GEA Members Protesting...

I have learned that teachers in Germantown, members of the Germantown Education Association, are apparently protesting by wearing black clothing, or black armbands and pins over their lack of a contract that expired a few months earlier.

The offer from the Board/Administration was in accordance with the QEO (qualified economic offer) rules still in effect in Wisconsin that cite a maximum of 3.8% compensation increase including benefits according to my information.

I Blogged yesterday about the QEO going away in Wisconsin given Democrat control and WEAC support.

Could this be the first salvo in that battle?  Is it just coincidence that this occurs the day after the election, or is it part of well-planned scenario to force that issue sooner rather than later.

~~~~~~~~~~

GOP Voter Turn-Out Down In Washington County...

I learned from an benefits industry newsletter this morning that voter turn-out on the GOP side of the race for president were off from the most recent similar race.

Washington County showed 50,641 votes for Bush in 2004 while there were a total of 47,725 votes cast for McCain.  Waukesha County showed 9,837 fewer votes for McCain versus Bush in 2004, and Ozaukee County reported 2,744 fewer votes for McCain versus Bush.

Given the intensity of the campaigning and other races that were involved, this would seem to suggest that conservatives were really 'put out' over being forced to cast votes for the least desirable of the Republican candidates that started the race.

These three counties are solid conservative counties typically.  Maybe this was a backlash or maybe there were more casual Republican voters who were swayed to cast their ballots for Obama because they liked him rather than as a protest of their selection.

~~~~~~~~~~

MATC Response Opposing The Germantown School District Petition Filed...

A 54 page response is available for your review on the MATC website if you like.  I've gleaned some of that information as follows:

• "MATC offers the highest quality and greatest variety of programs and learning opportunities in the most diverse college in Wisconsin.  Germantown has benefited enormously from MATC's resources."
• "As discussed below, reorganization would certainly not be in the best interests of the hundreds of Germantown residents who attend MATC, utilizing programming and coursework that is unavailable at Moraine Park."
• "...Germantown has not presented any compelling reason to sever its productive, long-standing relationship with MATC and realign Germantown with Moraine Park.  To do so would-in effect-place an unfunded mandate upon MATC by reducing its revenues without any corresponding reduction in costs.  Programming and enrollment data strongly suggest that Germantown residents will continue to attend MATC and utilize its resources, even if reorganization occurs."

This could, and does, go on and on through the course of the 15 page letter signed by the MATC President, Dr. Darnell E.Cole, and the MATC Board Chairperson, Lauren Baker.

It asserts that there is no real reason for the petition other than our desire to get out from under the $5.7 million annual tax burden (that MATC fails to acknowledge has climbed exponentially over time).  It complains that the sole reason for the petition is financial and it says that isn't permitted as a reason for consideration.

I was struck by the fact that MATC can decry the petition on the basis of the financial havoc that would be visited on MATC but the citizens of the school district are denied the same opportunity.

MATC brags about the unique courses available, and the commuting distance differences.

That rings hollow to me since there has been no indication that Germantown students, as few as they are in total number, are seeking out MATC for those "unique" courses.  The discussion of "distance" rings hollow for me since I can drive "more quickly and more easily" from Germantown to West Bend than to either the Mequon campus or the downtown campus.

MATC points out the $2.7 million investment made in the Mequon campus over the past ten years but fails to acknowledge the $40 to $50 million in taxes paid by us citizens over that same time span.  Again, the point of money is made by MATC but cannot be used to defend the petition.

MATC says it would have to engage in "substantial" program/job cuts" if the petition were to be approved.  What a novel idea for this organization contrasted with the endless tax increases that have been and will continue to be levied.  Once again, they can use the fiscal fact set they create to defend against our petition but we cannot use the fiscal fact set we create to auger in favor of our petition.

I  have long maintained that the likelihood of a ruling favorable to the Germantown School District in its petition to move to Moraine Park was a long shot, at best.

Reading the story put together to defend the poorly run MATC organization makes me ill, as it also helps me see that the likelihood of a favorable ruling is probably much more remote than I had ever supposed.

This is such a classic case of a non-elected governmental body with taxing authority being judged by its own parent to the detriment of us citizens.  This simply has to change...but that isn't going to happen for the time period during which the Democrats control state government.  I'd simply better come to understand that and forget trying to tip windmills.

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? 

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.