Today we'll explore the WEAC insurance companies called WEA Insurance Group.

The WEA Insurance Group is composed of five organizations:

• WEA Insurance Trust
• WEA Insurance Corporation
• WEA Tax Sheltered Annuity Trust
• WEAC Member Benefit Trust
• WEA Property & Casualty Insurance Company

These organizations are used to provide coverages such as health insurance, dental insurance, long term disability insurance, long term care insurance, automobile insurance, homeowners insurance and tax-sheltered annuities.

This is a spectacular picture from the WEA Trust that was created in 1970 with initial capitalization of $5,000 that was provided by WEAC.  By 1977, this Trust had become the thirteenth largest health insurer in Wisconsin.  By 1989, it employed 140 people, and now employs some 500 people and serves over 200,000 public school employees and family members.

It, as is its parent, is the 800 lb. gorilla so far as insurers providing coverage to school districts in Wisconsin.  It takes pride in the ways in which it developed new coverages for its members and in its record of few member complaints.

Among the breakthroughs it claims credit for are these:

• The trust was the first in the state to offer a disability plan that replaced 90% of a disabled employee's income.  (Typical insurance policies offer up to two-thirds of the employee's compensation to encourage those who are able to return to work as soon as possible, and to help hold insurance premium cost down for employers.)
• The Trust was the first insurer in Wisconsin to cover transplants as a standard benefit.  (Such breakthroughs have had to add costs to these plans that caused increases in premiums to employers.  Most insurers were hesitant to offer such coverage unless and until forced to do so by state mandate since they would've been priced uncompetitively with other insurers.)
• The Trust health plan covered psychiatric and chiropractic services "long before the law required insurance companies to offer such benefits".  (Again, we see marketplace differentiation that made it nearly impossible for other insurers to compete for school district business while it made the employers pay more due to these increased levels of service.)

We discussed Jane Doe's coverage cost to the district in a recent Blog.  Jane's cost to the district was $19,279 during the most recent school year, and she paid another 3% of the premium from her pocket as her contribution toward that cost.  Given the coming school year and plan changes that have been made by WEA Insurance Trust, the cost to the district for the most comparable program will go up to some $22,400 for an increase of about 16% in its cost.  (This is contrasted with an average increase in Wisconsin for other employers of about 4% this year according to a survey by the Mercer consulting firm released today.)

That same announcement based on the Mercer survey pointed out that $1,000 deductibles are now commonplace across America.  I would be amazed if a single school district in Wisconsin could be identified that has such a deductible in place.  Premium sharing by employees is often done on a 25%-75% or a 50%-50% basis in Wisconsin's workplaces, but in Jane's case there is a 3%-97% sharing arrangement.  It is not at all uncommon for employees of firms with fewer than 50 employees to have no health insurance coverage provided by their employer today.  That percentage is in the range of 50% to 60% in Wisconsin today.

WEA Insurance Trust points to its success with the following statistics:

• Health plan enrollment was 138,024 for 2007, or 71% of eligible school districts.
• Dental plan enrollment was 149,961 for 2007, or 78% of eligible school districts.
• Long term disability enrollment was 60,063 for 2007, or 75% of eligible school districts.
• Life plan enrollment was 36,237 for 2007, or 46% of eligible school districts.
• Long term care enrollment was 21,251 in 2007, or 23% of eligible school districts.

This is what the insurance industry calls "penetration" of a marketplace, and it points to the dominance that WEAC has in negotiating on behalf of its insurance companies.  I have spoken with people who have attempted to compete against the WEAC/WEA Insurance Trust insurance programs.  They have made presentations to Boards showing significant decreases with relatively little in the way of plan benefit reductions and few are ever successful in getting the business.  The union dominates this world.  Some question why the teachers would permit this to happen since the premium costs impact their pay due to the QEO rules, but I suspect any teacher who would voice his or her concern might feel uncomfortable in his or her peer group as the result.  And, it is great if you're in the cat bird's seat with the 'Cadillac' coverage.

If you read yesterday's piece, you may've noted that WEAC has universal health care as one of its legislative goals.  That would be great since they could then shift costs to all the state's citizens instead of just to those citizens in a district they provide coverage for.  And, most interesting of all is this overlooked fact:  WEAC had already obtained favorable treatment for its members in the Healthy Wisconsin program that was defeated last year.  Universal health care is great but they must still have better coverage for their members...and the party in control of state government was willing to cause that to happen.

Some have questioned the people costs of a school district but this kind of information helps us better understand where some of those costs originate. 

Surprise, Surprise...

I'm sure this must come as a great shock to us all.

The Wisconsin Technical College System Board voted 12-0 in favor of denying the petition request made by the Germantown School District to be permitted to leave the MATC district and move into the Moraine Park Technical College district.

We'll just have to shut up, pay our exorbitant MATC tax load and wait for another twenty years and try again.

In a very selfish way, I can at least look forward to many more opportunities to ridicule the MATC decision-making apparatus as well as the silly ways this group finds to divest themselves of our money.

When will we have a state government that wakes up to the folly of none-elected (appointed) boards that have taxing powers.  This is truly taxation without representation...and there seems not a thing we can do about it.

Maybe current MATC President Darnell Cole will eventually find another school that is willing to take him off our hands; I feel confident that he'll continue to look for more money and more people to tax.  After all, the goose that is called the MATC district is just about finished laying larger eggs.  I wonder if technical colleges also have powers of annexation?  That wouldn't come as too great a surprise, either.

I also wonder if we'll see more "free" laptops being donated to the library; and if we'll see that "splendid" cooperation between our industry and the MATC get even better.  We'd probably be wise to not hold our breath until that occurs.

~~~~~~~~~~

Knodl Konundrum - Chapter Two...

Dan Knodl has entered a plea of not guilty in Ozaukee County to the charges lodged against him over names published without the permission of those named.

I suspect that, at worst, he'll be fined a modest amount and life will go on.

I have to say, though, that I'd be very embarrassed if that were my campaign and I let that happen when I would've known I had a comfortable lead in such a dominant Republican stronghold.

~~~~~~~~~~

Mequon Road/Pilgrim Road Intersection Construction...

It seems that the construction in this main intersection in Germantown has gone on longer than had been expected.  I certainly hope this ends very soon so the roadway and traffic patterns can be restored prior to the Winter weather descending upon us.

I want to shift the focus now to the Wisconsin Education Association Council, or WEAC as it is commonly known.  Following this, we'll look at the WEAC affiliate that delivers health and other insurance coverages.

WEAC is among the state's 800 lb. gorillas so far as labor organizations are concerned.  It touts having some 98,000 members.  Its history shows a start in 1853, some 8 years after Wisconsin became a state.  It became known as WEAC in 1972 following adoption of collective bargaining laws for public employees in Wisconsin.

WEAC represents the following segments of education today: teachers, education support professionals, custodians, university students, state education employees, paraprofessionals, retired education support professionals, retired educators, library media specialists (one of whom, Mary Bell, is the current WEAC President), nutrition employees, school safety personnel, Wisconsin Technical College faculty and support staff, clerical staff, counselors, secretaries, teacher aides, bus drivers, cooks and state-employed education and information professionals.

WEAC's structure begins at the local level with the local unions such as the Germantown Education Association (GEA).

The local unions are members of a unified services unit, or UniServe unit, in their local area.  That unit includes the professionals required to support the locals, and is typically limited to some 1,200 to 1,500 individual union members.  Five of the largest school districts have their own UniServ units (Milwaukee, Madison, Racine, Kenosha and Green Bay).  The staffs of each UniServ provide locals with collective bargaining, member rights, public relations, professional development, and political action assistance.

The UniServ entities are tied to WEAC in Madison and WEAC is a member of the National Education Association, or NEA located in Washington, D.C.

It is easy to see that this organization is very well developed for the functions it has carved out for itself.  That is among the reasons that education is such an effective political force.  I have made earlier references to the fact that WEAC has spent millions of dollars to assure an attentive audience in the halls of Wisconsin government and in the Governor's mansion.

WEAC has identified its major initiatives for the period 2008-2010 and those are:

School Funding  They state: "It is evident that school funding is broken.  It is at the center of discussion from local to local.  The WEAC Board of Directors has identified measures of success for school funding reform, and they are offering a comprehensive education to kids and fair compensation for members."

Health Care  They state:  "We know that under the Qualified Economic Offer we've been sacrificing salary increases for health insurance.  But WEAC's commitment to health care reform is much bigger.  We care deeply for kids and their families because we all know that health care is also a learning issue."

Professional Development & Licensure  They state:  "Educators are required to focus more attention than ever on licensing and professional development, and WEAC is stepping up to provide quality support and services.  You are the best person to manage your professional development, with support from your union and financing from your district."

Achievement Gaps  They state:  "This issue is very close to the hearts of WEAC members.  The frustration of not being able to meet the needs of all our students drives us to do more - demanding needed resources and bringing the issue forward into a public conversation.  We will continue our work to involve communities, corporations and government in closing the achievement gap."

Membership  They state:  "We are listening to what you need and value, and connecting your union to your daily work.  We are focusing on groups who are already organized - and those who are not yet - in order to fulfill the promise of public education for future generations."

I'll close this piece with the 2009-2010 WEAC legislative agenda.  Their printed material says:

"WEAC Supports Legislation To:

• Repeal the Qualified Economic Offer law.
• Repeal revenue caps.
• Make preparation time for educators a mandatory subject of collective bargaining.
• Increase funding for SAGE to provide $2,500 per low income pupil beginning in the 2009-2010 fiscal year.
• Implement voucher accountability.
• Make attendance of 5-year-old kindergarten mandatory and a prerequisite to admission to first grade.
• Treat education support professionals the same as teachers under the Wisconsin Retirement System in terms of qualifying for coverage and for early retirement calculations.
• Establish WTCS pay equity by requiring that the salary and fringe benefits of part-time technical college instructors be prorated based on the salary and fringe benefits of full-time staff.
• Create a loan forgiveness program for teaching math, science, special education and ELL in high-poverty districts.
• Repeal residency requirements.
• Provide a tax deduction for non-reimbursed classroom purchases.
• Adopt the 'Wisconsin Indoor Environmental Quality in Schools Act' for public school buildings.
• Require school boards to adopt anti-bullying policies.
• Allow parents to take leave time from work to attend school conferences and activities."

~~~~~~~~~~

Several things jump out at me as I write this but I'll use another piece to explore those.  The one major thing that occurs is that virtually everything about WEAC means higher costs of education which translates into restructuring school financing laws and that will ultimately translate into more tax dollars.

While we are discussing the area of compensation, I want to take a 'hypothetical' person whom we'll name Jane Doe, and look at her compensation package.

Jane is in her 10th year with the school district.  She has a Master's degree with less than 15 hours of added credit.  This places her in lane 4 and step 10 of the 'matrix' we discussed yesterday.  Assuming that Jane had her Master's degree in the 2006-2007 school year, her base salary would've been $47,937.  In the 2007-2008 school year, her base salary was $49,703, an increase of some 3.7% even though there was no new contract settled and, thus, no new pay schedule in place.

In the school year we are in today, 2008-2009, Jane would be earning a base salary of $51,469 for an increase year over year of 3.55%.  A QEO offer would've more than doubled those increase percentages for Jane.

Total compensation for Jane this past school year was $85,406 inclusive of benefits in addition to base salary.

My point in this exercise is to give citizens some real life numbers to which they can relate versus the percentages that get thrown about without any actual meaning to most of us.

I do not begrudge the income that our educators earn.  It is very important that our children are well-educated and good teachers are a large part of that equation.

Next, we'll look at the Wisconsin Education Association Council (WEAC) and the WEA Insurance Group.

First, there was a story by Thomas J. McKillen in the November 15th edition of Germantown Express News concerning the November 10th School Board meeting.  In that story there were quotes attributed to Jon Stachowiak who is the President of the Germantown Education Association.  The article stated:

"GEA President Jon Stachowiak opened his remarks...by noting that Germantown ranked 'number one in all levels' on the WKCE test scores out of 50 school districts in southeast Wisconsin."

"'The teachers have led their students to a high level of success', Stachowiak said."

"He further stated that two-thirds of district teaching staff have Master's Degrees."

"'This success achieved on the WKCE test is not achieved by putting in a contracted day or working to the minimum", Stachowiak said."

It is important that we recognize the excellence in our district; I was pleased to see this in print.  I thought it also interesting that this had been achieved with the classroom crowding we have been told about.

In that same meeting, Stachowiak also cited that teachers had higher wages in the Hartford, Slinger, West Bend and Kewaskum districts, and said that "another offer by the school board which is the state minimum will not be accepted".  I was disappointed that this comment was made in this setting; that seemed more appropriate in a negotiating session and the board meeting was not being held for that purpose so far as I know.  Additionally, I don't know what he meant by "will not be accepted".  That sounds like a job action of some sort could result.

Teacher compensation has always been a bit of a mystery to me, and I suspect it may be for you, also.

We have a step system in place in Germantown which recognizes the combination of tenure and education.  There are a total of 84 different steps, or pay grades, in this matrix.  It is this matrix that is affected by the QEO that we covered in the first part of this discussion.  If a 3.8% increase is made, part of that goes for benefits and the rest, if there is a "rest", goes for salary and is applied to this matrix.

My understanding is that it is possible for teachers to gain salary increases even if no increase has been granted through contract negotiations.  That would happen if more credit hours had been earned, or if a new degree level had been achieved, or if tenure demarcations had been passed.  It is also possible for both education and tenure increases to be involved and that could see a higher increase in overall salary without regard to contract negotiations.  It seems that it can also be said that increases in total are not always limited to the 3.8% or whatever had been approved.  Certainly, steps could be passed at the same time increases were made to the matrix.

The step increases max out, I believe, when a teacher has obtained a Master's Degree with an additional 30 credit hours earned, and has at least 14 years in the district.  The GEA President mentioned that two-thirds of our district's teachers have their Master's Degrees, although I have no idea as to the cumulative years in the district for any of those people.  That suggests to me that our district has more people in the higher steps than in the lower steps, thus the overall costs to the district would be higher than might seem to be the case.

The 'rule of thumb' I've heard applied says that some 85% of the district budget is consumed by people costs.

This is basically how the system looks at this time.  I want to explore the benefit cost implications and am planning that for another part to this discussion since it could take some time to put together. 

Sendik's Food Market 60 Days Later...

I have yet to encounter a Sendik's associate who wasn't happy to be there and who wasn't happy to help me.

I have noted that the facility remains bright and cheery with a very clean floor, which I thought might be problematic given carpeting.  Winter will be a bigger challenge.  Shelves are always fully stocked; delicious samples are scattered throughout the store.

I don't know about you, but I am happy Sendik's selected Germantown as the site for one of their beautiful grocery facilities.

~~~~~~~~~~

Veterans Day 2008...

Remember that the 2008 Veterans Day ceremony will be held at the Veterans Memorial at the corner of Freistadt Road and Park Avenue on Sunday, November 9th at 10:30AM.  If you've not seen the memorial, it is worth your time.

A little history...

Veterans Day was originally known as Armistice Day when proclaimed by President Woodrow Wilson for November 11, 1919 to celebrate all veterans of World War I.  It finally became known as Veterans Day on November 8, 1954 when Congress amended the act to change the name and to have the day honor all veterans who have served their country.  The President was Dwight D. Eisenhower.

The American Legion will also conduct a flag disposal ceremony following the program so that you can properly dispose of any torn, tattered and/or faded American Flag you may have.

~~~~~~~~~~

County Supervisors Cut Property Tax Levy...

The supervisors agreed to take half of the county's sales tax revenue into the operating budget for 2009.

Unfortunately, this budget cuts the $35,000 for the County Convention and Visitors Bureau and cuts $15,000 from the Fair Park.  The Village of Germantown is working to assist the Convention and Visitors Bureau since it receives significant promotion from that organization and felt that the funding cut by the county would have consequences for the community and its merchants.

The county set a 2009 tax rate of $2.71 per $1,000 which is down about $0.10 per $1,000 from this year.

~~~~~~~~~~

SRO Officer In Schools...

I had the pleasure of meeting SRO Tim Miller during the Citizen Police Academy session this past Wednesday evening.  He gave us an overview of his duties in the schools and discussed the changes that have been brought about since this program was initiated.  "SRO" means School Resource Officer.  The SRO is a sworn officer and funding for this position is paid jointly by the school district and the police department on a 75%-25% ratio, respectively.

Our high school is a much quieter place of learning than before the initiation of this program several years ago.  Student fights seldom occur now; the SRO has formed relationships that help both students and administration.  And, students develop, I suspect, a much different view of police officers having had this experience.  The SRO is available for class instruction whenever the subject matter entails.  SRO Miller, in this case, can 'tell it like it is' during driver education and health classes, for example.

This strikes me as a very good use of taxpayer dollars that provides both a current payback as well as future benefits.

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.

I had intended to scan a copy of the sample ballot for Germantown however that wasn't sufficiently legible.  So, we'll list the offices for which there are candidate selections to be made by all of us who are registered to vote in the village.

You may elect to vote a straight ticket including, in the order found on the ballot:

• Democratic
• Republican
• Wisconsin Green
• Libertarian

The race for President and Vice President, in the order found on the ballot:

• Barack Obama/Joe Biden (Democratic)
• John McCain/Sarah Palin (Republican)
• Cynthia McKinney/Rosa Clemente (Wisconsin Green)
• Bob Barr/Wayne A. Root (Libertarian)
• Brian Moore/Stewart A. Alexander (Socialist Party USA)
• Gloria LaRiva/Robert Moses (Party for Socialism, & Liberation)
• Ralph Nader/Matt Gonzalez (Independent)
• Chuck Baldwin/Darrell L. Castle (Constitution Party)
• Jeffrey J. Wamboldt/David J. Klimisch (We, the People)
• Write-in________________

Representative in Congress District 5, in the order found on the ballot:

• F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr. (Republican)
• Robert R. Raymond (Independent)
• Write-in________________

State Senator District 8, in the order found on the ballot:

• Sheldon A. Wasserman (Democratic)
• Alberta Darling (Republican)
• Write-in________________

Representative to the Assembly District 24, in the order found on the ballot:

• Charlene S. Brady (Democratic)
• Dan Knodl (Republican)
• Write-in________________

District Attorney:

• Todd K. Martens (Republican)
• Write-in________________

County Clerk:

• Brenda J. Jaszewski (Republican)
• Write-in_________________

Treasurer:

• Janice Gettelman (Republican)
• Write-in_________________

Register of Deeds:

• Sharon Martin (Republican)
• Write-in_________________

Referendum - Germantown School District

Question #1:

Shall the following Initial Resolution be approved?

INITIAL RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $22,500,000

BE IT RESOLVED by the School Board of the Germantown School District, Washington County, Wisconsin that there shall be issued pursuant to Chapter 67 of the Wisconsin Statutes, general obligation bonds in an amount not to exceed $22,500,000 for the public purpose of paying the cost of constructing a new elementary school on school district property next to Kinderberg Park; technology, safety and security initiatives District wide; and acquiring furnishings, fixtures and equipment.

Yes ____

No   ____

Question #2

Shall the following Resolution be approved?

RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SCHOOL DISTRICT BUDGET TO EXCEED REVENUE LIMIT BY $500,000

FOR RECURRING PURPOSES

BE IT RESOLVED by the School Board of the Germantown School District, Washington County, Wisconsin that the revenues included in the School District budget for the 2010-2011 school year and thereafter be authorized to exceed the revenue limit specified in Section 121.91, Wisconsin Statutes, by $500,000 a year, for recurring purposes consisting of costs associated with the new elementary school.

Yes ____

No   ____

~~~~~~~~~~

The ballot is two-sided as you would expect from the many questions.

The Sunday Journal Sentinel contains a story by Tom Kertscher that discusses the school referenda with interviews of Bruce Warnimont, school board member, and others representing both sides of the debate over a new elementary school and the operating cap 'forgiveness' that would permit an additional $500,000 for operations of the new school.

Mr. Warnimont is quoted as pointing out the potential, based on presumed increases in full day kindergarten enrollment, for the increases in state aid to offset or exceed the cost of the referenda issues on the property tax bills in the district.  He is very knowledgeable on such things and I do not presume to espouse a position, either pro or con, in this Blog.

I will say that this is a most counterintuitive argument.  How does one approve a $22.5 MM bond issue and an additional $500M in annual operating costs and still see his or her property tax bill stay the same or decrease so far as the school district's portion of that bill?  The assumption is that some 230 full time kindergarten students would be enrolled (76 more than now) and that the additional state funding would offset the tax increases necessary to pay off the building and to operate the school.

Those in favor point to this as justification while those opposed point to this skeptically given that there can be no assurances that the supposition will prove valid.

I have difficulty in thinking that anyone would be disingenuous and therefore presume that each side is speaking what it considers to be the truth.  Perhaps I am terribly naive but I hope that isn't the case.

Given the lay of the land today so far as this project goes, I must say that I am happy to be an interested observer and not a direct participant on either side.  As I stated above, this is one tough counterintuitive argument to mount.  I do not know how I will vote but you can be sure I will vote.  I trust that the vast majority of our school district citizens will vote, as well.  We need to learn the true will of the people...and this election should point that out...unless the referenda pass by a handful or lose by a handful of votes.

"Your mission, should you decide to accept..."

That lead-in to the old Mission Impossible television show came to mind as I pondered today's Village Buzz topic possibilities.

I take some of our elected representatives to task now and then, and some of you readers do the same in your comments.  Maybe it is time for us to "put up or shut up" as the old saying goes (not really but it gets the point across).  If we have ideas as to how our governing entities could do things differently, lets put those on the table and see if any grow legs.

For example, we see privatized prisons popping up around the country.  That happened because the private sector found a use for capital that took a burden from the shoulders of the taxpayer.  I read of the latest Scott Walker budget proposals for Milwaukee County and thought that he has to be among the most creative politicians I've seen in some time (and, I hope he runs for Governor again).

What is there in our small world that could be done differently if we were to 'color outside the lines' for awhile?  At the risk of angering entrenched interests, I'll throw out a few thoughts along those lines (remember that there may be some current impediments but that most impediments are man-made and could be altered if we demanded that):

Why not look to the private sector to build a school building that we can lease?  The lessor could be obligated to handle all repairs, for example, over the term of the lease to assure that things that break get fixed on a timely basis instead of being delayed until they manifest as something worse.  I see many former hospitals that have been turned into apartment buildings, for example.  Just because a building is built to house students, doesn't have to mean that it would always be a school building.  As population ebbs and flows, this would give the taxpayer some welcomed flexibility.  Would this be workable?  We won't know unless we ask the questions.

What about a charter school or an Internet school option to take student-count pressure off the buildings now available?  Might that also reduce the personnel costs? 

Many communities have hired assessor organizations and building inspector organizations to do their specialized work instead of retaining this talent on their own payrolls.  Why not go through an extensive review of what we could do along those lines.  That might reduce costs.  It might eliminate our angst over rising benefit costs that have been negotiated and about which we can do nothing even as we watch the private sector deal with those same issues.  Current employees with those skills might welcome the opportunity to become entrepreneurs and build new companies that other communities could employ.

Would it be possible to contract for road repair and shift some of the uncertainties off onto a private sector entity?  Private business is accustomed to taking risk.  Government tends to have to avoid risk and that adds expense.  Road salting and snow plowing, for example, is a real problem given a hard winter and higher salt costs.  If a private firm were contracted, it would bear that risk.  I see many landscape firms that become snow plowers and salters in the winter.  Is that worth exploring?

Would it make sense to lease computer servers for the village's use and have those housed in a private data center that does that as its primary business?  The village wouldn't have need for the IT skills that it might today.  Leasing of such systems might prove more economical and is an expense for which we could plan.

In most of these examples, the private sector would probably be more efficient, less susceptible to the political winds that blow hot and then cold, more intent on running very tightly controlled operations, etc.  Where there is a true risk/reward relationship that is properly negotiated and vetted, I believe that the private sector is simply better at that than is a government body.  And, as the "sidewalk" issue shows, I feel certain that the private sector can get things done in shorter time periods in most cases.

"Your mission, should you decide to accept" is to come up with your own ideas that might be capable of altering the way we look at the world of Germantown government and the Germantown school system today.  I look forward to your comments...if you are brave enough/foolish enough to offer those.  Most of you, at least, have anonymity on your side.  I'm just hanging out there with my zipper down.

School District Referenda...

District residents will have the opportunity to make their wishes known with the news that two referenda items will appear on the local ballots.  The votes were unanimous with one member, Bruce Warnimont, absent from the special meeting.

The first item will see the question concerning approval of borrowing $22.5M to support the building of a new elementary school building for approximately $17.5M while using the balance for security and plant upgrades at the other existing school buildings.  The Journal Sentinel story this morning stated the cost to a homeowner with a $200,000 home would amount to about $74 per year.

The second item is the question concerning the district being authorized to borrow $500,000 for current operating expenses in excess of the current revenue cap.  That same homeowner would see this item add some $30 per year to the property tax bill.

Business Manager Ric Ericksen was quoted as saying that these costs would drop after existing debt is paid off in 2012.

Yesterday's Blog on this subject saw a healthy exchange of ideas and information amongst readers.  I hope we might see that exchange continue.

Knodl Konundrum...

I missed my guess on this item; I expected it to die down after a couple of days.  But, it seems this story has grown some fairly strong legs.

That has no doubt been caused by the original complaint filing by the Menomonee Falls resident, a letter from Jason LaSage to Dan Knodl that found its way into the Journal Sentinel story this morning...and some relatively questionable handling by Knodl himself.

Radio talk shows have continued to discuss this situation and reporters have obviously decided it has some continuing merit.

And, the longer this goes on, the more I begin to wonder if there isn't something more here than I originally felt to be the case.

The initial response from Knodl seemed plausible.  The subsequent statements that differ a bit from that original explanation raise some further questions...simply because the explanation has changed.  I hope the investigation by the Ozaukee County DA will be conducted promptly and that this can be put to rest so that it doesn't cloud the November election anymore than the facts, once exposed, justify.

Vote Today...

There is still time to vote.  Polls are open until 8:00PM.  I voted at about 10:30AM and was number 112 in my district.  Two contested races will be decided by today's vote.

Sendik's Again...

I was VERY pleased to learn yesterday that, at my age with sparse grey hair (stubble actually), I can actually purchase beer, wine or liquor in the Sendik's liquor store WITHOUT the need to show someone that I'm at least 21 years old.

And, I can report that items I purchase regularly appear to be priced at or below the prices in the neighboring establishment...at least during the initial stages of their operation.  Maybe that will change, but I hope not.

School Referendum...

Ty Finke reports in an adjacent article that the school board has approved the administration preparing a new referendum question for the November election concerning a new elementary building, and additional funds for two other needs identified.

I really think this is going to antagonize the electorate, but I have been wrong before.  The probable thinking is that with the normally heavy turn-out during a Presidential election, the issue will be carried substantially.  I have no way of knowing, but I fear this will pollute the stream no matter the side one finds himself or herself supporting.

Apparently a special meeting will be called to review the question before a final commitment is made.  Citizens need to make their positions known before and during that meeting.

An angry electorate will do no one any good, and could backfire to the eventual detriment of the community.  Emotion is a tough taskmaster and yields strange decisions on occasion.

Special Board Meeting Follow-Up...

The special board meeting to be convened at 5:30PM tonight deals, in part, with the Waste Management strike and garbage pick-up delays.  I received an email from President Kempinski over the week-end discussing my Village Buzz piece of late last week.

He indicated that the Waste Management topic had been added to the special meeting agenda to "keep the Board apprised as to the status of collection, and determine if the Board wishes to change companies should the company fall even further behind".  He went on to state that he didn't want to change companies but that he felt compelled to explore alternatives in case service should drop to even lower levels.

I had indicated that our personal experience was that Friday's pick-up was made on Friday.  He mentioned that the village had received calls indicating that pick-ups had been delayed two days in some instances.

President Kempinski also discussed the eventuality of switching to Veolia if Waste Management's service degraded to the point where that would be necessary.  His reasoning seemed to be that, if this went on for some time, and if many communities had similar experiences, there could be a wholesale departure from Waste Management that would overwhelm Veolia's capabilities.

He believes that, if Veolia comes back to the village indicating that it would be willing to accept the terms of the Waste Management agreement, the Board would be willing to switch.

A couple of thoughts come to mind:

If the current agreement has a five-day clause and if Waste Management continues to pick up garbage within that time span, does the village have any real recourse?

Even if there is a wholesale move away from Waste Management, maybe Germantown would, by staying with Waste Management after some agreement renegotiation actually see improved service since Waste Management would have less business and would likely be trying very diligently to repair the image damage it would've suffered.

I'll report on the discussion from today's special meeting in a 'Village Buzz' item tomorrow, if not before.

~~~~~~~~~~

School District Budget Deliberations...

An earlier segment on the current budget debate within the Germantown School District referred to some debate as to the size and configuration of the budget for the coming year.

It appears that this debate continues and centers on the draft prepared by the Administration which does not yet meet the constraints that at least some Board members feel necessary.  A target amount of $39,495,814 had been established last spring.  The administration has continued to stand behind a proposed budget that is some $650,000 higher.

Obviously, the school district has a relatively new business manager although he did have experience gained as a member of the school board when assuming that position.  There was over-spending in several accounts that were discretionary in nature as opposed to accounts that are relatively 'locked in'.  This apparently has caused some concern as to fiscal constraint. 

We also have a new superintendent who certainly has been working hard to learn his new district's idiosyncrasies and needs while also working to build his board and staff relationships.  That may be at work to some degree but it seems that staff would be anxious to follow its new leader rather than 'stand in the doorway'.

I suppose that staff might be expected to seek more money than the board is willing to provide, but, at some point, posturing has to give ground to reality.

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? 

News reports indicate that Village President Tom Kempinski is considering asking the Board to approve a referendum that would appear on either the September ballot or the November ballot.  This referendum would deal with just how Germantown voters desire to fund some $2,000,000 per year in road repairs, if they desire to do so.  The choices apparently would be borrowing, increasing property taxes or a combination of both or none.

The referendum could be advisory or binding in nature.  Obviously, if advisory, the Board would then decide what, if any action it would take, but it would do so with some idea of the public's mood.  If binding, the results would stand as the electorate decided at least until the Board was reconstituted or until the Board found some other approach to achieve the end if that were possible.

If property taxes were increased by $2,000,000 annually, the increase in village taxes over 2008 would be some 20.5% without consideration for any other line item increases in the village budget. It is unrealistic to assume that all other expenses will remain constant.  If the amount were to be borrowed, the debt service would be part of the tax increase each year so that both the amount spent each year plus interest would be added to the tax bills over a number of years.

The village's portion of our total tax bill in 2008 was 24.52%; that share would climb to 30.67% if all other taxing units remained at 2008 levels which, unfortunately, is very unlikely.  The actual increase in total property taxes due to the village's portion of the total could be something in the range of 1% to 2% I would suspect.

Use of a referendum will please some people and anger others.  Some will say that this gives the voter the direct voice on specific items that they otherwise lack in representative government.  Others will say the referendum gives the Board a place to hide; still others will say that there should be no referendum.

There are several questions that come to mind about which you may wish to make your views known:

1.  Do we need $2 million worth of road repair every year?  For how many years?

2.  What portion of the village's road surfaces need to be repaired today? 

3.  Have past Boards avoided their responsibilities and not funded road repairs properly?

4.  Is a referendum a good idea or is it a convenient tool for a Board that doesn't wish to stake out a position that may be very unpopular?

5.  If this referendum appears on the ballot, what impact will that have on any issue the School Board may advance at the same time?

6.  If we are to see a referendum, should it be simply an advisory referendum or should it bind the Board to a specific direction?

What think you G'town?

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.