Don't forget, the school district also now has to pay an additional $30,000? a year for Milton's new stormwater utility. I imagine that plays into the high levy as well. Quite honestly, I'd rather give my tax money to the school district than the city.

abluedevil,
Thank you for making an informational post. It is a change for this blog.

If you are going to attend an annual meeting and speak on the issues at hand you may consider educating yourself on the issues involved so you don't sound foolish. Anybody can say anything but there is reality to deal with (bargaining laws, the WERC, and arbitration). I expect more from someone with a background in education with a column (such as it is) in a local newspaper.

1. Governor Doyle's elimination of the QEO and his changes to the arbitration rules mean that any District that puts "a compensation freeze on the table in negotiations with the teachers (MEA)" is journeying down a losing path. The board's final offer is 0%, the MEA's final offer is 7% - it's all about the comparables and the board loses so instead of paying 4% increase they have to pay 7%.

2. Before you "argue that the SD-Milton Board should have issued MORE LAY-OFF NOTICES to protect itself with the property tax payers" you might investigate the timelines specified in the state statutes and MEA contract language as to when you must issue teachers non-renewal (layoff) notices. The Dems left schools with few options to deal with their last minute 3.1% cut in aid.

3. Have fun discussing school finance issues with Kim Hixon - he doesn't have a clue. Probably still shouting "the QEO has got to go" with no understanding of the consequences of his words or actions.

4. Teachers do not make $30,000 with benefits. They make $30,000 without benefits (if they are inexperienced). Beginning teachers start at $25,000-$35,000 and their health insurance alone costs at least $7,500 if they are single and $15,000 if they are married (more if the District is still stuck with WEA insurance). For veteran teachers, you'll be hard pressed to find a District with a max salary of less than $60,000 (not bad for 10 months of work a year).

5. If you want teachers to deal with layoffs and furloughs then I assume you want students to deal with class sizes of greater than 30 across the board. Unless you can furlough the students you cannot furlough the teachers.

If you want to attack teachers, go ahead, but at least do so as an informed taxpayer - if you think there is any chance of actually achieving a wage freeze though, you are kidding yourself (and your District will only have to pay its attorneys $15,000-$25,000 to take your losing 0% offer to arbitration).

Teachers make $30K a year with benefits and all of sudden some we the people jerk is telling us that's too much? The criminal-minded teachers maximum salary ceiling is less than $50K in some small towns and now we want to take away a 4% annual raise? People's unemployment checks are larger than a teacher's check. Let me know when teacher's get the same pay and free health care that GM employees got and then I'll complain.

Being a property owner myself I agree that taxes are a major issues and elected officials need to watch their spending habits and how it reflects to the taxpayer. Like stated above it is hard for local government to keep taxes frozen when the state has basically forced them to be the "bad guys". With that being said I have a very hard time reading about how it is always the teachers that are the bad guys. Is it true that many people in this area have faced layoffs...absolutely. Yet are there still people who kept their jobs and are getting minimal raises...yes. You have to remember teachers are on 2 year contracts, so because of what is happening now we should freeze all pay increases for teachers until 2011 no matter the increase in education level and years of experience? I get very frustrated to read the comments posted making it always the teachers that are the horrible citizens when it comes to school taxing and they should be the one to sacrafice.

What....Robson and Hixson didn't bother to show up at the meeting? Why am I not surprised?

Although, in effect, districts have to tax to the max, they are not forced to spend to the max. They could easily put the extra tax money into working capital, lowering borrowing costs and lessening the needs for future referendums. That piece of state law is a canard that the boards can rely on to justify continuous increases in spending.

Can you CHILL with the ALL CAPS? It makes me feel like I'm reading some spam email message.

POSTSCRIPT - After posting this blog, I read the New York Times' article, "Tax Bills Put Pressure on Struggling Homeowners" http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/18/busine....

The article reflects the same message to tax levying elected representatives which I heard at our SD-Milton ANNUAL MEETING last evening.

I dare to HOPE the elected representatives are LISTENING & HEARING! Are you all? Specifically - YOU the reps of SD-Milton: Senator Robson? Representative Hixson?

Here we go... Mr. E.

Well said John Eyster! Why does the general population have to deal with layoffs, furloughs and pay freezes and teachers do not? Do they not live in the same world we do? Do they not know the current state of the economy? As long as the teacher unions are involved, school boards and taxpayers are powerless.