Special Board Meeting Follow-Up...

The special meeting of the village board was convened at 5:35PM with Trustee Zabel absent but expected soon thereafter.

In the audience were news reporters, two members of the MATC staff and two school board members.  It appeared that there were also individuals from both Waste Management and, possibly, from Veolia.

The discussion on MATC secession centered on the desire by some that a 'co-signature' be provided for the village board to assert its approval of the filing.  There was discussion that since the village is one of several taxing entities, if the village were included, the others would need to be, too.  This was settled when Trustee Langer offered a motion to have a supporting letter attached to the filing by the school district.  After the second, that motion passed unanimously (with Zabel absent). 

The discussion on the possibility of a referendum regarding road repairs dealt with debt levies, budget trade-offs, and state gas tax proceeds.  It became apparent that there was no support for a referendum and that trustees felt it was their responsibility to determine how best to handle the issue without incurring more debt.  Trustee Vanderheiden offered a motion that was seconded by Trustee Langer to that effect.  That motion passed nearly unanimously with Trustee Zabel abstaining since he had arrived midway through this discussion.

The discussion concerning Waste Management and the current labor issues as those were impacting the village followed.  While President Kempinski and Administrator Schornack indicated that each had received calls about delayed pick-ups, the other members of the board were either moot or expressed that they had received no calls.  Discussion as to what would constitute sufficient grounds for action against Waste Management went back and forth.  It seemed to be agreed that there was not sufficient cause to proceed at this point.  Trustee Werderman offered a motion, seconded by Trustee Langer, that this topic of discussion be added to the agenda for the regularly scheduled Board meeting to be held on September 15th.  That motion passed unanimously.

President Kempinski gaveled the meeting to adjournment.

Harley 105th Anniversary Impact From The Police' Perspective...

I was curious as to how the police department viewed the 105th anniversary given the thousands of bikes in our area nearly all hours of the day and night.  Chief Pete Hoell indicated that there was one minor injury accident involving a motorcycle.  He mentioned that he had now experienced the 95th, 100th and 105th reunion celebrations and said, "Overall, as far as I'm concerned, this was a great event and we'll be looking forward to the 110th."

He also provided an anecdote that I think provides a great overview of the typical attendees:

"I was off duty with my kids driving east on Holy Hill Rd. in Richfield on Friday.  I was following a couple of Harley bikes eastbound when a high performance bike (crotch rocket) came from the other direction (westbound) and did a short wheelie from the stop sign.  The biker in front of me was wearing colors, long grey curly hair; typical stereotype of a biker one may think of from earlier years.  When he saw the wheelie and as the high performance bike drove by, the Harley biker made his displeasure of this act very clear and scolded him by shaking his arm and pointer finger at him.  It was a really good example how ethical most Harley bikers are, how willing they are to step up regarding the issue of safety and good behavior."

Nuff said!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

MATC Board...

Former superintendent Victor Rossetti has apparently moved from Germantown.  I have no idea to where he has relocated but his home has a sold sign in front and the new owners are moving in.

I have sent an email to MATC seeking information about his status as a Director.  The MATC website shows that his term is currently set to run through June 2009.  Requirements for positions as a Director are spelled out in quite some detail and residency is one of those requirements.

Some commenters have speculated in the past that MATC selected Mr. Rossetti to appease the residents/taxpayers of the Germantown School District.  Whether or not that was part of the selection process and decision I'm unaware. 

It seems that MATC would probably need to vacate his position through his resignation and I suspect that an appointment would be forthcoming to fill out the roster of Directors.  Among the requirements was the stipulation that one of the positions must be filled by a superintendent.  I don't know if MATC would consider our new superintendent or not, but it does seem that someone will need to be selected to fill that position.

If and when I receive a response to my email, I'll certainly publish the contents.

~~~~~~~~~~

Lilac Lane Bridge Out?

There have been signs across the roadway on both ends of Lilac Lane announcing that the bridge crossing the river is out.  This occurred relatively close to the time of closure of Maple Road where a new bridge was placed into service.  Maple Road has been open to traffic for at least a week and probably more.

Inquisitive as I am, I drove down Lilac Lane this afternoon and discovered that the old bridge is still there and still navigable albeit with a wide swing around barriers on either side of the bridge.  I don't know what is happening there but presume that plans have been delayed for some reason. 

It seems that the signs might be removed or moved off to the side of the road to permit regular traffic flow until work commences.  Those of us who make regular use of that road have been compelled to travel a distance to the north or the south to get where we're going.

Board of Education Meeting Review:

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

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

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

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

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

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

~~~~~~~~~~

Tax Knowledge Test Answers:

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

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

 (This courtesy of The Wisconsin Way.)

Test Your Tax Knowledge... 

A group named The Wisconsin Way sent an email today that had the following test of tax knowledge.  I'll re-publish this tomorrow with the answers added so you can check yours.

True or False:

1. Property taxes pay for most of the costs of the K-12 public schools in Wisconsin.
2. Wisconsin taxpayers pay more of their personal income toward state and local taxes today than they did 10 years ago.
3. Wisconsin collects more money from sales taxes than it does from gasoline taxes and corporate taxes combined.

~~~~~~~~~~

School Board Meeting Tonight...

The Board of Education meeting convenes at 7:00 PM tonight in the District Administrative Offices and agenda item VIII. B. "Discussion with appropriate action regarding secession from the MATC district" is included under "Unfinished Business".

This is an important topic and I'll cover the discussion and any public action tomorrow in another Village Buzz edition.

~~~~~~~~~~

Sendik's: Beehive of activity...

If you've not been past the new Sendik's facility during the day, it is a beehive of activity.  The crews working on this project have consumed most of the parking spaces in front of the building.  If they don't make their target opening date, it won't be for lack of trying!

~~~~~~~~~~

Thomas Square Bread Bagels...

Believe it or not, the George Weston Bakeries company responded by mail to my question about Thomas Square Bread Bagels.  Unfortunately, they told me that these are not currently available apparently anywhere in the U.S.  They didn't say 'never', so I'll continue to hope.  I wonder what the problem is that is keeping those off the market.  They sold very quickly.  Could it be that they stepped on another firm's exclusive process or something along those lines?  Or, is the cost of production so great today that they simply didn't think they could sell them?

If you find out, please let me know.

The Journal Sentinel carried an article this morning about the Practical Nurse program offered by MATC.  This program has been on probation for some time and that continues.  Another evaluation visit is scheduled for the Fall of this year.

Low rates of graduation apparently had prompted the probationary status and the state Board of Nursing has been carefully monitoring the progress or lack thereof at MATC in this program.

Dessie Levy was quoted as saying, "When you talk about implementing standards, our (graduation rate) will reflect a decline because we haven't had any standards (in the past).  She is Dean of Health Occupations for MATC.

WCTC has a similar program and it isn't on probation from all indications.  I was unsuccessful in contacting the Associate Dean at WCTC today, but there is no indication on the state Board of Nursing's website that WCTC is anything but in compliance and good standing.

We have been told repeatedly that our secession petition cannot simply focus on tax rates because apparently the Technical College System isn't concerned about the waste of our money.  We certainly can focus on substandard performance which seems to be the case in this program.

Students who have failed in this endeavor believe the fault lies with MATC and the curriculum.  Stephanie Wren was quoted as saying, "They just didn't prepare us, and I believe they set us up for failure.  When you have that much of your class failing, it seems like there's something wrong at that point."

How many other instances of low standards or no standards are there within MATC?

Another reason to petition for secession and permission to become part of the WCTC district in my opinion.

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel featured an editorial this morning concerning the possibility that Germantown will pursue the secession effort from the Milwaukee Area Technical College district.  They spoke of 'outreach' by MATC and re-established their position that Germantown should remain in the MATC district.

The 'outreach' they spoke of consisted of the appointment of Victor Rossetti (then Superintendent of Germantown Schools) to a MATC Board vacancy, meetings held with Germantown officials, contribution of laptops to the library and a couple of 'free' programs.

This so-called 'outreach' seemed a lot like a feeble attempt to head off an embarrassing situation.  The addition of Mr. Rossetti did nothing to alter the course of MATC.  It continues to be, in my opinion, an out-of-control institution that answers to no one.  Germantown pays millions annually and we are supposed to take thirty laptops and shut our collective mouth.

The editors finally get to the last paragraph of this piece where they seem to catch a glimmer of a major reason for our angst.  They state, "And our guess is that until MATC does something to reduce its tax levy, not only will Germantown's efforts continue, but other communities may also start seriously considering secession."

The school board is scheduled to discuss this subject tonight.  I hope that it moves with all deliberate speed to push the secession from MATC.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

MATC students along with all technical college and two-year college students in Wisconsin have a more difficult time gaining their education as the result of lenders leaving this marketplace.

MATC has nearly 5,300 students now at risk due to the fact that several lenders have decided to pull out of this market stating that it is unprofitable.  That supposedly is caused by too little money being borrowed for too short a time.

The total of loans that are affected by these pull-outs is more than $18 million, and involves five lenders for MATC students.

Several thoughts occur:

What other programs are available to these 5,300 students?  Supposedly there are from six to twenty other lenders available to the students if we are to believe the technical college system president, Daniel Clancy.  If that is the case, why would some big names pull out?  Those names included Chase, Citibank and TCF.  If there is money to be made, wouldn't they still want some of it?  Or is this indicative of some other more pervasive problem?

Will they qualify for replacement loans or is that really part of the problem that causes the lenders to want out?  Many of the students relying on these loans are low income people as you would presume could be the case.  It may not be possible for them to apply to other lenders and expect to be granted access to credit.  The federal government passed the College Cost Reduction and Access Act of 2007 and, contrary to what the name might suggest, this limited federal subsidies to those who lend money to students, and more than fifty such lenders left the market.  This suggests that we're talking about marginally-viable loans and that, without government guarantees, there will be fewer dollars available and those will go to better credit risks.

If there is a loss of significant numbers of MATC students, will MATC face up to the need to reduce budget?  There are nearly 5,300 students affected by this situation.  If half of those are unable to obtain different loans, there will likely be a similar number dropping out of MATC.  I don't know what the 'full time equivalent' student number is, but let's assume that these students are half-time.  So we would have a loss of half of the 5,300, or 2,650 and those would equate to 1,325 full time equivalent students.  That is about ten percent of the current total FTE students now attending MATC.  Will we see a ten percent reduction in the MATC budget?

Or, will MATC see this as forcing it to actually increase its tax take in order to offset the loss of student tuition?  Your guess is as good as mine, but I'll be amazed if we see a budget reduction as the result of this situation.  One cannot simply reduce staff because the student load has dropped, can one?  How does one manage to down-size when there are so many fixed costs, so many people relying on MATC for their livelihoods, so much left to do in the building of the empire?

What seems more likely is that this will be dragged out as alternatives are sought, and it will be talked about for awhile until we lose track of the issue.  Maybe state legislators will step up up and recommend new state guarantees.  After all, military veterans are given 100% tuition credits so it is only fair to begin providing everyone with 100% tuition to attend MATC.  It is only fair that MATC have this kind of support since the Milwaukee Public Schools are generating so few qualified graduates any longer.

The last paragraph was intended as 'tongue in cheek' in nature but I fear that it might be closer to reality than not. 

The president of the MATC teachers union, Michael Rosen, says he'll be in contact with Representative Gwen Moore (D-Milwaukee) to seek her help in assuring that students still have access to federal loans.  The dominoes have begun to fall and they threaten to crush us taxpayers yet again.  Why do they never topple in the other direction?

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Tom Kertscher writes about MATC and its new business incubator program in the January 20th Journal Sentinel.  It seems that the only press MATC can get is 'bad' press.  And they seem to get better and better at that. 

The article goes into the MATC's two urban business centers.  They have taken over old industrial building space and have rented that space in small increments to new businesses at very low rent cost.  The idea of business incubators, as the name suggests, is to enable them to mature in a protected environment until they're self-sufficient and can move out into the real world bringing jobs to the community.  Few of these businesses have reached the point of self-sufficiency which is not uncommon with new businesses.  Many more fail than succeed no matter where they start.

As Kertscher drilled down, however, we began to see the MATC we've grown to know and 'love'.  There are 98 tenants in the two locations.  The average incubator period nationwide is three years.  80% of those in the MATC locations have gone on longer than that.  Interestingly, the wife of State Senator Spencer Coggs (D-Milwaukee) whose name is Gershia Coggs, has been in the incubator for more than 20 years.  Her husband is also a tenant and rents space to store his personal and campaign materials for $55 per month.  That doesn't sound like a new business start-up situation.

17 of the MATC's tenants have stayed in their incubator space for more than a decade, including Mrs. Coggs.  More than 40% of the tenants are behind on their rent payments to MATC for a total of more than $80,000.  One tenant is three years behind in its rent payments but is still housed in the incubator receiving heat and electricity in addition to the space.  25% of the tenants are not even businesses such as Sen. Coggs.  These are comprised of social service agencies and other non-profit organizations.

MATC is losing some $125,000 per year on the incubators and guess what?  This is such a good deal that they are planning another investment of $4,000,000 to improve one of the two incubator locations.  That sounds exactly like something a real business would do, huh?  Pump more money into a losing proposition?  Only if it is taxpayer money, I guess.  Except that MATC is going to try to get grant money to cover part of the cost.  Apparently grant money grows on grant money trees that cost no one anything. 

Of course, there is the potential that jobs would be created, so maybe that is the mitigating factor here?  There is no way to tell because MATC doesn't track the number of jobs that have been created.  MATC says it doesn't have enough people to be able to track this.  On top of that, the two people within MATC charged with the responsibility for this program admit they can't think of any 'recent' success stories where a tenant actually got on its feet and moved out into the real world.

MATC's spokesman, Jim Gribble, is quoted in this article as saying that allowing tenants a grace period on paying rents is favorable to evicting them because then MATC would collect less rent.  That statement sums up many of the problems that MATC has.  Here is an institution that plows through taxpayer money like there is no end to it (and so far there has been no end to it), and somehow convinces itself that it is better to continue to give its space away to non-paying tenants because MATC will collect more rent.

I sincerely hope MATC is not offering accounting or economics classes for future business people using that logic.  By the way, one of the tenants is an economics instructor at MATC and runs his business in one of the incubators.  He indicates that his business isn't likely to employ anyone else for some time.  He sculpts items from driftwood, has been in business since September 2004 and has yet to sell anything he has created.

This is the kind of story that one wouldn't believe if it were published as fiction.  It is simply too far-fetched.  It demands too great a stretch of one's imagination.  But, again we're reminded that this is MATC and nothing should be viewed with disbelief simply because it is nonsensical.

View the whole article here.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Milwaukee Public School Board's Finance Committee took a vote last evening concerning whether or not to support "equal provision of employee benefits regardless of an employee's sexual orientation or family status".  The committee voted 4 to 1 in favor of that change in the MPS system.

Up to now, there are four school districts that provide similar benefit coverage.  Those schools are in Madison, Middleton, Sun Prairie and La Crosse.  Additionally, the City of Milwaukee and MATC provide domestic partner benefits.  These kinds of changes have been made elsewhere around the country so this is not new although it is still unusual.

It is not possible to fully step away from the 'third rail' of whether or not same sex partners should or should not receive benefits from the employer of one of the partners.  This subject evokes very strong feelings both pro and con.  This is one of those classic 'slippery slope' issue sets where those desiring such benefits nibble away at the elephant a bite at a time, and someday we awaken to find the entire elephant has been eaten.

The language portrayed in the committee's proposition also suggests that this is not simply a subject about same sex couples.  What is to prevent one MPS employee from cohabiting with a boyfriend or girlfriend whether or not there is an 'understanding' other than simple cohabitation for the time being?  Will a 'marriage certificate' be required in order to qualify?

How can a marriage certificate be presented unless it was obtained in one of the brief windows that have periodically opened for a day or two around the country?

If not a marriage certificate, then just what documentation will be required?  What would stop a person who has just been diagnosed with a very serious disease from applying for coverage through a friend employed by MPS or the City or MATC?

My recollection is that Jennifer Morales (the MPS board member who introduced this motion during a recent board meeting) and her partner traveled to Victoria, BC to be married.  Will that certificate be acceptable in Milwaukee, or will the MPS benefits people simply need to take the employee's word for the establishment of a domestic partner?

The Milwaukee Teachers' Education Association immediately jumped on this and will expect this to be made available to bargaining unit employees prior to the expiration of the current contract.  The slippery slope increases in angle rather quickly on occasion.

Is this a case of cart and horse in reverse?  Should this issue have been resolved in courts of law prior to these small incursions in one location and then another?  Or, is it the mood of the country that this is what should be available pure and simple?

The pure and simple truth is rarely pure and never simple.  Oscar Wilde

The CRG study published last year raised some additional points that suggest serious issues.

The composition of the board lends itself to decisions that do not reflect the circumstances of the general populace.  Two members are elected officials, three members are in the public sector heavily represented by unions, another is a business manager for a union local, one is a lawyer and and another is a consultant for a firm representing special interests.  The vast majority of the board at that time, seven members, came from the public sector and/or an environment tied to organized labor.  Many have personal wage and benefit packages that are similar to those found at MATC.  Given their perspective, it seems clear why special interests are better represented than is the average taxpayer.

Board member e-mails were obtained through open records requests.  Following are highlights:

In discussing financial decision-making, then board member Dr. William Hughes (Superintendent of the Greendale School District) writes to fellow board member Mark Maierle (Business Manager of Operating Engineers Local 317) on March 30, 2005 at 7:54AM: "In the end, a budget with over 90% perhaps as high as 94% of funds going to payroll, benefits and pensions MATC will need all the revenue it can generate."  Dr. Hughes continued at 9:31AM that morning: "the general public does not pay attention to the goings on at MATC"

The focus is obviously that of generating more revenue, and not that of managing costs.  MATC revenue comes from the taxpayers and the students.  The implication is that taxes and tuitions can be increased since the public pays no attention.

On May 23, 2005 at 10:13AM, board member Lauren Baker (program coordinator with Milwaukee Public Schools) writes to Mark Maierle regarding MATC child care expenditures: "Jeskiewitz (State Representative Sue Jeskiewitz) thought it was OK when we explained that the centers were used as learning labs.  The administration has not pursued that line of reasoning.  Craig P. thought we should charge the child care expense to teaching and learning, thus making the centers run as a learning lab...Remember, Jeskiewitz is a Republican and needs to be vocal on these issues.  I've never felt compelled to set policy based on what Alberta (State Senator Alberta Darling) and Jeskiewitz tell us...We need to have a sophisticated view of the politics in Madison or we will be jerked around"

The apparent philosophy is that lying to politicians is "political sophistication".  The Board promotes funneling "Child Care" into another budget, thus representing it as something other than babysitting at taxpayers' expense.

On March 31, 2005 at 8:45AM, Mark Maierle writes to board member Peter Earle (Lawyer) about a person's observation that Darnell Cole (MATC President) is tight with the union, and the union holds an axe over the Board's head.  "I believe his criticism of Cole came from his perception that Cole was in the union's pocket.  It sounds like the union is again threatening a no-confidence vote.  The Board has had this ax held to our heads long enough." It seems as though the special interests get their way, and the taxpayers get stuck with the bill.

This simply continues the process of establishing that MATC is poorly managed and unlikely to change of its own volition.  Germantown's petitions are not simply driven by taxes.  The state technical college board must come to grips with this rogue operation for which it has responsibility.  We citizens of Germantown cannot possibly be compelled by the state board to continue to support this abomination...unless that board and the Governor who appoints it are to be held equally complicit.

Based upon the CRG study, we have discussed many different aspects of the MATC issue.  We are going to shift, at this point, to drawing conclusions supported by this study.  This is where it gets tough.

MATC is failing to fulfill its mission as a technical college:

The CRG study is quoted as saying, "the clearest measure to determine success at the technical college level or higher, is shown by the ability of students to put their education to use in the job market".  In 1999, for instance, 85% of MATC graduates found employment related to their course of study.  At the time of this study (2006/2007), only 67% of MATC students are employed within the field from which they graduated.  Three possible factors were cited as possible contributors: Milwaukee ranks only 274 out of 367 in job growth among cities in the country; Milwaukee County's population has declined; and, Wisconsin had the third largest decline in median income in the entire nation.

Is MATC properly advising its students?  Statistics show that the demand for skilled technical workers, such as welders, was predicted to outstrip supply by over 200,000 jobs by 2010.  And yet, MATC graduated only 14 welders in 2005. 

Over 70% of all MATC students were enrolled in a General Education or Business curriculum.  The study questioned whether this sort of education was the core mission of a technical college, especially when the Greater Milwaukee area already had a taxpayer-funded education institution that provided similar education services for one-quarter the cost of MATC. 

How was it, the study queried, that only 8% of MATC's full-time equivalent students were enrolled in technical programs where the current job outlook is strong?  The study went on, "Even with an outrageous price tag of $23,760 per student, MATC is failing in its core mission.  Further, why should taxpayers support an institution that provides services already available to them from other sources at a fraction of the cost?

It is obvious to anyone who wishes to see it that MATC is not just a tax drain, but it is an inefficient tax drain.  It produces students who are skilled in things the employers of the community don't need, and it does so at outrageous fees and tax loads.

In 2005 alone, $37.4 Million could have been saved by the ten communities in the Greater Milwaukee area had MATC simply held its spending to the rise in the Consumer Price Index (CPI). 

The state technical college board needs to understand that egregious tax rates are but one aspect of the Germantown petitions for approval to leave the MATC district.  MATC is simply not doing its job; it has failed in its core mission.  The private sector would've fired MATC long, long ago.  In fact, from the hiring statistics, it appears MATC has been fired.  It sounds a lot like "dead man walking".

Again, from the CRG study published in 2006, we find amazing information about the health care benefits and retirement benefits available to MATC employees.

As of the 2006 study, all full-time teachers, operational employees, para-professional employees, and public television staff received health care coverage with 100% of the premiums paid by MATC.

When was the last time you received such a rich benefit, if ever? One of the health plans offered, the Humana Premier HMO, had no deductibles or coinsurance costs. This plan also contained unlimited hospitalization, 100% coverage for skilled nursing home care, all private duty nursing care, and a $300 annual reimbursement for a personal trainer.

What about retiree health insurance?

To be eligible for 10 years of fully paid retiree health care from age 55 to age 65, only 15 years of employment at MATC was required for full-time teaching faculty and full-time para-professionals. 20 years of employment were required for employees in public television (Channels 10 and 36 with their own fund raising activities and full scale HDTV studios before the first commercial stations in Milwaukee), and daily operations staff.

An actuarial study by J.F. Malloy and Associates on 10/14/2004 placed the then current liability for retiree medical and life insurance coverage at $62.2 Million; this number will very likely increase over time. As this study opined, “How much longer must taxpayers provide Cadillacs for government employees when all they can afford are Yugos?”

When we turn our attention to retirement, we find that full-time faculty and full or part-time para-professionals can retire at age 55 with only 10 years of service. They are also given their unused sick pay in a lump sum upon retirement.

Part-time faculty teaching 20 or more semesters can retire at age 55; they are given any unused sick pay upon retirement.

MATC employees are covered by the State of Wisconsin Retirement Fund or the Employees Retirement System of the City of Milwaukee. The MATC Board, at the time, paid the full cost of these retirement programs. Employees contributed nothing. These plans are what are known as defined benefit plans meaning that an ultimate benefit amount is promised and contributions by MATC are made until that benefit is fully funded, no matter the cost. These plans were used by private employers but have been largely discontinued years ago in favor of “defined contribution” plans. Such plans use whatever money is in the fund at retirement to purchase whatever benefit it will buy. There is no guaranteed benefit, only a guaranteed contribution.

Beyond this largess, the employees who retire at age 55 receive a “special” pension payment from MATC “as if they had retired at age 65 instead of at age 55”.

Does this sound vaguely familiar? Maybe something like the County pension scandels of a few years ago?

Believe it or not…there is more to follow and it gets worse!

Continuing with the series based on the CRG study concluded and released in 2006, we’ll next look at sick pay and time off policies.

All full-time teachers and para-professionals receive 15 days of sick leave credit annually. They are permitted to accumulate up to 150 days of their unused credits. After reaching the 150 day mark, they can add further to their account at the rate of a ½ day for each additional sick day unused. There is no limit on the account balance from that point forward.

Based upon the then average annual wage of $90,850 for MATC faculty members, cashing in 150 sick days (if none were used for retiree health care premiums) would be comparable to receiving an additional $53,000 as a “retirement” bonus at taxpayer expense.

The school year at MATC was defined as 162 days with student contact and an additional 6 days without student contact for a total of 168 days. This compares to an average 239 work days for the typical Milwaukee area full-time employee.

Additionally, a full week is defined as consisting of 32 hours on campus. If this is prorated, it amounts to the MATC teacher working the equivalent of about 134 days per year. If they were to use their full number if sick days and professional leave, they would end up putting in about 114 full days in a given year.

Add to this the sabbatical program which provides for a full year of time off to “improve themselves as employees” once every eight years, provided they worked six of those eight years, and you see a very nice package that most of us will never be close to earning. The package is especially nice when you consider the employee is receiving 60% of regular pay while away for the year. How does that compare to your work place policies?

All this simply points to an institution that appears to be run too loosely and for the primary benefit of its employees rather than the students and the taxpayers. This is not “just” a tax issue as members of the state board were quoted as saying was unworthy, by itself, of petition approval; it is a management and oversight issue that should’ve received the attention of the state technical college board long ago. But then, what does one do when tenure rears its ugly head?