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!

In keeping with the protocol we have established, we'll lead with the response of Senator Darling to each question in this chapter.

 * * * * * * * * * *

What is your position on Ethanol mandates in Wisconsin?

Darling:  I oppose ethanol mandates!  I have asked our federal lawmakers to repeal the federal renewable fuel mandate and eliminate tax credits for ethanol production.  I have also asked the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to lift the reformulated gas (RFG) blend mandate.

Wasserman:  I am against Ethanol mandates.

* * * * * * * * * *

Wisconsin is now listed as only the 11th highest taxed state in the union.  Is this appropriate given the services we receive?  Are there ways that taxes can be reduced further and, if so, where do you think that can be accomplished?

Darling:  For way too long, Wisconsin was among the top ten of most highly-taxed states.  Wisconsin is now out of the top ten because legislative Republicans have successfully defeated billions in Democrat-backed tax hikes over the years.  While I am pleased that our tax rank is dropping, the state must start to spend less too.

Wasserman:  Based on the services we receive, I think we could be more in the middle of the pack.  We can do that by restructuring government and eliminating unnecessary layers of bureaucracy.  We also need to stop giving tax breaks to every individual who comes to Madison with a paid lobbyist.  Instead of increasing the complexity of our tax code and favoring the few instead of helping the many, taxes should be cut across the board.  We can all share in tax breaks.

* * * * * * * * * *

Is the UW system working as it should or are there problems that need resolution?  If problems, what do you see those as being?

Darling:  As a proud alumna of UW-Madison, I think it is important that our UW-System remain a top notch higher educational system that is a major driver of our state's economy.  That said, there have been far too many examples where the UW-System has wasted taxpayer dollars.  Everyone remembers examples like the $26 million spent on a new computer payroll system that didn't work and the $700 per month automobile allowances for chancellors.  While the UW-System is very important to our state, it needs to eliminate wasteful spending.

Wasserman:  The overall UW system is the third largest in the country, and I'm proud of it.  I graduated from the University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, and I'm very proud of my education and what it's done for me.  One area of concern is the administrative system for the UW itself, which needs to be cut.

* * * * * * * * * *

As always, our thanks go to both contributors for taking the time to respond to our questions.  And, we again encourage readers to pose their questions for future chapters in this 'debate'.

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 UW Board of Regents decided that tuition had to go up 5.5% for students at the four-year universities.  They laid the blame in large part (3% of the 5.5%) at the feet of the legislature that mandated free tuition for veterans.  There are some 3,200 veterans now registered as students under this program; the program was originally intended to pay 50% of the tuition and that was raised to 100% last fall.

The UW and the legislature have been at odds for a long time.  This is likely just the next salvo to be fired in this long battle.

The Regents recently made their selection for the new head of the UW system and she will get a boost in what seems an already hefty salary.  That may be offset in small part by contributions from the UW Foundation as has been the past habit since the legislature has attempted to rein in the spending at UW.  She was reported to have stated her desire to see salaries increased soon to bring the UW system up to the standards of the large universities across America.  She also wants to see 'domestic partners' covered by the benefit programs made available to system employees.  Sounds as though this is going to be a costly hiring decision.

There is concern on the part of some students and the administration over the cost of the veteran's program being shouldered by the students.  Maybe that wouldn't have had to be the case had the Regents learned better how to live within their means. 

There was little hue and cry from the student body when the UW-La Crosse tuition was increased by some $1,300 per year with those funds to be used to support the tuition of more disadvantaged students attending that institution to better reflect the needs of that community.

The military has never been a 'favorite' of the UW system, so I guess we should expect that kind of differentiation.  The students' attitudes tend to reflect that of the institution in which they are immersed. 

There is a very real problem with the UW system.  We see out-of-state students being rewarded with reduced tuition rates at the expense of Wisconsin students.  We see the administration expense running at very high rates with no checks and balances apparent.  We see ever-increasing pay ranges for staff, and yet we understand there are many hangers-on that are not earning their keep.  Have costs ever been reduced in the UW system?  Are shrinking programs ever eliminated?  Are these concepts foreign to the Regents?

The system seems to have its own political beliefs and those do not fit in an institution of higher learning.  Schools should be apolitical, but that seems to have been forgotten completely over the past four decades.

The UW system begs for a thorough house-cleaning and some solid oversight with enforcement teeth.  It has become a significant part of the education industry in our country.

Nicole Sell...

What a miracle this 16 year old's recovery from a gunshot wound to the head is to behold.  It is nothing short of an act of God that she continues to live with us in this place.

I hope the sheriff's department will be relentless in its efforts to locate the person or persons responsible for this near-tragedy.  Someone knows something, as is almost always the case.  That someone needs to step forward and enable the authorities to close the file on this case.

Kenneth Rogers...

The new superintendent of Germantown Schools will take his new position on July 1st.  Now the superintendent of the Eleva-Strum Schools, he'll be moving to our community soon.  Welcome Mr. Superintendent.

I hope you will be able to work closely with the elected school board members while you breathe new ideas and approaches into our district.

Allan Kehl...

Another politician gets caught with his hand out, and has entered guilty pleas to federal charges that he took $15,000 from Dennis Troha of Kenosha.  Worse yet is the fact that Kehl is the former Kenosha County Sheriff.  He maintains, of course, that this money didn't influence his thoughts about the gaming casino Troha was trying to get established.  Sure Allan, we believe you...sure we do.

Newsweek...

We can all relax now that Newsweek has declared the debate on global warming to be over.  Here I was thinking that an honest, earnest debate had yet to begin on the subject, but I must've been wrong.

Certainly this liberal bastion of a magazine couldn't have misinterpreted all the evidence.  Oh, that's right...we really don't have any hard evidence yet do we?

Charles Krauthammer has a great column in the Journal Sentinel this morning if you're interested.

There seems a very real sense in our community that bodes ill if the school board decides to pursue a re-vote on the same bonding issue from the spring election this fall.

Judging from the discussion that has ensued since that news was made public, whether or not formalized by the board at the time of its disclosure, the residents of the school district appear to feel very much opposed to the idea that a re-vote would follow so closely on the heels of the recent defeat.  And, they seem to be especially opposed to a re-vote on the identical bonding questions.

We are able to observe the 'test tube' that is called Hartford and what we see in that situation could easily be what we'll see in Germantown unless the school board steps to the plate with a different approach.  Even though the board used the services of a communications consultant, the communication seemed to be unidirectional.  The district voters' response was this: "you talk to us but you don't seem to listen to us".  That may be an over-simplification, but that is the essence of the problem today.  In Hartford, now, when the real damage is done, the board seems to have realized that it might need to reach out and learn why.  That may well be 'too little, too late' and that will be a shame because there are undoubtedly needs.

If the voters are 'given another opportunity' in the same form and in such a quick fashion, they may very well take that as an insult and seize that opportunity to really show their dissatisfaction. That will succeed in nothing more than polluting the well for a good long time to come.

There seems more a problem with feeling that the board has ignored the voters' feelings as expressed in the initial outcome, than outright opposition to anything the district wants to do.  Although, the district is getting very close to the edge of that chasm, in my opinion, and really needs to step back, reassess and reformulate its approach.  The outright distrust factor is growing and will only be overcome with earnest effort.  It will not be overcome with 'in your face' tactics...and that is what seems to be happening today. 

It seems from my vantage point that communication has been lacking.  I know that the school board hasn't taken that approach intentionally; at least I hope that has not been the case. Communication involves give and take.  It involves outreach in a form that seems more earnest than purely intended to show voters why the district is correct.  The district may well be correct, but the voters need to come to understand that.

Just as all students don't learn in the same way, all voters don't learn in the same way.  Maybe we need to slow the process a bit, engage the citizenry in other ways and have some earnest back and forth conversations.

My opinion is that a mistake was made when taxpayer money was spent on the Baird effort; it wasn't a lot of money, but it didn't sit well in the community.  I think that simply having had board members out in the community would've been better providing they were each on the same page.

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.

It is difficult, at best, to process information and understand whatever bias one might've injected.  There may be bias or it might be imagined.  The bias, if present, could be caused by the processor or it could have been injected into the process itself through the data gathering effort.

There is a certain tone, a certain something that seems to be going on in our fair community.  We have had political change, but it is hard to determine if that was a cause or an effect, or maybe a combination of those drivers.  We have an aging volunteer community that may foretell of more changes.  For example, will there cease to be a Mai Fest in a year or two or three given the fact that many of the organizers and behind-the-scenes drivers are getting almost too old to continue on their chosen pathways.

There are the rumors that one hears and there may or may not be truth, to whatever degree hindsight will prove, but those rumors have gained in intensity and show no signs of diminishing.  Again, that may be a bias that I've injected or that has been provided knowingly or unknowingly by the people involved in the process.

There is the sense that the school bonding issue, if brought back with no change, and if not thoroughly 'vetted' in public, will be a disaster.

There is the presidential race that will continue to confuse and confound us all until November.  There is the state senate race that will continue to elicit feelings, pro and con, about each candidate.  There is the assembly vacancy that will likely have candidates from both major parties, but that is yet to unfold.

My sense is that we are witnesses to something that will unfold over the course of months and, maybe, years.  I sense what some might refer to as a watershed.  But I have not been able to pin down anything of sufficient substance as of yet to begin to draw conclusions.  All I have are feelings and yet those are giving me the sense that there is something on our collective horizon that we'll look back on for years to come.

You know how the hairs on the back of your neck sort of stand up?  What do you think?

I received an email from a regular reader this morning asking me what my opinion was concerning the announcement that the elementary school bond issue will be back on the November ballot.  He forced me to give thought to something I had managed to push from my mind for about a week, but that hiatus is over.

First, let me say that I think the district has had a poor public relations week.  The announcement that the bond issue, apparently unchanged, is expected to be on the ballot in November was probably awkward enough.  Then, we learn of the expected budget deficit for the current year, and we learn that the proposed budget will require a property tax increase if approved as explained.

I've not engaged anyone from the district on the subject of the reappearance of the bond issue, and have had no contact regarding budget shortfalls.

There was some analysis done as the result of the spring election where the bond issue was defeated.  That apparently showed some interesting results when reviewed area by area.  Remember that the Germantown School District encompasses more than simply the Village of Germantown.  The most recent election apparently showed results indicating that some non-village areas were quite opposed while the village proper was more evenly split, or at least that is my recollection.

My supposition, and it is only that, is this:  November will see a significantly higher turn-out of voters.  The district may have reasoned that this will be a 'fairer' review of the proposal and it may have reasoned that the outlying non-village areas' votes might be outweighed by greater village turn-out, desiring to take its chances on that populations' decision this time around.

Beyond this, the budget deficit is understandable given the economic conditions we're experiencing.  Energy and food costs are up significantly and those are the primary areas identified as the 'culprits' in the budget shortfall.  The fact that preliminary budget numbers for the next period are reflecting the need for greater revenue is not surprising on its face.  The amount of the deficit and the amount of the need for the next period will be of more interest.  The tactics employed by the school board and the district administration in meeting these issues will be very informative.  We are in a superintendent 'lame duck' position and the new person selected will have had little, if any, substantial input by the time hiring decisions have been taken.

I must say that I'm disappointed with this confluence of events.  I don't know what, if any, press releases may have been issued on the bond issue decision.  If there were such releases, there is little indication of that fact since the news was simply dropped in our laps without forewarning or preparation for receipt of the news.  Then, to see the news about the current and prospective budgets pop up within days, citizens were subjected to what in our small world is tantamount to a 'media blitz'.

I fear that some significant damage has been done to the district's credibility on both issues whether or not deserved.  Those opposed to the bond issue have a ready-made counter offensive dropped into their laps.  Those who favored the bond issue have been embarrassed, self included.

All the old bromides about school boards being more interested in buildings than students, etc., etc. will be front and center during the election season.  And, frankly, the district has brought that unto itself whether through arrogance or ignorance or simple mishandling.

It appears that the Assembly and Senate have reached sufficient agreement to bring a budget repair bill to a vote later this week.

Word available indicates that there may have been a few actual budget reductions while the bulk of the heavy lifting is being done on the back of money being pulled from the transportation fund and money being pulled from the 'rainy day' fund.

Additional tactics reportedly include pushing some school funding into the next budget period and adding some additional taxes that were overlooked before this.

The long and short is that we'll be borrowing more money to replace the tax collection shortfall that will be used for transportation expenses.  Some cookies have been included that don't seem to have anything to do with the budget dilemma so those must've been payment for votes promised by some of the politicians.

We will be looking at the same set of issues next budget at this rate since we're not fixing the problems by reducing expenditures.  Except those issues will very likely have bigger teeth.  Our elected officials are being asked to vote in favor of a deal that pins its hopes on an improved economy by the next time the 'problem' pops up on radar screens.

What will it take to get actual budget reductions approved?  Apparently more people in office with the fortitude to stand up against the tax and spend crowd that sits in far too many chairs today.

It was reported a week ago that the school board had interviewed the desired applicants and narrowed the field to three 'finalists'.  Sources indicate that while three of the six who were interviewed were to be invited for a follow-up interview, none were labeled as 'finalists' at this point contrary to press reports.

Seventeen people responded with indications of interest in the position being vacated by Victor Rossetti on June 30th.  A handful were or had been superintendents and the balance were principals and/or human resource directors who were seeking the position as their next step up the leadership ladder.

Some on the board are concerned with the relatively small level of respondents for this position and wonder why that was the case.  Reports indicate that there are more open positions than qualified candidates across Wisconsin.  Was it due to the fact that the Germantown district does not pay as much as other districts?  Was it due to the recent vote on a new elementary school building initiative?  Is it due to the size of the district?  Is there something else at work that caused such a small initial response?

Given the fact that there were few sitting or experienced superintendents seeking our position, are we now faced with finding the best candidate without that level of initial experience and bringing her or him into the district?  Will the citizens support that approach or will they demand that Germantown keep interviewing until it finds an experienced and willing candidate who has no negative baggage.

If you were a member of the board and were faced with this open position, what do you think is most important?  Would you be willing to seek out the best candidate without actual experience?  Would you be willing to "take a chance" on a candidate that seems to have everything but experience?  Would you be looking for that next Jennifer Semmann or would you be content with the best of the lot that appears available to you?  Would you broaden the search if possible?

Please share your thoughts.  This is a very important position and the person selected will participate in shaping our community's future.

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.

Governor Doyle recently signed a bill that establishes age 15 & 1/2 as the age at which a person residing in Wisconsin can make his or her decision to donate organs if they were to die.  The age until now had been established at 18.  This was included in Assembly Bill 570 that was co-sponsored by Rep. Jeskewitz and Rep. Wasserman, names familiar to our community.

I have close friends who have experienced the life-giving results of organ donors' decisions.  They are passionately in favor of the program.  I am not discussing the pro and con of organ donation.  I am not raising questions about youthful donors; organs have been harvested and donated from infants and children for a long time.

I am raising the question of just when a person should be able to make that decision for oneself.  I am raising the question of when the person has accumulated the knowledge and wisdom to make such a decision without parental consent.  I am raising the question as to when parental consent and parental responsibility is removed from the family. 

What are the things one can do legally at the age of 15 & 1/2 years?  Drive? No.  Drink alcohol?  No.  Vote in public elections?  No.  Join the military?  No.  Own a gun?  No.  Marry?  No.  Go to school?  Yes.

Is it just me or does it seem to you, as well, that our society is gradually eroding the rights of parents and giving those rights over to the state?  Are we truly moving to that "It Takes A Village" thing?

If we think back, there has been a subtle, slow, but inexorable movement in which the parent has lost rights that have been given over to the state (or the schools which is nearly the same).  Vaccinations. Sex education. Corporal punishment. Driver's training.  Abortion.

Am I way off the mark, or do you agree?  Where is this going to end?  Will it end tomorrow, or next year, or next generation or will it end when the parents have given over all their rights to those who know best?  And, do the parents even know that they're losing parental rights?  And, if they know, do they care?

Troubling incrementalism.

The Center on Wisconsin Strategy and the Wisconsin Council on Children & Families, both found in Madison, have released a report that reaches the startling conclusion you see in the headline above.

Wow!  What a surprise!  Further into the article in today's Journal Sentinel that discussed this amazing statistic, we find out that Wisconsin actually ranks quite well so far as this measurement is concerned...but apparently not well enough to make these groups comfortable.  The report shows that the gap in Wisconsin is actually smaller than on average across the country.  The report found that Wisconsin actually ranks 11th out of the 50 states in this regard, and that means the gap between top and bottom fifths of the population are lesser.

But, there are the usual suggestions made to 'correct' this terrible situation:

• Increase the minimum wage and then index it to inflation.
• Improve worker skills and education.
• Expand subsidized childcare and health care for low-income workers.
• 'Update' unemployment insurance.
• Make taxes 'more progressive'.

This 'minimum wage' canard is so old and tiresome but it just keeps coming back.  There are positions in the workforce that do not command more than the current minimum wage.  Every time the minimum wage is increased, it displaces workers at the bottom end of society because the jobs simply go away. The majority of minimum wage jobs are held on a part-time basis by students and homemakers, and not be sole bread winners.

Improving worker skills and education is a noble undertaking, it is one that we are engaged in already, and it speaks to the need to get MPS working since it seems intent on not graduating 53% of its students thus relegating them to those minimum wage jobs and/or welfare programs (except that you have to read for many of those, so I guess that is out).

I don't know where the people have been who built this study, but every time we turn around, we are expanding childcare and health care for low-income workers.  Look at BadgerCare and BadgerCare Plus.  Listen to the radio commercials begging people to come in to sign up for welfare programs.

Apparently unemployment insurance should be 'updated' (read increased) so the people who are unable to hold jobs get more money until the benefit runs out.  Maybe a better tax climate in our wonderful state would prompt the creation of more jobs and remove the increasing need for the unemployment insurance program 'update'.

Finally, the ultimate liberal solution for every ill to be found in society:  let's take more money away (tax increases) from 'the rich' and give it to the poor.  This class warfare shot is being heard all too often in the current presidential campaign, and it fails to define just who the 'rich' are; be careful middle class; you may be rich.  We don't need to resort to the use of this class warfare tactic in Wisconsin.  In case the 'ruling class' hasn't figured it out, our taxes are already too progressive.

These studies drive me nuts (as is plainly seen from this Blog).  Lower our taxes as Texas has done for its citizens and employers, and watch what happens to unemployment, etc.

What a surprise.  The rich get richer faster than the poor.  The real surprise is that liberals have yet to figure out how cause and effect function in this equation!

Governor Doyle signed the bill that permits continued funding of virtual schools, with a relaxed cap on enrollments while a study is being conducted to determine their effectiveness on several different fronts.  This is a temporary 'fix'.

This represents a real victory for those parents who have enrolled their children in these educational institutions and who love the result.  Yes, these are educational 'institutions' even though it is difficult to see the walls.  Yes, the students do seem to thrive in this setting.  Yes, union teachers are involved in the instructional process.  Yes, they do seem more efficient in some ways than the typical brick and mortar schools with which we are all familiar.

But, they are different...and they are frightening to some...and threatening to others.  Certainly some students would not fare well in this environment.  Certainly some teachers would not fare well in such an environment.  So, maybe over the next couple of years, we'll have the opportunity to learn a lot more about this approach to education of our children.

Lest we forget, there is still the drive to end most forms of 'outside the box' education.  California's court system recently held that parents in that state are not fit to teach their children in a 'home school' setting.  Milwaukee Public Schools graduate less than 50% of their students but school choice is not looked upon with favor. 

Our system of education is in a state of flux.  Taxpayers are not happy about spending more money on buildings as we saw recently in Germantown.  Maybe all this will prove to have been part of a healthy debate as to just how our educational system of the future will look and function.

It seems obvious that we do need to have such a debate.  It seems obvious that we do need to get 'outside the box' as we discuss the future of education.  But, how are we going to do this?  Where will this debate be conducted?  Who will participate?  Will this be structured or will it simply be done through the free flow of ideas?  We have much greater communications abilities today than ever before. 

Will the debate be done at community levels, then county and state levels?  Or will it be done at the state level and then be pushed down to the place where education really happens?

Sadly, if there is to be such a debate, it will probably happen at the federal and state levels and be force-fed to the communities.  It will probably be done in courts of law with attorneys crafting the future of our educational system.  It will probably be funded by unions with their own agenda that may or may not look like the agenda of a community or of a parent.

I have no answers to these questions.  It might be better if we simply have a lot of questions and then seek the right answers...rather than to have the answers and then try to make those fit no matter what the questions may be.

It seems to me that we are on the cusp of exciting and frightening times in the world of education.  I hope we citizens and parents are up to the test.

The actual make-up day involved is the 'lost power' day at the High School.  Snow days are to be dealt with separately.  See comment below. 

The first thing that leaped out of the Journal Sentinel story this morning was the statement that Germantown had received, so far, 115 inches of snow this season.  The 'so far' is there just in case...but I really hope that isn't necessary.

The second thing was the manner in which the time lost will be made up to comply with the state requirement that those in kindergarten through 6th grade must complete a minimum of 1,050 hours of instruction per school year, and those in grades 7 through 12 must complete 1,137 hours of instruction.  By adding 5 minutes to the start of every school day remaining this year, Germantown will accomplish these minimum numbers.

No doubt the addition of full days at the end of the school year is problematic given school lunch programs, parents' and teachers' plans and so on.  I understand that both students and teachers want the last day scheduled to be the last day.

But, at the risk of angering some people, I have to say that I don't think the students actually gain much in the way of learning from the extra five minutes per day.  Maybe they would gain just as little from two extra days being added at the end of the term.  All this seems just a little on the farcical side from my jaundiced perspective.

If you were to work an extra five minutes per day at your job, you'd admittedly account for the time required by your boss...but would you really accomplish much of anything?  I doubt it.

I don't have the answer to my implied question.  But this approach seems nothing more than technically meeting some requirement that doesn't have much to do with what is or isn't learned.  Could the state 'chill' a bit if that's what would be necessary?  The last day or two of school never used to have much to do with education, and more to do with tidying up the area, turning the books in and making up things to keep us students 'occupied' while the clock seemed to tick once every five minutes.  Those were the longest and most useless days of the year.  Maybe all that has changed since this 'curmudgeon' was in school...but I'd really be surprised.

Okay.  Take your best shot if you disagree...

There were two items in the newspapers today that are particularly troubling and those are:

Wisconsin's black 8th graders rank worst in the nation in writing...

This article cited the latest tests that showed our black (African-American) students were actually getting worse than better so far as both reading and writing are concerned.  Other states in the nation have posted improvements in the same time period, so we know this issue can be dealt with positively.  Reading and writing are very basic skills without which these kids will fail in their quest to make it through this life.

This comes on top of the recent report that Milwaukee's public schools graduate only 47% of those who come in as freshman students.  This speaks to virtually a complete failure in my mind.  Yes, the breakdown of family units plays a significant role, but that needs to be overcome.  The kids who grow up to a bleak life are more likely to perpetuate the family breakdown issue and make it worse than it already has become.

Finally, our state Superintendent of Public Instruction, Elizabeth Burmaster, issued this statement, "Our overall student achievement is improving and parallels what we see on other assessments.  We must stay focused on raising achievement for all students, in particular our African-American students, and closing achievement gaps.  We know what works: quality educators in every classroom and strong leaders in every school, early learning opportunities and small class sizes and shared responsibility by parents, schools and communities to support student academic achievement."

What a bunch of malarkey!  It is this attitude that has exacerbated this problem.  It is this attitude, in part, that has seen this problem worsen in the past decade.  If she truly "knows what works", then why isn't it working?  Is it that we need to pour good money after bad?  Is it that we need ten students per classroom instead of twenty?  What is it?

And, where are the rest of the political ruling class members?  Strangely silent and strangely absent it seems.  Why is school choice getting short shrift?  Why are web-based schools such a threat?  Is it because the "we know what works" group fears that choice would prove to be better?  Would relaxation of the residency requirement bring better teachers into Milwaukee schools?  Is it possible that we are failing these at risk kids and that they have no real alternatives?

Diabetes up 27% in state since 2005...

In two years, there are 27% more adult diabetics in Wisconsin.  419,870 adults were indicated to have diabetes in Wisconsin in 2007.  And, the estimate is that about 1 million more are pre-diabetic.  We have something over 5 million citizens, so the combination of diagnosed and pre-diabetic people accounts for about one of every four people in the state.

We have a health care cost crisis in our state and our country...and these statistics are evidence of why that is the case in very large part.  Diabetes carries a huge human cost and a huge financial cost from onset to end of life.

Hospitalizations due to diabetes grew by 11% over the two-year period in this study.  While the number of hospitalizations grew by 11%, the cost of those hospitalizations increased 48% to $2 billion; this can be attributed to the severity and number of cases as well as the general escalation of health care costs.  The overall cost of diabetes among adults in Wisconsin now stands at some $5.2 billion per year.  If the pre-diabetics were to be lumped into this cost today, we'd be spending $15 billion per year or more on the ravages of this disease.

We can be our own worst enemy so far as this disease is concerned, although that isn't always the case.  But, for those who are able to control or moderate their disease through personal lifestyle changes, they need to do that...for themselves and the rest of our citizens.  This disease threatens to bankrupt our state...both in the human toll extracted as well as pure cost. 

This is one of the periods that are often joked about by the citizenry.  With no sessions being conducted in Madison, we all can feel a little less threatened.  The major snag in that logic at the moment is that both houses will continue to debate the budget repair needs given the anticipated revenue shortfall of some $650 Million.  I have discussed the primary differences between the Governor and his Democrats and the Republicans often in past Blogs. 

What got done and what didn't get done during the session now ended?

• We are still without a photo ID law to assure that only Wisconsin citizens who are entitled to vote are voting.
• Thank the Democrats for blocking this necessary legislation again.
• Our elected officials at the State level continue to enjoy the largess of Sick Leave accumulation.
• Thank the Democrats for continuing this little 'cookie jar' benefit at our expense.
• Cell phones are not part of the do-not-call list in Wisconsin.
• Thank the Republicans for mysteriously not taking this up in the Assembly.
• Economic development proposed by Governor Doyle was killed.
• Thank his fellow Democrats in the Senate for this being killed because it supposedly cost too much.
• The gun database still does not carry information about involuntary mental health commitments.
• Thank the Senate Democrats for killing this common sense initiative; maybe they want to simply ban all guns.
• Psychological examinations for new full-time police officers still not a requirement.
• Thank the Republican Assembly for not even debating this change even though it makes sense.
• Property rights won a victory over the anti-smoking groups.
• Thank both the Assembly and Senate for not giving away our personal rights and for letting merchants decide if they will be smoke-free.
• Virtual schools will be permitted to exist after heated arguments for and against.
• Thank both the Assembly and Senate for reaching a compromise that Governor Doyle dared not kill off even though his WEAC money machine dearly wanted this dead.
• The 'Frankenstein Veto' provision will be put to the citizens as a proposed Constitutional Amendment.
• Thank the Democrat-controlled Senate for finally agreeing to let this pass after the Assembly gave it bipartisan support.
• Healthy Wisconsin was defeated.
• This is a great victory of common sense over politics thanks to all elected officials who voted against it, and that is primarily the Republicans in both the Assembly and Senate.

So, how do we grade the overall efforts and results of the Assembly and Senate?  It has to be a mixed grade at best.  Maybe in the 'C+' to 'B-' range.  Our state budget spends too much money even though Republicans did their level best to reduce it even more than they did. 

The two branches again showed us how dysfunctional our government can be.  The bad side of that is that things of value to the citizenry were lost.  The good side of that is that a lot of bad 'stuff' got tossed in the garbage can.

Maybe we can get a decent budget repair bill put together and lessen the hit on the taxpayers' wallets and purses.  That would raise my grade by nearly a full point.