as long.
Take a house for example, a Victorian is built much better than most houses of this generation. Granted, there are more bells a whistles in today's houses but the quality and craftsmanship went away long ago.
So again we state that adding on to a building that was built to last is far more economical than spending upwards of 10 times the amount to construct a new building that will NOT have the students to fill the seats. Even if you use Ms. Thiels math, it won't even put the new school at 50% capacity. So, where are you going to get the rest of the students?
Teresa used an analogy that doesn't apply. Unless she is somehow trying to state that Read, Washington, E-Cook, Webster and Merrill are old buildings that have out-lived their usefulness.
They have not. They are good quality buildings that could absorb additions and with proper maintenance could easily last another 100 years.
This is not about being a naysayer, this is about spending wisely, creating efficiencies and investing in our district.
The analogy applies, some people just don't like it. And there are always naysayers in this community. They are usually the supporters of the likes of school district whiners Monte, Schneider, and Becker. Vote no for the sake of voting no is their motto.
So, you are saying that Read, Washington, E-Cook, Webster and Merrill are old buildings that have out-lived their usefulness?
8:52, looking at the URLs, you are the same person who posted that you wanted to vote 'yes' just to spite the 'naysayers', so it's ironic that you should think "Vote no for the sake of voting no" is the motto of the 'naysayers'.
Naysayers Unite!!!
Question this referendum. Ask everything you need to know. Vote yes if the answers are appropriate. Vote no if the answers do not make common sense. Use your brains people. Think for yourselves, don't be drawn into the personal attacks by folks who want to make you feel bad for having an opinion or an alternative thought.
FYI --- There is NO space to add on to Webster, and Merrill is already short on playground space so wouldn't really make sense to add on there, I think the same goes for Read... really the only N. side schools with enough land for an addition and still adequate playground is E. Cook and Washington and adding on to Washington doens't really help Oaklawn students.
As for filling up the new school -- don't forget the 90 students that live in the Oaklawn attendance area who can't go there either because they need special ed programming Oaklawn doesn't have (but the new school will), or because Oaklawn classrooms are full... so you will have close to 400 students current (07-08 WINSS data) Oaklawn enrollment of 213 + approx. 100 Sunset Students + 90 Oaklawn attendance area students attending elsewhere = 403. Given how close the new school is to Winneconne there may be some open enrollment students as well and if the Gruny property starts developing the school will fill up fast. Remember Traeger was supposed to have over 100 "extra" seats when it opened and it was "full" instead.
Saying that schools built in the 50's were built for quality, one look at Oaklawn tells you that isn't true, and Read is a total take down and rebuild so it is one of those new schools "with significantly lower standards of materials and will not last as long."
I will grant you that some buildings built 100 years ago were built to last from a structural standpoint, that doesn't mean they still "work" as a 21st Century school.
The fact remains, buildings fail and are torn down and sometimes it just doesn't pay to add on to an old building. I believe we need a new building on the North side and it makes good sense to build it large enough to leave some room for an increase in enrollment.
You know, for less than $15,000,000we could build the additions, provide some upgrades and purchase entire blocks of homes to create more playground space.
It is all about creating greater efficiencies!
Looking at URLs? That means nothing and you're not even close to being as clever as you portend 9:31. But props for trying.
Using the car vs school analogy, I think this BOE would vote to build a new school and give each family a new car so they could drive their kids half way to Neenah to attend it.
What a joke.
I'm voting NO!
To the people clamoring for efficiencies, what would they have the school district do with the land and infrastructure already paid for years ago, and for the very purpose of a school no less? Who will buy it and at what cost? I might also ask where all these complainers were when the land was being bought way back then. There's certainly more homes out there and greater chance for growth now than back then, but it is now that we see the naysayers coming forward.
I see our unemployment in Oshkosh is below the state average AGAIN and yet there are people here complaining about a referendum and saying how people won't support it. Funny how that hasn't stopped people in some areas with worse unemployment from passing thei own referenda.
Head-In-The-Sand said:
"To the people clamoring for efficiencies, what would they have the school district do with the land and infrastructure already paid for years ago, and for the very purpose of a school no less? Who will buy it and at what cost? I might also ask where all these complainers were when the land was being bought way back then. There's certainly more homes out there and greater chance for growth now than back then, but it is now that we see the naysayers coming forward."
The expansion to the North of Oshkosh never occured. The landfill and prison are the man reason why. As there is no mass expansion expected that direction, the school makes little sense.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Wrong we bought it (in hindsight) lets not compound that by building a school.
A classic example is the Copps building. They thought there would be enough people on that side of town to warrent another store. The store was there for about a year, not business and closed.
I plan to vote NO.
My, my, what a nasty individual. Someone disagrees with you and you have to call names. How classless.
That being said, the Ryf Road location is only one mile from the original Sunset Elementary School. So what's the fuss about?
Next, you say "The expansion to the North of Oshkosh never occured. The landfill and prison are the man (sic) reason why." The landfill and prison have absolutely not deterred expansion and growth out there. Take a look around at the various apartment buildings, new streets, and small pockets of neighborhoods scattered around, especially off Snell, Jackson, and Vinland. That's kind of a moot point anyway, because the Ryf Road location is not near the landfill or prison. It's actually more NW of town than north.
Since you like names so much I would say you're not only classless, but clueless as well.
The Copps example from 1:45 PM really is a poor one, especially since Copps also closed their west side location, which is where most of our city's growth has been. The example is further diminished by the fact that the Pick and Save store on the north side continues to flourish, as well as plenty of other old and new businesses.
I realize there are many naysayer posters who continue to disagree that the economy is bad. These naysayers continue to contend that all is well and Oshkosh is not hurting.
I just heard Oshkosh Truck will begin a layoff and restructure program. The naysayers will continue to indicate that this in no way will hurt Oshkosh, or the chances of the referendum passing.
I think otherwise. I contend that rather than NO...it will, YES hurt Oshkosh and those taxpayers who live and work here.
I think that unless our President gets that 5 Million stimulus package passed, and we use it for maintenance of schools it won't happen as the chance of defeating the referendum is great and yes, most likely to happen.
I deleted a comment that contained very misleading information.
Opinions are fine but don't play around with numbers and pretend they are facts. Those posts I will continue to delete.
It's true that the new school is only a little more than a mile from the old sunset (90 kids) but the bulk of the population will be at a school almost 5 miles away from their current school...Oaklawn.
Oshkosh Truck has many locations around the country/world. It's doubtful many of the cuts, if any, will occur here. Unless they do, it won't do much to touch our local economy.
"It's doubtful many of the cuts,"....again the naysayer comments.
The economy is shedding more jobs now than any other time since maybe the early '50's. You can't continue to be a naysayer and live with your head in the sand. People are hurting and losing jobs. Now of all times seems to be the most likely time for the referendum to be defeated. People have no extra money.
Naysayer? To believe few of the cuts, if any, will happen here? That's actually called positive thinking. When they let people go a couple months back it didn't happen here, did it? I didn't think so. Oshkosh Corp and a local referendum. They have little if anything to do with each other.
Keep your head in the sand Naysayer. Continue to believe things are alright and nothing is wrong. Keep thinking no one will vote against the referenda. Keep thinking those that say the economy is bad are just fools. Keep saying I'm wrong. Hope you and the BOE have a plan B the day after the election. Or maybe you can just keep your head buried.
Where did anyone say nothing was wrong. Learn how to read, for heaven sakes. They said the cuts at Oshkosh Co. would probably not be felt here in Oshkosh so there referendum wouldn't be affected by that. You've jumped to another planet all together and you're looking for a fight the whole way.
Never hear of someone thinking postiively as being a naysayer but I guess in some weirdo's dictionary that may be the case.
8:54 and 9:35;
Your comments and use of the word naysayer make it pretty clear why people shouldn't use words they don't understand. Thanks for being such a good example and adding a good laugh to my evening.
The morning news reports that corporations will report the lowest profit in decades.
They also report that the unemployement numbers are soaring.
Unemployment benefits are being extended to help those out of work.
All this accurate data, and yet the naysayers on this blog continue to say it's not that bad.
People have alot of money and will support a $15,000,000.00 referendum.
The naysayers continue to say NO, the economy is great and people will be happy to give more money to a fools plan that is now our referendum.
Take your head out of the sand and realize all is...YES pretty terrible out in the real world economy.
The chance for rederenda defeat is almost certain.
I want this referendum to fail because it is an example of wasteful spending and I want it to send a message to the BOE to cut back and spend wisely.
The economy will most definately play a roll, but I don't want the poor economy to be an excuse for these nitwits!
Let's talk about the referendum:
1. The BOE is proposing a new school in a declining attendance area that all children will have to be bussed to. They want to spend $15,000,000 on this new school when they could spend more like $2,000,000 on classroom additions.
2. The BOE wants us to give them more money to spend on maintenance and building upgrades while, at the same time, they refuse to reduce spending and appropriate adequate money towards maintenance.
Furthermore, Teresa states that there are only 50 open seats in the north side elementary schools. I wonder what might happen if we were to reduce or eliminate SAGE in these schools. I would bet that we could then fit all Lincoln and Oaklawn students in the remaining schools.
"I wonder what might happen if we were to reduce or eliminate SAGE in these schools. I would bet that we could then fit all Lincoln and Oaklawn students in the remaining schools."
The above statement is a classic example of posters who have very little understanding of the district posting things that appear to be statements of fact but in the end have no basis in reality!
The above statement is simply WRONG--
If you close Lincoln and Oaklawn...the ONLY remaining school on the North Side that is SAGE is Webster Stanley and eliminating SAGE there would give you approximately 60 extra seats (you could add 14 seats per grades K-3 [14 x 4 = 56] {SAGE class size 15 students per class - district class size 22 students per class & there are 2 sections per grade at Webster}.
Closing both Oaklawn and Lincoln leaves you 289 seats short on the N. side. If you eliminate SAGE at Webster and you add 60 seats this still leaves you short 239 seats which is a school about the size of Jefferson...it would NOT be a matter of just adding a few classrooms.
I thought that Read was planned to be a SAGE school when Lincoln wa closed. The above statement is not an example of me have no understanding. It is an example of trying to think outside of the box to provide a solution.
Your winns link was to their home page. Can you link the page that indicates OASD attendance numbers?
Can you hold back on the insults and help look for solutions too?
Here is the way to deal with declining enrollment and budget shortfalls. Kaukauna is in this process and now Neenah follows….yet Oshkosh feels we need to build a new school without any consolidation of existing schools or staff…and carry all this off in a DECLINING enrollment era.
Seems Neenah and Kaukauna have a better BOE and Superintendent than we have in Oshkosh.
It is simply ludicrous to think that now is the time to propose a $15,000,000.00 spending project.
Neenah schools face cuts in staff- 44 positions may be eliminated by 2010-11 budget
Supt. Jerry Schutz recommended Wednesday that Neenah schools cut 16.3 positions to balance its 2009-10 budget and another 27.8 positions to balance its 2010-11 budget.
The moves would cut expenses by $1.1 million in 2009-10 and by $1.6 million in 2010-11, when the school district's $6 million in referendum money runs out.
Schutz's recommendations, unveiled before the Finance and Personnel Committee, combine new cuts with reductions first proposed by former Supt. James Wiswall in January 2007.
The changes would result in larger class sizes, eliminate the elementary magnet program and move kindergarten and grades one and two from Taft Elementary School to Hoover Elementary School.
9:20, You want someone to hold back on the insults. Try it yourself. Calling people nitwits and spewing forth some of the other nonsense you did is pretty insulting. We reap what we sow. Try it sometime.
"The changes would result in larger class sizes, eliminate the elementary magnet program and move kindergarten and grades one and two from Taft Elementary School to Hoover Elementary"
Funny how a few years ago Dennis Kavanaugh was criticizing board members saying their positions will raise class sizes yet, this is exactly where he (under his two years of Board Presidency) and his other 10 years of "leadership" is sterring us. At same time, a more conservative approach would have neutralized this need to raise class sizes at a time where our kids need the most individualized attention. Our children are competing in a global economy and their are fewer jobs at home and we can ill afford to allow our schools to continue in the hands of those responsible for the decline.
I wonder if some that have supported this board member failure are starting to realize that being more conservative day to day will result in a better position when times get tough. REmember, this years budget is a RECORD $117,000,000 and they can't make it work (recently cut another $ 300,000 from maintenance that could have gone into school). In other words, they can't manage when times are the best, how will they manage when times and budgets get worse?
I hope people see the failure of the past and present board members and will vote for change.
We didn't get in this mess because board members voted NO, we got in this mess because of incumbents who want to be CAREER board members and because THEY VOTED YES ON EVERTHING!
As you vote NO on the referendum, vote to eliminate those that got us in this mess! Now that is being an advocate for both your children and your checkbook!
Another uninformed poster. Children who do live in the city do not ride the school bus UNLESS there are not continuous sidewalks to their school. Some students who live in the city must be bussed to their schools due to the fact the surrounding townships do not have sidewalks. (See 9th ave and the Town of Algoma)
Anon said "REmember, this years budget is a RECORD $117,000,000 and they can't make it work (recently cut another $ 300,000 from maintenance that could have gone into school). In other words, they can't manage when times are the best, how will they manage when times and budgets get worse?"
PLEASE, stop with the comments that make no sense. Just because expenses have increased (utility costs, special education cost, increased testing just to name a few) that does NOT mean times are the best. Do you not read the newspapers? Did you just start following school issues in the last 5 days? These have not been the best of times for schools for over 10 years. It has been explained numerous times by various people in different forums what revenue controls have done to WI school, you don't understand it, you don't care, whatever but stop posting idiotic statements that these are the best of times for schools.
Most of you posters say the fact that the district has a projected deficit is the result of mismanagement by the BOE. Then to follow that, all the businesses with losses are a result of mismanagement, right? I mean Oshkosh Corporation had a record budget and yet they had losses and have to lay employees off...
I think it is actually admirable that the district has managed for the most part to keep cuts away from the students and have not rushed to increase class sizes. Those pushing for larger class sizes do not have what is best for students in mind they are just focusing on their wallets and "payback" to those "nasty" teachers for having decent benefits.
Education is an investment too bad some in this community care more about themselves than the education of our children. Investments sometimes require sacrifices, If it means I go out to eat 2 fewer times each year or see 4 fewer movies each year or buy 2 fewer pairs of shoes, I'm more than happy to do so to invest in education and those things I mentioned aren't even sacrifices, they are just cutting back a little bit on the fun.
Come April 7th we shall see where the voters in this community stand. Will they invest in education or will they say, nope I'm not paying a penny more. I have a strong belief that the majority know education is important and you get what you pay for, if you want quality, you hae to pay for it.
"Those pushing for larger class sizes do not have what is best for students in mind they are just focusing on their wallets and "payback" to those "nasty" teachers for having decent benefits."
....it's for THE CHILDREN.
Ya right.
Heard it a thousand times. That is tried and true flack talk to tug at the taxpayers heartstrings and make them open their wallets and pay more RATHER than fix the system, eliminate the waste and discard duplication.
It is not going to work this time.
Teresa trots out Shirley Mattox's "Butter Burger" economic justification theory.....
"Investments sometimes require sacrifices, If it means I go out to eat 2 fewer times each year or see 4 fewer movies each year or buy 2 fewer pairs of shoes..."
I plan to vote NO on all referenda questions.
Anonymous said...
Teresa trots out Shirley Mattox's "Butter Burger" economic justification theory.....
It is NOT a theory it is simple Math... if I am going to pay extra school taxes, it has to come from somewhere in my budget. Since I value education more than any of the thing I listed, that is what I would eliminate to cover the extra school tax. It is not a theory it is how things are budgeted. Set your priorities and cut out the extras you cannot afford. Now clearly some value their night out or those $50 shoes (I would never pay $50 for a pair of shoes but many do)more than they value education and that is their right, but it is disingenuous to say you can't "afford "the referendum when in fact you just don't want to give anything up to py for it.
What about those that are on fixed incomes and are struggling to pay their mortgage and still buy their medication?
Not everybody has it as good as you.
Its just a little extra here, just a little extra there, its not much...just about what you'd spend on a Butter Burger or a pair of shoes....
Except many elderly on fixed incomes in Oshkosh can't afford to go out for a McDonalds Hamburger much less a Culvers Butter Burger.
Many of us have elderly parents who want to remain in the family home they feel safe and comfortable in. They are on fixed incomes and many don't have the wonderful pensions those in the public sector unions enjoy.
They...we...struggle daily just to keep them in their homes as long as we can.
$50 is alot to us.
Until our BOE has EARNED the respect of voters, showing they can manage a budget and present a plan that is reasonable, many of those in my situation will not be willing to support ANY MORE SPENDING....or more to the point HIGHER TAXES!
Vote.....NO!
People are fixed incomes are probably not living in $100,000 homes so they would not be paying the $50 a year. Even if they did, it comes to just pennies over $2.00 a month. Anyone who can't afford that probably can't afford to own a home anyway. Let's also remember even people on fixed incomes get a raise in those incomes.
"Let's also remember even people on fixed incomes get a raise in those incomes."
Not to mention those in the circumstances described would get Homestead Credit and therefore wouldn't be paying the full increase anyway.
Advocating increased class sizes and no money to fix our buildings, in no way can be said to be in the best interest of our children. It will not help students to be in larger classes and refusing needed money to make needed repairs will mean the district will have to continue to patch as best they can and buildings will continue to deteriorate. If that is what the community wants that is what they will get, and we will have to watch the quality of our district go downhill and it wont be easy to repair our reputation.
This BOE has not made the case. They have not earned the votes. They have not acted in a professional manner to deserve winning this referendum. I predict it will fail in historic fashion. Even the naysayers will not be able to help win the votes!
The BOE and its committees have not even yet begun the referendum campaign so how would you have expected them to have made their case? Try to follow along or is that too difficult for someone with such a negative attitude?
Teresa,
Please delete 12;06 and other comments which are attacking rather than factual, informative or appropriately questioning.
I have no faith in our current School Board. They have not earned my vote. I don't believe they are acting in the best interest of the taxpayers or the children. Join me in voting NO on each of the referenda questions.
Since the school district has not even trotted out their referenda information and promotion yet, you do not have all the details. Yet you're willing to cast your vote now, before having all the facts. You're the kind of person who should never serve on a jury. It's a shame you even are able to vote, given how mis/underinformed you are.
The referendum team has been putting out information at different meetings. Although it doesn't seem to be 100% complete.
It is not completed and when it is there will be plenty of meetings and informational sessions. Until then, those who vote no just because they can and don't like the administration or board majority are acting like a bunch of uninformed, spoiled brats.
How long should we wait for the rubber-stamping BOE majority to "trot" out their plan before we use or heads, think for ourselves, and determine that a new $15,000,000 school in a declining attendance area at the edge of our district boundaries in a location that all students will have to be bussed to is a BAD, BAD, BAD idea?
THINK about it!
The BOE and its committees have not even yet begun the referendum campaign so how would you have expected them to have made their case? Try to follow along or is that too difficult for someone with such a negative attitude?
What else is there to know?
3 part referendum question each of which is self explanatory!
The facts are;
The board majority continues to cut maintenance, and then want to close schools since they are falling apart!
The district is in declining enrollment, but the board majority wants to build a new school for $15,000,000 (or $ 15.5 mil now)!
The board majority doesn't have a long-range plan, or if they do, then this referendum is Part I of a THREE PART $65,000,000 referendum (if you think this referendum is expensive, run the numbers on the other two parts!!)
We don't need to listen to some unqualified committee members tell us why this is NEEDED because we already know why it isn't!
Teresa Thiel wrote:
Most of you posters say the fact that the district has a projected deficit is the result of mismanagement by the BOE.
Actually Teresa; The deficit is a result of mismanagement by the BOE as is the deferred maintenance. Time were the best they will ever be and the board chose to NOT put money in our schools (remember a few months ago where the board majority spent $ 100,000 for fencing for tennis courts and then cut maintenance for our school a few months after that??). I remember when Wayne Traska voted NO to replace 30 year old band uniforms for West High students but votes YES to spend $ 100,000 for fencing for tennis courts and $ 150,000 to increase the rent to UWO for JJ KELLER FIELD. Shows priorities and that is what the mismanagement is. Mispriorities!
Teresa also wrote:
"I think it is actually admirable that the district has managed for the most part to keep cuts away from the students and have not rushed to increase class sizes. Those pushing for larger class sizes do not have what is best for students......."
Teresa: That is what exactly this board will do moving forward. They will raise class sizes. They have a projected multimillion dollar deficit and will layoff teachers, which will result in increased class sizes. You find their failed practices that have lead us in this mess admirable?
Sad inconsistency here Teresa is because the board has increases labor costs, we will ALL FEEL the pain now. And I assume Dan Becker won't support this raise in class size as HE DIDN'T CAUSE THE COSTS TO rise faster than revenue. Your Board majority you support did and I should be dumb to dumber to watch them try to solve this. I always get a kick out of Dennis Kavanagh attempting to explain his way out of the problems he created. Good luck in the debates on that one Dennis. You and Traska vote to cut the teen pregnancy program but Teresa thinks you are an "advocate for kids". Advocate for kids is CODE for advocate for the teachers union. As they have always won with this board while they deferred maintenance to pay them!
Maintenance had to be cut from the budget in order to balance it, AFTER a mistake was discovered that had been made by Todd Gray. You know, that anointed saint that people like Dan Becker, Ben Schneider and Michelle Monte wanted for superintendent. He couldn't even do his own job right, much less give him the job of supt.
"It is not completed and when it is there will be plenty of meetings and informational sessions. Until then, those who vote no just because they can and don't like the administration or board majority are acting like a bunch of uninformed, spoiled brats."
So...going along with that line of thinking, those (Including Ms. Theil) who are promoting the referenda and posturing for YES votes would be in a similar conundrum. How can they take their position without all the information?
It appears you've just called yourself a spoiled brat!
Don't you people understand we are in a depression?
…more people out of jobs every day and more to come.
Wouldn't you think you should make do with what you have until we get out of this economic mess that we are in?
Oh I forget it's not your money, it's the tax payers' deep pockets. Well at some point enough is enough. You don't have enough money to ruin the schools now. Why add more debt?
Wake up people you can't keep spending beyond what people can afford to pay at this time of high unemployment. We don't need a personal priority like geothermal heating and cooling. What other budget ideas are in there?
Question: Do you run your household budget this way? Spend, spend, spend?
William Zaske
imho that is the likely outcome. all three referenda fail.
new boe will recraft for the next election. no new school.
take care of all deferred maintenance in a single referendum. voters require oasd budget to include annual maintenance expense.
we live within our means; like we all do in our personal lives. after all, they are trying to spend our money.
despite my negative stance, i am very supportive of repairing what is broken, ie, all deferred maintenance IF we stop deferring our annual maintenance requirements.
it is irresponsible to misappropriate maintenance money for salaries and programs
dA
"As I've maintained all along, we need to examine all buildings for these kinds of built-in ineffiencies and make the tough decision to not keep all buildings open. When we have reduced our number of buildings and have reasonable numbers of students in classes with reasonable numbers of staff, we can recognize our savings and move forward with construction or major remodels."
I agree 100%.
I believe that SAGE is less effective than the administration and the SAGE planning team has lead us to believe.
I am in favor of eliminating SAGE and consolidating schools. I am in favor of targeted tutoring and special help for students that demonstrate a need. It is wrong that half our district has 15 students per class and half has over 20 students per class. There should be more consistency and equity across the district.
This will reduce the number of buildings and staff in our district and I wonder why the administration is not supportive of that.
Oshkonian
SOme of us can see the need for certain things in this district without having additional information.
And others will vote no no matter how much information they have or how much of a case is made.
So I guess all the district's problems are Todd Gray's fault?
His last term was what, 10 months and despite Dennis Kavanugh's 12 years of bad decisions, cutting the maintenance budget every year except when fund balance was raided to pay for planned roof replacements and when challenged, they blame someone else. Ron Heilmann took 10 year to develop the current 10 year plan (even though we don't know what years 2 through 10 are) and the supporters of Karen Bowen, Wayne Traska can only blame someone else.
Problem though is, when you were in the majority, controlled the votes, controlled the agenda, you have the responsibility. That is what I hope the next election will be about. Voting records and how these incumbents voted.
Remember, they have been deferring maintenance year after year we didn't get in this mess overnight. We got in this mess over their tenure.
Dennis Kavanaugh, 12 years of incoherent leadership. Wayne TRaska, 3 years of following in his footsteps. One can say Wayne is an inspiring Dennis Kavanaugh. They vote exactly alike.
Who approved the budget that was flawed recently? It seems 6 members did.
When you approve budgets, are you not telling the community with your YES vote the budget looks good? But yet, a few weeks after they approve, they modify? Is there any due diligence performed or is the board a bunch of referendum seeking nitwits that doesn't know what they don't know?
DA,
Although I agree 100% to what you said, I doubt anyone who is behind the school referendum will get your message. They obviously don’t read the paper or watch TV to see our country is in a recession.
So other than getting off your chest your letter unfortunately will do nothing.
I just hope and pray ALL three referendums fail. I too don’t want my taxes to rise. I know some of our schools are suffering, but that’s not our fault…it’s the BOE/OASD funneling maintenance funds elsewhere the last few years. Maybe they should shift funds from their inflated salaries back to the maintenance funds.
Mr. Corndog
"Just because someone calls themselves a fiscal conservative don't assume that means they will always vote to fix our schools."
What does that mean Teresa? Your board members just voted to cut $300,000 to cut the maintenance to fix our schools recently AND the same meeting (?) voted to spend $150,000 to increase SPORTS RENT to JJ KELLER FIELD!!
Teresa: How sad you distort people's position to make your points. Schneider NEVER voted to defer maintenance. He voted against raiding the fund balance and depleting the a dangerously low level to pay for planned expenditures. He supported the projects, no the way the board paid for. He voted NO to award a roofing contract to a dishonest roofing company and SAID yes to the project. There is a distinction!
Problem you and this board majority have is they have pass every budget. A budget affirms priorities. Unfortunately, this board doesn't have maintenance as a priority as evidenced by their voting record and condition of our schools!
Schneider voting record of voting no because "he didn't want to close schools or defer maintenance to pay for" seems to be pretty sound right now. Voting no on budgets that increase legacy costs and defer maintenance is a good position.
You can't get around the FACT that your board members are in the majority, deferred the maintenance and feel tennis court fencing is MORE IMPORTANT than roofs. You can't get around the FACT that Wayne Traska and Dennis Kavanagh and the board supported $ 10,000 pay raises for your administrator friends and is MORE IMPORTANT TO THIS BOARD than addressing the deferred maintenance. Look at the voting records folks.
Look who just recently (6 board members) voted to defer maintenance.
Teresa, we are not in this mess because of one board member being outvoted and that said no. We are this mess because Traska, Mcdermott, Kavanaugh, Weinsime, Bowen have SAID YES TO:
Wasting money to fund deferred maintenance.
Lets at least stick to the facts please othewise, we will continue to do the same things over and over and expect different results!
WOW,
This poster hit the mark!
"It is not completed and when it is there will be plenty of meetings and informational sessions. Until then, those who vote no just because they can and don't like the administration or board majority are acting like a bunch of uninformed, spoiled brats."
So...going along with that line of thinking, those (Including Ms. Theil) who are promoting the referenda and posturing for YES votes would be in a similar conundrum. How can they take their position without all the information?
It appears you've just called yourself a spoiled brat!
Those of you with children in Oshkosh Public Schools have NO IDEA how lucky you are. We moved from the state 3 years ago. Oshkosh schools gave my kids a great primary education. The teachers my kids had a Emmeline Cook, ALPS Charter and Merrill were wonderful.
The district is progressive, responsive and reactive to trends in education. You are lucky, lucky, lucky.
My kids attend school in a district where there is very, very little gifted/talented programming. The special education situation is TERRIBLE. The expulsion rates and drop-out rates are above national averages. The school board does not respond to community concerns. There is blatant racism, classism, and sexism in all the schools. And this is one of the better districts in the area! We aren't talking about Chicago or Rockford...this is a town of 30,000 in a middle class part of the state.
We desperately miss Oshkosh...the school district is truly one of the biggest reasons we wish we could move back.
Those of you with children in Oshkosh Public Schools have NO IDEA how lucky you are.
We are also lucky we have an election April 7th.
Spring signifies a new season and time for a change!
"It is not completed and when it is there will be plenty of meetings and informational sessions.
So, if it isn't completed, what does that tell you that board members are willing to spend $ 24,000,000 to approve a plan despite it not being completed. So much for due diligence.
What fools these naysayers be. They have no idea that marketing campaigns for a referendum are put together AFTER you know what you need. You can't go to the people without knowing what you need. It's like any other business that way. You have to have a game plan, then put together the best possible package to implement it. When it's time for them to make their pitch, you'll all hear the details you're clamoring for.
Yes, thank good ness we have an election in April. Time to once again stomp out the naysayers. Or better yet, let's vote 'em in and watch them fumble all over themselves. Then we can nitpick, poke, jab and make fun of them at ever opportunity that beckons. I can hardly wait.
Happy February!
The countdown is beginning. Only 9 more weeks until election day. On that day, you will be asked to fill 3 seats on the BOE out of 7 positions. You will also be asked whether or not you agree to pay additional taxes in order to support your school system's building infrastructure.
I don't know how many registered voters there are in the OASD area, but there are only 9 weeks to give out information that will lead to a vote. 9 weeks to announce meeting dates and places, plus put together any informational packets and materials. 9 weeks to decide on not ONE, but THREE different questions that can be voted upon.
Don't know about you, but that doesn't seem like enough time to cover the issue. We have been discussing this current "plan" for 3 years now, and I do not see a plan. I see plans for a new school. I do not see a comprehensive maintenance plan for the other 24 buildings. Sure, I see a patch here and a band-aid there, but meaningful improvements? Not yet. And I don't expect to see any in the next 9 weeks.
I love our schools. We didn't pick this district at random. As people moving to the area we were certainly disappointed to see the sheer number of buildings and some in really poor condition.
It speaks volumes about the area, when you're just driving around and first impressions are important!
Do I believe in education in Oshkosh? You bet! Do I want improved conditions (buildings that don't rain, snow and flood, the end to Open Concept classrooms, real computers and science labs for 21st century learning? You bet!
Do I see anything suggested by our Admin to the Bd. of Ed. that would support these improvements? No, I don't. Which makes me very skeptical about approving additional spending.....
I would not vote NO to spite my kids, some Board members who may or may not even have a seat in 9 weeks, or anyone else. If I voted "NO", it would be because I don't get any clear idea of how this money will be spent, and that's the least we deserve to know.
Regarding the referendum and spending additional taxpayer money -
Here is the way to deal with declining enrollment and budget shortfalls. Kaukauna is in this process and now Neenah follows….yet Oshkosh feels we need to build a new school without any consolidation of existing schools or staff…and carry all this off in a DECLINING enrollment era.
Seems Neenah and Kaukauna have a better BOE and Superintendent than we have in Oshkosh.
It is simply ludicrous to think that now is the time to propose a $15,000,000.00 spending project.
Neenah schools face cuts in staff- 44 positions may be eliminated by 2010-11 budget
Supt. Jerry Schutz recommended Wednesday that Neenah schools cut 16.3 positions to balance its 2009-10 budget and another 27.8 positions to balance its 2010-11 budget.
The moves would cut expenses by $1.1 million in 2009-10 and by $1.6 million in 2010-11, when the school district's $6 million in referendum money runs out.
Schutz's recommendations, unveiled before the Finance and Personnel Committee, combine new cuts with reductions first proposed by former Supt. James Wiswall in January 2007.
The changes would result in larger class sizes, eliminate the elementary magnet program and move kindergarten and grades one and two from Taft Elementary School to Hoover Elementary School.
Don't know about you, but that doesn't seem like enough time to cover the issue. We have been discussing this current "plan" for 3 years now, and I do not see a plan. I see plans for a new school. I do not see a comprehensive maintenance plan for the other 24 buildings. Sure, I see a patch here and a band-aid there, but meaningful improvements? Not yet. And I don't expect to see any in the next 9 weeks.
The above hit the nail on the head.
What is the long-term plan? We know what phase I is, however, what about phase II and phase III?
Does anyone who what II and III will cost?
I know Phase I will cost me an additional $ 425 over just 5 years.
I hear the other two phases is another $ 45,000,000 more. The way I figure, this board's plan will cost me over ONE THOUSAND dollars more on top of my increases they sock me every year, plus my "registration fees".
board of education, I CANNOT AFFORD YOUR REPRESENTATION. Don't take it personal, but I just cannot afford to vote for you again! Thanks for your service but time for the people that have warmed the bench for all those years!
"I CANNOT AFFORD YOUR REPRESENTATION."
That's what has been posted many times about public sector labor in general. Taxpayers are beginning to get to the point where they simply can not afford the cost of labor and programs (city, county and schoo)
Maybe this will change with Obama giving out money to more public sector employees. All I can say is that Oshkosh is not a wealthy city compared to Appleton, Neenah etc. We often get lumped in that group, but the truth is Oshkosh is a lower class (financially) community and everyone knows it. Thats why retail doen't come here. Retail goes where the money is and thats Appleton.
Oshkosh taxpayers can't keep funding higher and higher costs by paying more taxes. We've reached our breaking point. The referendum will fail.
And you purchased your tarot cards where?
When will the committee "trot" the specifics out to the public?
Time's a wastin'.
Patience is a virtue.
More wasteful spending ahead....
More piggish union greed news hits the papers today.
Ben Franklin would be turning over in his grave if he could see what the institution he invented looks like today.
The Post Office has lost $7.9 BILLION dollars in the past two years. In an attempt to stop the downward spiral, the Post Office is considering cutting back mail deliver from 6 days a week to 5 days a week.
The biggest reason for the drop loss, and the biggest challenge to overcome is the cost of providing healthcare to current and future retirees. The postal service owes its retiree heath fund $7.4 billion this year alone.
With 650,000 workers, the Postal Service is the United States third largest employer, after Wal-Mart and the Defense Department.
Union contracts make layoffs rare…Raises are automatic…sounds similar to our teachers and city public sector workers.
Greedy CEO’s and Greedy Unions are ruining this Country!
You are pretty full of it. You think with email and other technologies, the post office has lost revenues mainly because of union costs? What an idiot. They've always had those costs and they've done just fine. But we haven't always had the technologies we have today. If you're so concerned about this crippling of big business, shut off your computer and write some letters, then get off your arse and go to the post office and mail them. I guarantee if you sent as many letters as you make posts about unions and their members you'd single-handedly save the U.S. Postal Service. C'mon loser, help 'em out, won't you.
Teresa,
I used to find your site informative and sometimes people posted pithy comments. Some of the commentary is getting abusive. Please delete the ugly comments.
C'mon folks, let's act like adults.
Hey dude, I read that article and ya it did say that a major reason the post office was hurting was cause of the healthcare costs.
Thats no secret cuz its the same at the car companies. The labor is to high and thats whats screwin the place all up.
No worries Union folks. Obama says he's going to make sure no teachers get laid off.
Guess they can cancel that meeting in Neenah. Obama says their jobs are golden.
I have deleted the original post, removed the name calling and profanity. I understand the frustration but let's focus on the issues, stop the name calling and profanity. Thanks
T. Thiel
Edited post:
Anonymous said...
Some of us get it and aren't just hot to vote no for the sake of voting no. And you know what all the fingerpointing in the world isn't going to solve the problems. Nor will a new school board. They'll only inherit the problems. So you can either play the blame game or you can face reality that our schools need help, no matter the reason, and take a mature approach toward solving that problem.
Monday, February 2, 2009 3:50:00 PM CST
..."yet Oshkosh feels we need to build a new school without any consolidation of existing schools or staff"
Sorry but you are mis-informed. The new school will result in Oaklawn and Lincoln being closed (consolidation) and will result in some staffing efficiencies due to the new school ultimately having 4 sections per grade (like Oakwood and Traeger - our two most efficient elementary schools from a staffing standpoint.
Teresa: The fact is that the new school will do nothing to save money and it will cost us more money. The point is that more can and should be done to consolidate, reduce staffing and save. We should develop plans and do this before we ask for more money. Instead this BOE is sitting in wait with more costly future referendums.
Teresa said...
"will result in some staffing efficiencies due to the new school ultimately having 4 sections per grade"
What the heck does that mean? Talk about vague and evasive..."staffing efficiencies"
How many full time staff would be eliminated and what are their job titles?
"Talk about vague and evasive..."staffing efficiencies"
How many full time staff would be eliminated and what are their job titles?
Wednesday, February 4, 2009 10:10:00 AM CST"
For starters you would eliminate one Principal and one School Secretary position.
I don't yet have the number on teaching positions but looking at past consolidations I would imagine it would be in the range of 2 or 3. You would also save a little on the cost of travelling staff. I hope these details will be provided at the Feb. 11th Board meeting. I will post them when I have them.
Combining 2 complete schools and you only reduce staff by one principle, one secretary and maybe two or three teachers???
Another shell game!
You'll have to cut a whole lot more to win my vote!
Teresa thinks we should spending $1,100,000 per YEAR over 20 YEARS to "save" a principal and a secretary.
HMMMMMM. Lets spend $ 1,100,000 each year to save what $ 200,000?
Maybe that is why we are in this mess. This line of thinking is just plain ol' foolish.
No, we are in the mess we're in because people in Oshkosh are basically cheap and have been spoiled with low taxes all these years. Now it's time to play catch up and that costs money. The expression, pennywise and pound foolish comes to mind. Time to start thinking ahead so we don't always have to play catchup. As for Teresa, she was 1 of 7 votes for 3 years. Plenty of others to blame for the mess we're in, as you say, including board members who served multiple terms. One of them now wants to come back after we said get lost last year. I'm starting to think like so many others out there: Bring Schneider back back, elect Monte, and let's watch them and their pal Becker fumble and run us even further into the ground with their cheapness and negativity.
10:33 said
"Bring Schneider back, elect Monte"
I couldn't agree more!
We need fiscal conservatives on the BOE!
10:33 said: I'm starting to think like so many others out there: Bring Schneider back back, elect Monte, and let's watch them and their pal Becker fumble and run us even further into the ground with their cheapness and negativity.
11:50 is the typical Schneider-Monte-Becker supporter. Only have half the facts and tell part of the story. Go figure.
No, we are in the mess we're in because people in Oshkosh are basically cheap and have been spoiled with low taxes all these years.
fumble and run us even further into the ground with their cheapness and negativity.
Call people cheap before you ask them to buy the bailout referendum. That's smart.
Fumble and run us "into the ground" with their.....
So at least you are admitting your board majority ran us into the ground! That is the first step for spendaholics. To admit a mistake.
Second, how can someone being responsible moving forward be bad? There is only a certain amount of money to go around, and no one every advocated not spending it. They only advocated spending it wisely. Like you board majority didn't!
We are in a mess because of cheapness and people trying to keep taxes low. We will go even further into the hole with the likes of Schneider-Monte-Becker on the board. It'll make for great comedy and it's on in primetime no less. Yippee.
So you think are taxes are too low?
If yes, then I guess we will agree to disagree! Me and about 90% of the community!
Question though, do you feel the board is responsible with our money?
The hole you reference is interesting as the board majority has been lead by the likes of Teresa Thiel, Karen Bowen, Weishime, Traska, Kavanagh, Mcdermott for ever. I wonder if they care you are blasting them now that they have put us in a hole? Looks like you supported the people that have put us in a hole because they lead us.
Looks like we both agree on something though. They have put us in a hole!
Plenty of others to blame for the mess we're in, as you say, including board members who served multiple terms.
Who is to blame. Dennis Kavanaugh has been President or Vice President for 4 of the past 5 years (and wants re-election). That in itself isn't all to important until you consider HE WAS IN THE MAJORITY, developed the agenda, and works closely with the 'super'intendent.
Is Dennis to blame?
How about Wayne Traska. He was in the majority too and been Vice President for past nearly one year. Is he to blame.
It seems when you vote YES for everything, you are responsible.
Man, this is too easy.
Too many, as Jonathan Krause puts it, 300 pound bloggers out there.
Yes, taxes are low. Compare the Oshkosh area with other cities. Or our school district with others. For a real giggle, compare our taxes with those of nearby towns. Some of you weenies are perpetual complainers who can't recognize things as good as you've got. It's en vogue to complain and so you do. You're a follower, not a leader, nor are the naysaying hypocrites you support. You're right, it's too easy.
So answer this one question. Have you gone down to the City Hall and asked the assessor to raise your taxes to provide more for our elected money managers?
So what you are telling me is your taxes are too low?
Becker, Schneider and Monte will not run this district into the ground. They will, however, question the administration and every resolution they present. They will not be rubber stamps.
We need a change!
The more I read about the referendum, the more that comes out each day about the economy, the more I feel sure I'm not going to support the referendum in April.
Anon. said "How about Wayne Traska. He was in the majority too and been Vice President for past nearly one year."
Now don't forget Ben Schneider served a year as Vice President too. I wonder if that was the year he pushed to give $300,000 back to taxpayers (about $15 on average per taxpayer) rather than use that money for all the deferred maintenance he was supposedly so concerned about...maybe it was the year he was up for re-election... I don't call that fiscally responsible I call that pandering!
The school board in Oshkosh has chosen school programs over building maintenance going at least as far back as the mid 1980's (when none of the current board members were on the board). The community has made this choice as well. In the 11 years I have followed the school board, I have seen MANY groups of people coming forward to advocate that programs not be cut -- the most memorable being when it was proposed that elementary strings be cut. The public forum lasted till nearly 1am with people coming forth asking that the program not be cut. I don't recall any such groups advocating we spend more on maintenance.
How many years was Mr. Schneider chair of the Facilities and Finance committee? Where are all his resolutions to spend more on maintenance? Never once heard him say "I'll support this budget if you put another $200,000 into maintenance. Nope, he just voted no on every budget washing his hands of it all, not what I'd call effective leadership.
Now don't forget Ben Schneider served a year as Vice President too. I wonder if that was the year he pushed to give $300,000 back to taxpayers (about $15 on average per taxpayer) rather than use that money for all the deferred maintenance he was supposedly so concerned about...maybe it was the year he was up for re-election... I don't call that fiscally responsible I call that pandering!
Boy Teresa, can you harbor any more hatred? Did he have the majority votes in the year he was vice president? Or was that the year he didn't support the budget once again because the board didn't put enough in maintenance?
Also, the 300,000 you reference was year end surplus that had no resolution attached. Simply money left over from previous budget! He and what, 5 other board members choose to give it back to the people that provided. You should have tried to be responsible with people's money too, then maybe you would have been elected more than once!
The guy couldn't even get a common sense Calendar alternative through this board. The same board that in 2008, put more money into Adminstrator pay raises than roofs.
Hmmmmm. Keep supporting these "responsible people Teresa" and we will see how much lower our district can go.
I guess you will keep given the board majority you supported more time to keep digging us a bigger hole!
Teresa, one last question. Will the board majority, that created this mess, be cutting teachers and raising class size to balance the budget hole they created? I know Dan Becker probably won't since he didn't create, but I would like your take on how they will solve their $ 4,000,000 deficit they created!! Thanks!
And don't be soooo angry Teresa. It is ok to disagree. :)
"I wonder if that was the year he pushed to give $300,000 back to taxpayers"
Only in Teresa's world is given taxpayers money back a bad thing. Teresa is just a taker. We are here to serve her and give the board of indecision more of our money.
When I look at my property tax bill and see all these fat cat Administrator's making 100k and more, makes you wonder why some think the board is being responsible.
I can imagine it was tough for Ben to sit his 6 years on the Board while always in the minority and I am sure it has been equally difficult for Dan. Dan, hang in there please, help is on the way!
CHANGE we can all belive in.
I was told that Thiel's husband is on the school payroll. If that is correct…...I am appalled at what a conflict of interest it is!
Knowing that, if it's true, it's no wonder she would certainly voice support for ANY situation that would provide a greater financial gain to her family.
We just moved to Oshkosh and I have to wonder…..how did she ever get elected to a position as a BOE member?
8:08 is looking at their tax bill. In doing so I hope they took notice of the fact that the taxes in the school district WERE LOWERED on this last tax bill. These people are nuts. They keep bitching about taxes yet they're significantly lower than everywhere around us. Go figure. Then they bitch about Teresa's husband being a teacher and her having served on teh board. #1 the public elected her #2 there was no conflict in the eyes on any ethics board or state laws #3 where things involved pay for teachers she abstained. So again, we have people bitching for the sake of bitching. I don't beleive for a second this was even a question asked by someone who just moved to town. It smells much like the tactics we've seen before by a certain wannabe. used by a wannabe. Talk about transparency.
8:22...what financial gain does Teresa Thiel get if the referendum pass? Clearly you don't understand how referendums work or the laws governing them. But nice try at clouding the issues. Is cloudy your middle name?
If the referendums pass the BOE will be off the hook for many of the poor financial decisions they have made. If they do not pass the BOE will likely be forced to cut spending and that will lead to reducing staff. Teresa's husband is a teacher. Those are facts.
I don't dispute that Teresa has anything but the best interests of the district in her mind. She just thinks that more teachers, more teaacher raises, more SAGE and more spending is the solution and she apparently won't recognize another way.
That is her main fault.
Nice try but no cigar. A teacher with his kind if seniority would not be in danger of getting laid off. If you really knew what you were talking about or were interested in debating issues with fact you'd realize that.
So you must know the man then. I'd guess you might be a teacher also. You have every reason for concern. Finances are very limited and this morning CNN reported the package is being cut to obtain votes for passage. Many of the cuts being made relate to education and teaching issues. Maybe you won't obtain the golden taxpayers egg to cover up for the financial mess our school system has be placed in. I'm guessing Oshkosh might follow in Neenahs footsteps and have to layoff staff to balance the budget.
From the District's website:
The Oshkosh Area School District is developing a 10-year facilities plan. The process began in 2005, when the Board of Education's Facilities and Finance Committee recommended:
enrollment projection updates
analysis of community growth patterns
identification of capital improvements needed at district facilities
In 2005, when Schneider was chair fo the Facilities committee, he worked to develop a plan. He didn't think the patch here and patch there was a satisfactorily method of moving forward. I do recall when the 300k was returned. It was the same year the board raised taxes 9% (he voted no). He felt that increase was unreasonable (budget didn't put any more money in schools, just more money in Administrator pockets)
To blame a guy off the board for a year, to blame a guy that help start a smart process (that was derailed by board members in the majority (remember closing South Park, closing Roosevelt, remember the 9-10, 11-12 split high school, remember changing boundaries on the counsins sisters brother's mother date of birth criteria, remember Casey Meadow's moving to Merrill?)
You see, whatever this board touches, they collectively mess it up.
Amazingly, the board just voted to spend another $ 150,000 for rent for UWO while last year, they spent ZERO, That is not a typo folks, they SPENT ZERO on roof replacement last year. HMMMM. Interesting priorities.
The 300k that was returned to taxpayers was voted and approved by 5-6 board members because it was year end surplus. Year end surplus that should have been returned to mitigate an obscene 9% tax increase!
We can agree to disagree on these issues Teresa, but to not put the blame where it lies is a little dishonest. I thought you were an honest person that I just disagreed with. You are proving me wrong.
The two incumbents up for re-election both voted YES to the $ 150k sports rent while cutting $ 300k from the maintenance budget. And that voted to spend not ONE DIME on roof replacements this year!
That too is obscene.
The below seems like leadership to me.
In 2005, when Schneider was chair fo the Facilities committee, he worked to develop a plan. He didn't think the patch here and patch there was a satisfactorily method of moving forward. I do recall when the 300k was returned. It was the same year the board raised taxes 9% (he voted no). He felt that increase was unreasonable (budget didn't put any more money in schools, just more money in Administrator pockets)
The real question is, what has this current board done to provide leadership on this issue.
Many have written about the recent cut from the maintenance budget while putting more money in sports.
Many have written about how the board has decreased the Capital Improvements budget over the past few years.
Clearly, a more balanced approach is needed and the board members cannot keep doing what they've done in the past.
We need a Schneider on the board as he has financial expertise and asks the tough questions.
I just wish Teresa and her bloggers wouldn't be so mean spirited and would try to work with those they disagree with to find common ground vs. character attack. This is important because "her side" is in contrl and just isn't getting things done. I have seen all sides engage in this and it is just toxic and needs to stop! Please.
Lets focus on the common ground and solve our problems. And lets not continue to do what was done in the past. That is why we are in a mess!
I'll second the previous post.
Too much "toxic" blogging out there. Focus on the common ground and lets not continue with the ways that lead us here.
I hope everyone has a nice weekend!
As usual, you present a somewhat skewed version of the facts. Precisely why we DO NOT need people like Schneider and his ilk on the board.
I'll be supporting Mr. Schneider is the upcoming campaign. I know I will not support incumbents and I'd really like to know more about the other candidate...Weidenhoeft? Any info on him?
There is nothing skewed about the fact our board has a record budget, charges record fees, has deferred a record amount of maitenance. Go ahead and support the people that caused this Dennis Kavanaugh and Wayne Traska. It will keep the debate going on how to solve our problems as they will just continue.
Did anyone see today's headline;
UNEMPLOYMENT RISES TO 7.6%... PAYROLLS DROP 598,000... MOST SINCE 1974...
The board has managed us into the ground when things were good, and now, they are getting as bad as we've seen in many of our lifetimes and they want us to give them more after they failed us.
Disappointing!
This ought to be funny to read this answer to my question;
You wrote;
As usual, you present a somewhat skewed version of the facts. Precisely why we DO NOT need people like Schneider and his ilk on the board.
How has Schneider and his ilk caused our problems since he was NEVER in the majority, always outvoted on ridiculous resolutions (school calendar) (unafforable mega pay raises for Adminstrators)(raiding the fund balance)? The board got their way every time they voted. Everytime. There never was a resolution they didn't get their way. So how is "Schneider and his ilk" to blame when your board members always got their way and are responsible for this mess?
It is pretty simple, he stands for change and you defend the behavior that got us in this mess!
The previous poster is waiting their time with the questions.
The supporters of the board majority are much like a story I recall reading about when a guy that was busted for drunk driving blamed the bartender for serving him alcohol. Thankfully the judge threw the loser in jail since it was his 3rd offense. Hint, hint voters, throw them out of office.
They embrace the failed practices that got us in this mess. Many don't.
Just watch at how negative these people are too. They will respond with nasty blog material and not just simply try to work on the common ground and recognize they got us in a mess.
How do we solve our problems when the behavior that caused is repeated?
I thought this blog was about "Oshkosh students"? The board has caused great harm to "Oshkosh students" with the defict they created which is over $ 4,000,000. They will have to cut programs for "oshkosh students" and will have to raise class size for "oshkosh students".
I remember a few years ago, the board cut the Teen Pregnacy program for "oshkosh students" and cut the VIP program for "oshkosh students".
This blog should be changed to;
"It's about Oshkosh Administrators"
That is who the board fully supports. Giving mega pay raises on top of salaries that are over double (YES DOUBLE) the average family HOUSEHOLD INCOME.
A superintendent making $ 800 per day! That is for "oshkosh students".
So much for "Oshkosh students"!
Anyone remember when a board member presented a calendar alternative to this current board joke of a calendar only to be told "we'll look at next year"?
Well, its been 4 years and what do we have, the same school calendar that has our kids going to school to mid June!
Can the board compromise on anything?
"Can the board compromise on anything?"
That is a good question.
What has this board compromised on in the past few years?
I would like an answer on that one.
Maybe if compromise happened, we wouldn't be in such a mess!
Is it me or does it not help the board's cause when their supporters give them a free pass, allow them to cut maintenance and then blame a board member that couldn't even get the board majority to "consider" another calendar that would have solved the joke of the problems the current calendar has?
Doesn't help their cause. And you will just keep on angering the electorate and see come referendum time how people feel about the board.
I agree with 11:23 about nasty blog material. I got tired of reading the negative crap over on the Michelle Monte blog. Now I see her kind are posting nasties here and elsewhere. That evidently meets with 11:23's approval. What weirdos to think that challenging one's position on things is nasty but making ugly comments about a person's personal or physical characteristics isn't? We've seen that far too often by those in the Monte-Becker-Schneider camp. Miss Manners would give you a big red F, and that doesn't stand for "Fine." They need to learn to debate the issues without being ugly, though that is so ingrained in their nature, perhaps they can't help it. If they can't debate issues without making it about personalities maybe they should just stick to the Monte blog or not say anything at all.
I agree with previous post.
Everytime you challenge a supporter of the incumbents and question their voting record, watch out.
Lets keep it civil.
Examine voting records of cutting maintenance and frivilous spending and stick to the issues!
I just do not understand how Becker and Schneider can be blamed for the problems we currently have when they were on the losing end of 2-5 votes for years. Can someone please explain this ot me?
This poster hit the "nail on the head"...........
This blog should be changed to;
"It's about Oshkosh Administrators"
That is who the board fully supports. Giving mega pay raises on top of salaries that are over double (YES DOUBLE) the average family HOUSEHOLD INCOME.
A superintendent making $ 800 per day! That is for "oshkosh students".
So much for "Oshkosh students"!
The Monte-Schneider-Becker supporters get an "F" for their reading comprehension too. Yikes.
If we had Monte-Schneider-Becker on the school board, we might finally have some fiscal conservatism!
Stop spending - make cuts!
You'll have a school district operating without a current budget since they like to say no just because they know how to pronounce the word. What a kettle of fish they'll cause us to be in. My kids don't need that and I doubt yours do either.
Post a Comment