As a former leader in the Caldwell School District, I would have found it embarrassing if our school board had asked patrons to support an increase in their supplemental property tax charge of 3 times when those patrons are dealing with the same economic realities as schools. It is reported that the increase will go from $71 per $100,000 of value to $208 per $100,000 of value. When there are many patrons of the district unemployed or having to face salary deduction themselves, it is no time to ask them to pay a huge increase in their school supplemental property tax levy. In addition, the district plans to increase their plant facilities levy by over 16% or $50,000 per year, without any justification. Now is not the time for any increase.
Before the election day in May the school board must demonstrate to the Caldwell School District patrons clearly and publicly what they have done to cut costs before they decided to ask the voters for more money, including but not limited to what non-essential positions they have eliminated. There are some of these positions in every school district. Every non-teaching position should be on the “list “ for possible elimination. Also, the District board of Trustees needs to explain to the patrons why a 16% increase in the plant facilities levy is essential at this time. Finally, and very importantly, what is the long-range plan for this escalated supplemental levy? Is it a temporary 2-year levy until state revenues return or is it planned that this historic increase simply becomes part of the on-going tax charge on the Caldwell School District property taxpayers? The Board owes their constituents a thorough explanation why all of these increases are necessary and their long-range plans for the supplemental levy.
Historically the Caldwell School District has supported their schools by approving a supplemental levy for nearly 50 consecutive years. Now it appears that they are going to put that tremendous record at risk. Some consideration might be given to the comment made recently by the neighboring school superintendent from Vallivue when he stated, ““We don’t want to raise taxes on our taxpayers for the years and years and years that they’ve supported us on these levies.” Good point!"
Where are the jobs in this recovery? People on unemployment are doing more with less. All of this looks like schools feel like they are not required to do the same. A 300% increase in the levy is just too much to swallow and the thought of it becoming permanent is just plain wrong.
ReplyDeleteNO will be my answer on this one...
Why is it unreasonable to expect our schools to be run in a business like manner? What privite business could survive using their facilities 180 days out of the year.Subract 180 plus 104 days for weekends 15 days for holidays from 365 and you have 66 days that are not used each year , over 25% of the avaliable days. Under the current schedule ther is not a month in the school year where no days are taken off for one reason or another. When we use the facilities we have fully. Then I would support building more
ReplyDeleteEducation has been the sacred cow of taxation. Even the state legislature found the gumption to make the necessary cuts to keep from raising taxes on people in this recession.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with the voting is most people will not remember to vote on May 18th and only those who want this to pass or fail will make it to the polls.
All district positions that do not interface with students directly in the classroom need to be on the block this time around.
ReplyDeleteAlso, the article by Wayne Hoffman about cadillac benefit packages for teachers should go under the knife before taxes are increased.
Wow, most of these people sound as if they think teaching is an "easy" job. Teachers should do more with less is that what Annonomus 1 said? Do you know how much time teachers put in? I do, my mother was a high school english teacher for over 19 years. Every morning she was at school by 7 so students that "wanted" to come in for help could, and then she would stay after till 5 or sometimes later to help those who wanted help as well. She spent most of her nights (after 9) and Sunday afternoon grading papers. What do you do at night and on Sunday? Watch tv maybe? It is easy to say we tax payers are being asked for a lot right now, and yea we are. But I would rather my taxes go to "educating" our kids than paying for a downtown that will never exist. Maybe if we get sick of the UR district we can start putting our money to good use, like the schools and teachers. Because if we don't, the teachers will go elsewhere and our kids will be so stupid they think UR districts are the way to go.
ReplyDeleteWe need teachers and good schools more than fancy water ways and wine tasting resturants and condos on the creek. The voters of Caldwell don't see it that way, well I will tell you I do, and I will vote to raise "my" taxes so my kids can have an education that may take them somewhere other than the food stamp line.
Paul, ask the school district and get it posted before the election on Tuesday: How much if any tax revenue otherwise due to the school district is siphoned away because of urban renewal.
ReplyDeleteWill,
ReplyDeleteTeachers are valuable, and unfortunately the district doesn't pay them what they are worth. However, paying them a fair wage is a district policy issue. While others are trimming back, the school district is asking for more. Why don't some of the large salaries of the district office employees get cut? "They" ask the teachers to forgo a rightfully owed raise for another year? Something just isn't right. I will be voting NO on Tuesday.
I just read in the IPT that the levy would include $580,00 for SECONDARY athletics and activities, with no money going toward teacher salaries? Money well spend? No.
ReplyDeleteOh, I meant $580,000!
ReplyDeleteIt is ironic 1200 patrons are all that voted. Maybe it was a result of the hand picked attempt at the yes voters from previous years. These people need to stop thinking that the voters paying more is their form of fiscal responsibility.
ReplyDeleteWill,
ReplyDeleteWhy do I read in the paper the school district wants to raise taxes to fund the building of new buildings and at the same time says they will cut positions because there isn't enough money. There is enough to pay all those teachers. The reason why they want to raise taxes is to build new school buildings we can't afford and they are obviously willing to sacrifice teachers positions to do it. This is wrong no matter which way you look at it. Cut the new buildings out of the picture, keep the teachers, wait for the economy to recover and ask again later and you will have my support. This is CSD's problem and they need to learn to make do like everyone else in this crappy economy.