Keep running to improve Wisconsin Schools
A Wisconsin State Journal editorial | Posted: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 10:00 pm|
Education Secretary Arne Duncan announces finalists in the second round of the federal “Race to the Top” competition. Wisconsin didn’t make the list but must continue to hustle to improve.
DREW ANGERER — Associated Press
Wisconsin just lost another race to improve its public schools.
It's disappointing.
Yet our state still needs to keep running — even if there's no longer a pot of federal money at the finish line.
The future of so many struggling Wisconsin students, especially in Milwaukee, depends on it.
U.S. Department of Education Secretary Arne Duncan on Tuesday announced 18 states and Washington, D.C., as finalists in the national competition for billions of dollars in federal school innovation grants. Illinois and Ohio were the only Midwestern states to advance in the second round of Duncan and President Barack Obama's "Race to the Top" initiative.
It wasn't surprising that Wisconsin fell out of contention so early in its latest bid for $254 million in federal grants, including $8 million for Madison. Wisconsin previously missed being on the list of finalists in the first round of "Race to the Top" grants. And the Legislature had failed to show federal officials that Wisconsin was serious about shaking up Milwaukee's failing public schools.
Regardless, this is no time to stop hustling to improve our schools. Obama's competitive grant contest won't deliver any money for innovation here, but it did prompt the state to start improving its evaluation system for principals and teachers.
The Legislature also has given state Superintendent of Schools Tony Evers some limited power to force change in Milwaukee. Evers can demand more continuity in Milwaukee's school curriculum and require more help for struggling students.
In addition, a new state law makes it easier to remove principals from poor-performing Milwaukee schools.
Evers told the State Journal editorial board on Tuesday he's optimistic his new powers can make a difference. We urge Evers to aggressively use what new powers he has.
Plans for a public boarding school for Milwaukee students on the verge of dropping out is another positive development. It will be a charter school with more freedom to try new ways of motivating at-risk teens.
Wisconsin needs to pick up its pace on transforming public education across the state. The most important race isn't for federal dollars. It's the race to save more Wisconsin students from dropping out into a lifelong rut of poverty and social problems.
Posted in Editorial on Tuesday, July 27, 2010 10:00 pm Updated: 10:06 pm. Editorial, Race To The Top, Schools, Arne Duncan, Department Of Education, Barack Obama, Milwaukee School District, Tony Evers, Public School
Wisconsin not included among Race to the Top grant finalists
By CLAY BARBOUR | cbarbour@madison.com | 608-235-1090 | Posted: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 6:00 pm |
Education Secretary Arne Duncan speaks about the federal "Race to the Top" school reform grant competition, Tuesday, July 27, 2010, at the National Press Club in Washington. Wisconsin was not included.
Drew Angerer
Related Stories
Related: 18 states, DC are education reform grant finalists
Related: Wis. not named in 2nd round of education grants
For the second time this year, Wisconsin has lost out on a share of billions in federal aid for schools.
The U.S. Department of Education announced Tuesday the 19 finalists — mostly southern and eastern states — in the second round of the "Race to the Top" school reform grant competition, which gives participants a chance to win a share of $3.4 billion.
"It's hard to know how the applications were scored, but it's pretty clear that the quality of a state's education system was not taken into account," said Gov. Jim Doyle, who also noted that no state in the upper Midwest reached the finals in either round.
Thirty-five states and the District of Columbia applied for the second round. A total of 46 states and the District of Columbia applied for either the first or second rounds — or both.
Applicants' scores and reviews are kept confidential until after the winners are announced, but disappointed education officials praised the state's efforts Tuesday and were optimistic about what the process has meant to the state.
"Just by being among the 36 applicants for funding we laid the groundwork for major change in public education for the students, educators, parents, and citizens of Wisconsin," said State Superintendent Tony Evers.
Wisconsin failed to reach the finals of the first round in March, missing out then on a share of $4 billion in federal aid. The state was seeking $254 million, including $8 million for Madison.
The state's application, submitted in January, focused on early childhood development, addressing the achievement drop-off between middle and high schools, and developing good teachers and principals.
According to the Education Department, Wisconsin's first-round bid ranked 26th out of 41. One reviewer said the state's application "fared poorly in securing signatures (of support) from local teacher union leaders" and the state earned a "mixed rating for improving student outcomes."
The winners of that round were Delaware, which won almost $100 million, and Tennessee, which won $500 million.
For the second round, Wisconsin was asking for $250 million, at least $4 million of which was for Madison. The application outlined a plan for improving education that included:
• Raising education standards by leading a consortium of 47 states in developing performance benchmarks.
• Changing the state's testing process to provide more meaningful information to teachers and parents.
• Increasing support for teachers through mentoring for new teachers and coaching for struggling teachers.
Doyle said Tuesday that education reforms passed last year strengthened Wisconsin's education system, provided more authority for administrators to turn around failing schools in Milwaukee and instituted a system for placing top-level teachers and principals in schools that need the most help.
"It is important that we follow through on the reforms we made together with or without Race to the Top funding because they are a real benefit to our students," he said.
Last fall, the state removed the prohibition on using student achievement to evaluate teachers and began work on new methods for measuring student growth and success, as well as evaluating the success of education programs.
"That was a step in the right direction, but not a big step," said Allan Odden, a Race to the Top expert with UW-Madison's Wisconsin Center for Education Research. "Other states went farther than we did and that's ultimately why we rated lower."
Odden said Race to the Top is designed to promote major overhauls of education systems and that most education officials in the Midwest simply feel their systems need minor fixes.
But State Rep. Brett Davis, R-Oregon, the ranking Republican on the state's education committee, said he wasn't surprised to learn the state didn't make the cut.
He said Assembly and Senate Democrats rammed through weak legislation in an effort to bring the state in line with Race to the Top guidelines.
"All session long, education reform ideas offered by Republicans were not even considered or were voted down," he said, referring to proposals that would have directly linked test scores to teacher evaluations and strengthened efforts to discipline poor-performing teachers. "Clearly the lobbying efforts by WEAC, which were top in the state in 2009, paid off and will keep the status quo."
Wisconsin's application had the support of more than 80 percent of local teacher union leaders and more than 96 percent of the state's school districts and charter schools.
"It was a very collaborative effort," said Mary Bell, president of Wisconsin Education Association Council, the state's largest teachers union. "Educators across the state are disappointed. But the reforms in the application are sound reforms. We will move forward on them, it just might take more time without the federal funding."
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Sunday, July 25, 2010
School Funding a Touchy Subject - Reply
Open letter to John Forester of the School Administrator's Alliance, Miles Turner of WI Assoc. of School District Administrators; cc'd Tom Beebe, John Matthews of MTI, State Rep Mark Pocan, MMSD Board.
Good afternoon. I hope all of you had a nice weekend.
I usually start my morning by reading the WI State Journal and today I caught a story about funding our state's schools and each candidates position (or non-position) on how to fund or not fund.
Mr. Forester and Mr. Turner made a comment about how the current funding formula for schools is not working any longer. We need to start looking at alternatives and they are available - we just have to make sure we act to make the changes needed to help save our schools. We also need to make sure that our legislators hear us about such options. I have written a select few about options researched and presented by MTI and myself but have received no reply.
It has been presented that a 1% increase in the state sales tax would help solve many of the problems that are facing our schools. Even a 1/2 % would help. Dane County may be asking for a 1/2% sales tax increase for commuter rail - why not for schools, too?
The State is not going to increase its funding to ours schools any time soon and will likely continue to cut. We can not continue to do the same thing and expect a different result. By this I mean we can not continue to go to the property tax owner and keep cutting programs and teachers if our student population rises. The property owner's well has about dried up and speaking as a Madison resident, we soon will not be able to afford to live in the city because of the heavy burden the levy has caused us. Schools will have to become leaner and more efficient but we can prevent the bankruptcy scenario Mr. Forester mentioned in today's paper (see link below).
It is unfortunate that Wisconsin did not qualify for the Race-To-The-Top federal funding program this year as this would have helped us in the short term.
Our communities are also facing losing the property tax credit. We also have our local technical colleges asking for added funding. We must get this under control and we need your help to work together and resolve these problems. There are also many other ways we need our local communities to work with us to address altering the tax code.
Mr. John Matthews was kind enough to forward me the Foundation Plan research by MTI and its potential related cost savings if implemented. It was presented to the assembly and nothing has been done as far as I know.
I have attached some related material for review.
http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt_and_politics/elections/article_b0d53e22-4d53-5a77-ac71-19a160bdeaaf.html
I sincerely hope that we can work together to get this done and get our schools back on track.
Thank you,
C. Damian Michaelis
Madison WI
P.S.
Similar funding is being asked for with a program called "A Penny For Kids.
Wisconsin Schools Need our Help!
As a result of Wisconsin’s flawed school funding system, the amount of money going to our schools has not matched the rising cost of quality education.
Therefore, communities around the state have been forced to lay off staff, increase class sizes, cut programs and services, and increase their reliance on already overburdened property taxpayers. This crisis situation was made even worse when the state government decided to cut aid to public schools.
Now it is our turn to step forward. A “Penny for Kids” is all it will take to provide for our children and maintain the high quality of life that our communities deserve.
Sign the "Penny for Kids" petition to tell Wisconsin legislators that our schools need their attention now and a penny-for-kids sales tax increase is a good way to start
Go to: http://www.apennyforkids.org/ To sign the petition.
http://www.apennyforkids.org/the-need.html - The need.
http://www.apennyforkids.org/who-we-are.html - Who we are.
Good afternoon. I hope all of you had a nice weekend.
I usually start my morning by reading the WI State Journal and today I caught a story about funding our state's schools and each candidates position (or non-position) on how to fund or not fund.
Mr. Forester and Mr. Turner made a comment about how the current funding formula for schools is not working any longer. We need to start looking at alternatives and they are available - we just have to make sure we act to make the changes needed to help save our schools. We also need to make sure that our legislators hear us about such options. I have written a select few about options researched and presented by MTI and myself but have received no reply.
It has been presented that a 1% increase in the state sales tax would help solve many of the problems that are facing our schools. Even a 1/2 % would help. Dane County may be asking for a 1/2% sales tax increase for commuter rail - why not for schools, too?
The State is not going to increase its funding to ours schools any time soon and will likely continue to cut. We can not continue to do the same thing and expect a different result. By this I mean we can not continue to go to the property tax owner and keep cutting programs and teachers if our student population rises. The property owner's well has about dried up and speaking as a Madison resident, we soon will not be able to afford to live in the city because of the heavy burden the levy has caused us. Schools will have to become leaner and more efficient but we can prevent the bankruptcy scenario Mr. Forester mentioned in today's paper (see link below).
It is unfortunate that Wisconsin did not qualify for the Race-To-The-Top federal funding program this year as this would have helped us in the short term.
Our communities are also facing losing the property tax credit. We also have our local technical colleges asking for added funding. We must get this under control and we need your help to work together and resolve these problems. There are also many other ways we need our local communities to work with us to address altering the tax code.
Mr. John Matthews was kind enough to forward me the Foundation Plan research by MTI and its potential related cost savings if implemented. It was presented to the assembly and nothing has been done as far as I know.
I have attached some related material for review.
http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt_and_politics/elections/article_b0d53e22-4d53-5a77-ac71-19a160bdeaaf.html
I sincerely hope that we can work together to get this done and get our schools back on track.
Thank you,
C. Damian Michaelis
Madison WI
P.S.
Similar funding is being asked for with a program called "A Penny For Kids.
Wisconsin Schools Need our Help!
As a result of Wisconsin’s flawed school funding system, the amount of money going to our schools has not matched the rising cost of quality education.
Therefore, communities around the state have been forced to lay off staff, increase class sizes, cut programs and services, and increase their reliance on already overburdened property taxpayers. This crisis situation was made even worse when the state government decided to cut aid to public schools.
Now it is our turn to step forward. A “Penny for Kids” is all it will take to provide for our children and maintain the high quality of life that our communities deserve.
Sign the "Penny for Kids" petition to tell Wisconsin legislators that our schools need their attention now and a penny-for-kids sales tax increase is a good way to start
Go to: http://www.apennyforkids.org/ To sign the petition.
http://www.apennyforkids.org/the-need.html - The need.
http://www.apennyforkids.org/who-we-are.html - Who we are.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Nine Out of Ten WI State Law Makers Gave Themselves a 5.3% Raise January 2009
At the end of January 2009, during the worst recession this country has ever faced, The WI State Assembly decided to give themselves a pay raise of 5.3% while the State of WI was on record to exceed a $5.7 billion deficit. Thousands of state workers were laid off and HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of American workers were losing their jobs.
Find out who these elected "representatives" were by reading the attached link to the article in the Wisconsin State Journal. 10 elected officials gave the money back: Senators Alberta Darling, Jon Erpenbach, Ted, Kanavas, Dan Kapanke, Joe Leibham, Dale Schultz. Representatives; Steve Hilgenberg, Dan Knodl, Margaret Krusick, Keith Ripp.
I have listed on a separate post on how to contact your senators and representatives. Please contact them and ask them why they gave themselves the raise while many of the people who put them in office were suffering. And remember; elections are in November! Please vote your conscience.
Find out who these elected "representatives" were by reading the attached link to the article in the Wisconsin State Journal. 10 elected officials gave the money back: Senators Alberta Darling, Jon Erpenbach, Ted, Kanavas, Dan Kapanke, Joe Leibham, Dale Schultz. Representatives; Steve Hilgenberg, Dan Knodl, Margaret Krusick, Keith Ripp.
I have listed on a separate post on how to contact your senators and representatives. Please contact them and ask them why they gave themselves the raise while many of the people who put them in office were suffering. And remember; elections are in November! Please vote your conscience.
Petition: Add Sales Tax for Commuter Rail?
DATE 21 DANE ADVOCATES FOR TRANSPORTATION EFFICIENCY IN THE 21ST CENTURY
We, the undersigned residents of Dane County Wisconsin, strongly urge the Dane County Board of Supervisors to place the following referendum question on the November 2, 2010, General Election ballot.
"Shall commuter rail from Middleton to the Town of Burke be funded by a half-cent (0.5%) increase in the sales tax?"
1. The Regional Transportation Authority (RTA), created by the Dane County Board of Supervisors in November 2009, is an appointed body authorized to increase the sales tax by 0.5% to 6.0%, primarily for the purpose of building a commuter rail line in the Madison area (from Middleton through Madison’s isthmus to the Town of Burke).
2. The residents of Dane County must approve the RTA’s decision to construct a commuter rail line funded by an increase in the sales tax for this rail line to be recognized as legitimate.
3. The essential elements of any commuter rail line proposed by the RTA are sufficiently well known for voters to decide whether or not they favor having commuter rail in the Madison area; no further resources should be expended to develop commuter rail in the Madison area without residents’ approval.
Link to sign online petition is: http://www.StopTheTrainTax.org The petition can be downloaded for print extra copies and there's even an online petition to sign for everyone.
OR
Email: MIKEDATE21@GMAIL.COM for more information.
We, the undersigned residents of Dane County Wisconsin, strongly urge the Dane County Board of Supervisors to place the following referendum question on the November 2, 2010, General Election ballot.
"Shall commuter rail from Middleton to the Town of Burke be funded by a half-cent (0.5%) increase in the sales tax?"
1. The Regional Transportation Authority (RTA), created by the Dane County Board of Supervisors in November 2009, is an appointed body authorized to increase the sales tax by 0.5% to 6.0%, primarily for the purpose of building a commuter rail line in the Madison area (from Middleton through Madison’s isthmus to the Town of Burke).
2. The residents of Dane County must approve the RTA’s decision to construct a commuter rail line funded by an increase in the sales tax for this rail line to be recognized as legitimate.
3. The essential elements of any commuter rail line proposed by the RTA are sufficiently well known for voters to decide whether or not they favor having commuter rail in the Madison area; no further resources should be expended to develop commuter rail in the Madison area without residents’ approval.
Link to sign online petition is: http://www.StopTheTrainTax.org The petition can be downloaded for print extra copies and there's even an online petition to sign for everyone.
OR
Email: MIKEDATE21@GMAIL.COM for more information.
Monday, July 19, 2010
Madison Schools Biggest Loser
http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/education/local_schools/article_419c64fc-3fcd-5186-... 6/7/2010
Madison schools -- the biggest loser
By SUSAN TROLLER | The Capital Times | stroller@madison.com | Posted: Wednesday, November 4, 2009 4:00 am
Despite an ailing economy, Madison School Board members were guardedly optimistic last spring as they put together the district's preliminary 2009-2010 budget. The community had overwhelmingly passed a referendum the previous fall that allowed the district to exceed state revenue caps, providing an extra $13 million to the district through 2012.
As a result, the board was anticipating a rare year where public school programs and services were not on the chopping block and was looking forward to crafting a budget with minimal property tax increases. Initial projections worked out to a $2.50 increase on an average $250,000 Madison home on this year's tax bill.
For once, it looked as if both parents and taxpayers would be happy with the budget, a rare scenario in Wisconsin where school spending formulas and revenue caps often seem tailor-made to pit taxpayers against school advocates.
But the preliminary budget plan the Madison district drew up and approved in May predated the news that Wisconsin's revenue situation was far worse than predicted. The result was a steep reduction in what the state's 438 school districts would get from Wisconsin's general school aid fund. The drop in general school aid amounted to $149 million, or 3 percent.
These cuts, however, would not be shared equally across every district, and the formula used was particularly unkind to Madison,which overnight saw a gaping hole of more than $9 million, a drop in aid not seen by any other district in the state.
"We were so happy last spring. In retrospect, it was really kind of pitiful," says Lucy Mathiak, vice president of Madison's School Board. The mood was decidedly more downbeat, she notes, in late October when the board gave its final approval to the $350 million 2009-2010 school district budget.
When property tax bills go out in December, taxpayers will be hit with a $92 increase in property taxes on a $250,000 home, far higher than the modest $2.50 increase the board had predicted in May. Next year looks even worse, with a budget gap now predicted to be somewhere between $23 million and $25 million for the Madison school district, said Erik Kass, the assistant superintendent for business services. With the prospect of steep cuts in education as well as the potential for a new round of tax increases, the road ahead looks rocky.
What happened? How did a formula designed to "equalize" resources among disparate school districts in Wisconsin create some of the unkindest cuts for Madison, the state's second-largest urban school district, with nearly half of its students qualifying for free or reduced lunch? And where was the help from powerful Democrats in state government who had championed school funding reform when they were the minority party in the Legislature?
The swift turnabout in Madison has left Madison School Board members bitter and exasperated. They're deeply frustrated with the arcane shared-revenue formula that hits Madison especially hard and with 15 years of revenue caps that have forced school districts to pass budgets that couldn't keep up with the rising costs.
As Arlene Silveira, Madison School Board president, puts it: "We've been talking for years about how this system is horribly broken, yet no one seems able to really step forward to change it."
Funding of education in Wisconsin is a three-part exercise involving money from the state aid fund collected through income and sales taxes; local property taxes; and funding from the federal government, mostly in the form of aid for low-income students and those with disabilities.
The funding formula, so complex it makes the tax code look like beach reading, seeks to equalize the cost of education among the state's poor and rich districts by distributing state aid based on each school district's relative affluence.
The system determines the wealth of a community through its property values, not income or ability to pay. Generally speaking, school districts in communities with high property values get less money from the state to educate their children because of their supposed ability to raise money through property taxes, while communities with low property values get more money to fill in what they are not able to raise through property taxes.
The state funding formula also takes into account the cost of education per student, which, on average statewide, is currently a little over $10,000 (excluding transportation costs, capital and debt service), according to figures from the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance, a nonpartisan watchdog group that gathers annual data on revenue, expenditures and other comparative information on public schools.
The funding formula first focuses on how much money a district can raise through property taxes to pay those costs and then, using the pot of state general aid, fills in to help the district reach the average amount. Multiple factors, including things like higher-than-average costs per student or declining enrollments, reduce the amount of money a district receives in general aid.
Madison, with 24,496 students, 47 percent of whom qualify for free or reduced lunch, will this year get just over $51.5 million in general state aid. The district got hit especially hard this time around because, unlike much of the rest of the state, its property values remained relatively stable despite the slump in the housing market. It did have some company in this regard. The Middleton-Cross Plains School District in Dane County, property-rich districts around northern Wisconsin lakes, and suburban areas in the greater Milwaukee area were also socked with the maximum 15 percent reduction in state aid because of their high
property values.
But unlike many suburban districts with high property values, Madison has other challenges, including a significant population of low-income students, English language learners and children with disabilities. The cost to educate these children is high, partly because of state and federal mandates that describe in detail what's required to provide an adequate education.
Unfortunately for Madison, the state general aid formula doesn't account for these high-needs students when calculating who gets what. Meanwhile, the percentage of funding available from government through "categorical" aids targeted at these students has been steadily dropping for more than a decade.
"You may disagree with the goals, but when push comes to shove, the formula generally does a pretty good job of leveling the playing field," says Todd Berry, president of the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance. "That said, there's one kind of district - with Madison being an example - where the formula doesn't meet its goals as well."
The kind of district Berry is describing is one where property values are high as are the number of high-need students. That produces high per-pupil spending, which the formula penalizes.
Other urban districts in Wisconsin fare better when it comes to getting aid from the state's general fund, according to figures fromthe Department of Public Instruction:
* Milwaukee, with 87,376 students and a poverty rate of 77 percent, will get about $584.5 million in state aid. Milwaukee lost just under half a percent compared to last year's state aid distribution.
* Green Bay, with a new 4K program, 20,573 students and a poverty rate of 52 percent, increased its aid allotment over last year by about 1 percent and will get $126 million from the state aid fund.
* Eau Claire, with 10,725 students, 33 percent of them eligible for free and reduced lunch, gets more state aid than Madison: $58.4 million, a drop of about 4 percent from last year.
Rep. Sondy Pope-Roberts, D-Middleton, chairwoman of the Wisconsin Assembly's education committee, says part of the problem is that the changing demographics of the Madison school district, with nearly a 50 percent poverty rate, have not yet pierced the perception around the state that the district largely consists of well-off families.
"You do hear the comments," she says. "'Oh, Madison. Their idea of really cutting back is eliminating 4th grade strings.'"
Madison School Board members are feeling particularly stung by this year's budget cuts because, the economy notwithstanding, they thought this year might be different. After years of Republican control of the Statehouse, not only were Democrats in control of the Legislature and governor's office, but Madison-area lawmakers were in charge of the budget process.
As co-chairs of the Joint Finance Committee, the Legislature's powerful budget-writing panel, Sen. Mark Miller and Rep. Mark Pocan were arguably in the most powerful positions to influence the process.
But board members say they got little help from Democratic leaders, both on the specific problems surrounding the 2009-2010 budget and on broader questions about fixing the state's long-term school funding.
"I understand that the economy is terrible, but for years we heard that the reason we had this school funding mess was because we had Republicans in charge who were basically content with the status quo," says board member Marj Passman. "I had expected so much change and leadership on school funding issues with a Democratic governor and a Democratic Legislature. Honestly, we've got Rep. Pocan and Sen. Miller as co-chairs of the Joint Finance Committee and Democratic majorities in both houses! Frankly, it's been a huge disappointment. I'd love to see that little beer tax raised and have it go to education."
Adds Silveira: "There's been a great deal of talk about the importance of education and improving the system but very little real action that really helps us do a better job of meeting both student needs and taxpayer needs."
She says all local municipal officials bear a particularly heavy burden, forced to cut budgets and services and go back on their promises to hold the line on property taxes.
"By the time we found out about what a huge hit we were taking in aid from the state, we were already close to the end of our fiscal year and were locked into most contracts and programs for the school year. Basically, our hands were tied," Silveira says. "The trouble with the politicians is that they tell us that they won't raise taxes, but that we can. It puts us in a horrible position with our own community, which has been so supportive of our schools. It doesn't seem fair."
Although Pocan is sympathetic to the frustrations of Madison School Board members, he says he and other legislators must balance the needs of the entire state. He agrees with Silveira and others that the funding system needs a "complete overhaul" but says that kind of change would likely come with a huge price tag, which some school funding experts suggest could reach a billion dollars.
"Given the current economy, that's not feasible," he says. "I'd love to do something that helps Madison, but the system is so complex with 20 or 30 threads all together that if you just pull one, something else unravels."
He argues that even returning $100 million to the state general aid fund for this budget cycle wouldn't have helped Madison because the current formula would direct the vast majority to other districts that get more favorable treatment under the existing system.
Andrew Reschovsky, a University of Wisconsin economist and expert on school funding, concurs that Madison was hit harderthan other districts.
"The real problem is the longer-term structural problems with the funding system. Some aspects of the existing formula really penalize Madison because it doesn't reflect the district's challenges of educating a student population with a high poverty rate and multiple languages," he says.
Frustration over school funding is nothing new. For years, various groups, from academic experts to legislative panels, have studied how to make the state's multibillion-dollar system more sustainable and more equitable.
But when it comes to changing the law, little of substance has happened, reflecting the political difficulties of bridging deep divisions between what various school districts and communities want, as well as between various school stakeholders, from the teachers union to school board members to taxpayer groups.
Pope-Roberts has been involved with education issues, including funding reform, since she was elected to the Assembly in 2002.
She says Wisconsin's current dismal economy constrains even those who are most committed to education and most dedicated to exploring a range of ideas.
"It's very bad out there in the state. I think there may actually be some school districts that simply won't have enough money to operate after this year."
But Pocan and Pope-Roberts say they see glimmers of hope in some new, broad-based coalitions that are coming together to work on school funding reform.
For example, the School Finance Network includes representatives from the Wisconsin Association of School District Administrators, the Wisconsin Education Association Council, the Wisconsin Parent Teacher Association and the Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools, among others.
Despite political differences that often put them at fierce odds in the past, as a group they agree that the current funding system is divisive, unsustainable and the reason many school districts lurch from budget to budget, with expenses rising faster than allowable tax increases.
In its literature, the network notes that education has a profound long-term impact on Wisconsin's economy and, that, if current conditions continue, it won't be long before a number of school districts will be insolvent.
Thomas Mertz, spokesman for the Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools, says the state funding system also has the unintended consequence of dividing communities instead of bringing them together through their schools. "Under the current system, the state shifts much of the tax burden and the blame to the local level," he says. "Yeah, it's difficult for anyone to raise taxes in this economy but the current system is broken."
Mertz, who teaches at Edgewood College and is a Madison district parent and longtime observer of public school issues, says his group of parents and concerned citizens is advocating for a sales tax increase - a program it describes as Pennies for Kids. While the proposal is not in a final form, he says he is hopeful the state Legislature will consider a 1 percent hike in the state sales tax.
"A penny boost in the sales tax would bring us in line with surrounding states and would provide $830 million a year in aid for education," Mertz says.
The extra pennies would surely be welcomed in the coming years. With approval of the 2009-2010 budget under its belt, the Madison School Board is already beginning to focus on ways to address the larger shortfalls predicted for the following year.
And so are other districts around the state. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel recently reported that some suburban districts in the Milwaukee area are already hearing from residents unhappy about double-digit increases in local tax levies, and are considering potential program changes like combining athletic teams.
"If there's a silver lining in this, and if you were a real optimist, you could say that this current crisis may, finally, lead to system reform," says UW's Reschovsky. "I'm not sure I believe that, though."
Madison schools -- the biggest loser
By SUSAN TROLLER | The Capital Times | stroller@madison.com | Posted: Wednesday, November 4, 2009 4:00 am
Despite an ailing economy, Madison School Board members were guardedly optimistic last spring as they put together the district's preliminary 2009-2010 budget. The community had overwhelmingly passed a referendum the previous fall that allowed the district to exceed state revenue caps, providing an extra $13 million to the district through 2012.
As a result, the board was anticipating a rare year where public school programs and services were not on the chopping block and was looking forward to crafting a budget with minimal property tax increases. Initial projections worked out to a $2.50 increase on an average $250,000 Madison home on this year's tax bill.
For once, it looked as if both parents and taxpayers would be happy with the budget, a rare scenario in Wisconsin where school spending formulas and revenue caps often seem tailor-made to pit taxpayers against school advocates.
But the preliminary budget plan the Madison district drew up and approved in May predated the news that Wisconsin's revenue situation was far worse than predicted. The result was a steep reduction in what the state's 438 school districts would get from Wisconsin's general school aid fund. The drop in general school aid amounted to $149 million, or 3 percent.
These cuts, however, would not be shared equally across every district, and the formula used was particularly unkind to Madison,which overnight saw a gaping hole of more than $9 million, a drop in aid not seen by any other district in the state.
"We were so happy last spring. In retrospect, it was really kind of pitiful," says Lucy Mathiak, vice president of Madison's School Board. The mood was decidedly more downbeat, she notes, in late October when the board gave its final approval to the $350 million 2009-2010 school district budget.
When property tax bills go out in December, taxpayers will be hit with a $92 increase in property taxes on a $250,000 home, far higher than the modest $2.50 increase the board had predicted in May. Next year looks even worse, with a budget gap now predicted to be somewhere between $23 million and $25 million for the Madison school district, said Erik Kass, the assistant superintendent for business services. With the prospect of steep cuts in education as well as the potential for a new round of tax increases, the road ahead looks rocky.
What happened? How did a formula designed to "equalize" resources among disparate school districts in Wisconsin create some of the unkindest cuts for Madison, the state's second-largest urban school district, with nearly half of its students qualifying for free or reduced lunch? And where was the help from powerful Democrats in state government who had championed school funding reform when they were the minority party in the Legislature?
The swift turnabout in Madison has left Madison School Board members bitter and exasperated. They're deeply frustrated with the arcane shared-revenue formula that hits Madison especially hard and with 15 years of revenue caps that have forced school districts to pass budgets that couldn't keep up with the rising costs.
As Arlene Silveira, Madison School Board president, puts it: "We've been talking for years about how this system is horribly broken, yet no one seems able to really step forward to change it."
Funding of education in Wisconsin is a three-part exercise involving money from the state aid fund collected through income and sales taxes; local property taxes; and funding from the federal government, mostly in the form of aid for low-income students and those with disabilities.
The funding formula, so complex it makes the tax code look like beach reading, seeks to equalize the cost of education among the state's poor and rich districts by distributing state aid based on each school district's relative affluence.
The system determines the wealth of a community through its property values, not income or ability to pay. Generally speaking, school districts in communities with high property values get less money from the state to educate their children because of their supposed ability to raise money through property taxes, while communities with low property values get more money to fill in what they are not able to raise through property taxes.
The state funding formula also takes into account the cost of education per student, which, on average statewide, is currently a little over $10,000 (excluding transportation costs, capital and debt service), according to figures from the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance, a nonpartisan watchdog group that gathers annual data on revenue, expenditures and other comparative information on public schools.
The funding formula first focuses on how much money a district can raise through property taxes to pay those costs and then, using the pot of state general aid, fills in to help the district reach the average amount. Multiple factors, including things like higher-than-average costs per student or declining enrollments, reduce the amount of money a district receives in general aid.
Madison, with 24,496 students, 47 percent of whom qualify for free or reduced lunch, will this year get just over $51.5 million in general state aid. The district got hit especially hard this time around because, unlike much of the rest of the state, its property values remained relatively stable despite the slump in the housing market. It did have some company in this regard. The Middleton-Cross Plains School District in Dane County, property-rich districts around northern Wisconsin lakes, and suburban areas in the greater Milwaukee area were also socked with the maximum 15 percent reduction in state aid because of their high
property values.
But unlike many suburban districts with high property values, Madison has other challenges, including a significant population of low-income students, English language learners and children with disabilities. The cost to educate these children is high, partly because of state and federal mandates that describe in detail what's required to provide an adequate education.
Unfortunately for Madison, the state general aid formula doesn't account for these high-needs students when calculating who gets what. Meanwhile, the percentage of funding available from government through "categorical" aids targeted at these students has been steadily dropping for more than a decade.
"You may disagree with the goals, but when push comes to shove, the formula generally does a pretty good job of leveling the playing field," says Todd Berry, president of the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance. "That said, there's one kind of district - with Madison being an example - where the formula doesn't meet its goals as well."
The kind of district Berry is describing is one where property values are high as are the number of high-need students. That produces high per-pupil spending, which the formula penalizes.
Other urban districts in Wisconsin fare better when it comes to getting aid from the state's general fund, according to figures fromthe Department of Public Instruction:
* Milwaukee, with 87,376 students and a poverty rate of 77 percent, will get about $584.5 million in state aid. Milwaukee lost just under half a percent compared to last year's state aid distribution.
* Green Bay, with a new 4K program, 20,573 students and a poverty rate of 52 percent, increased its aid allotment over last year by about 1 percent and will get $126 million from the state aid fund.
* Eau Claire, with 10,725 students, 33 percent of them eligible for free and reduced lunch, gets more state aid than Madison: $58.4 million, a drop of about 4 percent from last year.
Rep. Sondy Pope-Roberts, D-Middleton, chairwoman of the Wisconsin Assembly's education committee, says part of the problem is that the changing demographics of the Madison school district, with nearly a 50 percent poverty rate, have not yet pierced the perception around the state that the district largely consists of well-off families.
"You do hear the comments," she says. "'Oh, Madison. Their idea of really cutting back is eliminating 4th grade strings.'"
Madison School Board members are feeling particularly stung by this year's budget cuts because, the economy notwithstanding, they thought this year might be different. After years of Republican control of the Statehouse, not only were Democrats in control of the Legislature and governor's office, but Madison-area lawmakers were in charge of the budget process.
As co-chairs of the Joint Finance Committee, the Legislature's powerful budget-writing panel, Sen. Mark Miller and Rep. Mark Pocan were arguably in the most powerful positions to influence the process.
But board members say they got little help from Democratic leaders, both on the specific problems surrounding the 2009-2010 budget and on broader questions about fixing the state's long-term school funding.
"I understand that the economy is terrible, but for years we heard that the reason we had this school funding mess was because we had Republicans in charge who were basically content with the status quo," says board member Marj Passman. "I had expected so much change and leadership on school funding issues with a Democratic governor and a Democratic Legislature. Honestly, we've got Rep. Pocan and Sen. Miller as co-chairs of the Joint Finance Committee and Democratic majorities in both houses! Frankly, it's been a huge disappointment. I'd love to see that little beer tax raised and have it go to education."
Adds Silveira: "There's been a great deal of talk about the importance of education and improving the system but very little real action that really helps us do a better job of meeting both student needs and taxpayer needs."
She says all local municipal officials bear a particularly heavy burden, forced to cut budgets and services and go back on their promises to hold the line on property taxes.
"By the time we found out about what a huge hit we were taking in aid from the state, we were already close to the end of our fiscal year and were locked into most contracts and programs for the school year. Basically, our hands were tied," Silveira says. "The trouble with the politicians is that they tell us that they won't raise taxes, but that we can. It puts us in a horrible position with our own community, which has been so supportive of our schools. It doesn't seem fair."
Although Pocan is sympathetic to the frustrations of Madison School Board members, he says he and other legislators must balance the needs of the entire state. He agrees with Silveira and others that the funding system needs a "complete overhaul" but says that kind of change would likely come with a huge price tag, which some school funding experts suggest could reach a billion dollars.
"Given the current economy, that's not feasible," he says. "I'd love to do something that helps Madison, but the system is so complex with 20 or 30 threads all together that if you just pull one, something else unravels."
He argues that even returning $100 million to the state general aid fund for this budget cycle wouldn't have helped Madison because the current formula would direct the vast majority to other districts that get more favorable treatment under the existing system.
Andrew Reschovsky, a University of Wisconsin economist and expert on school funding, concurs that Madison was hit harderthan other districts.
"The real problem is the longer-term structural problems with the funding system. Some aspects of the existing formula really penalize Madison because it doesn't reflect the district's challenges of educating a student population with a high poverty rate and multiple languages," he says.
Frustration over school funding is nothing new. For years, various groups, from academic experts to legislative panels, have studied how to make the state's multibillion-dollar system more sustainable and more equitable.
But when it comes to changing the law, little of substance has happened, reflecting the political difficulties of bridging deep divisions between what various school districts and communities want, as well as between various school stakeholders, from the teachers union to school board members to taxpayer groups.
Pope-Roberts has been involved with education issues, including funding reform, since she was elected to the Assembly in 2002.
She says Wisconsin's current dismal economy constrains even those who are most committed to education and most dedicated to exploring a range of ideas.
"It's very bad out there in the state. I think there may actually be some school districts that simply won't have enough money to operate after this year."
But Pocan and Pope-Roberts say they see glimmers of hope in some new, broad-based coalitions that are coming together to work on school funding reform.
For example, the School Finance Network includes representatives from the Wisconsin Association of School District Administrators, the Wisconsin Education Association Council, the Wisconsin Parent Teacher Association and the Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools, among others.
Despite political differences that often put them at fierce odds in the past, as a group they agree that the current funding system is divisive, unsustainable and the reason many school districts lurch from budget to budget, with expenses rising faster than allowable tax increases.
In its literature, the network notes that education has a profound long-term impact on Wisconsin's economy and, that, if current conditions continue, it won't be long before a number of school districts will be insolvent.
Thomas Mertz, spokesman for the Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools, says the state funding system also has the unintended consequence of dividing communities instead of bringing them together through their schools. "Under the current system, the state shifts much of the tax burden and the blame to the local level," he says. "Yeah, it's difficult for anyone to raise taxes in this economy but the current system is broken."
Mertz, who teaches at Edgewood College and is a Madison district parent and longtime observer of public school issues, says his group of parents and concerned citizens is advocating for a sales tax increase - a program it describes as Pennies for Kids. While the proposal is not in a final form, he says he is hopeful the state Legislature will consider a 1 percent hike in the state sales tax.
"A penny boost in the sales tax would bring us in line with surrounding states and would provide $830 million a year in aid for education," Mertz says.
The extra pennies would surely be welcomed in the coming years. With approval of the 2009-2010 budget under its belt, the Madison School Board is already beginning to focus on ways to address the larger shortfalls predicted for the following year.
And so are other districts around the state. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel recently reported that some suburban districts in the Milwaukee area are already hearing from residents unhappy about double-digit increases in local tax levies, and are considering potential program changes like combining athletic teams.
"If there's a silver lining in this, and if you were a real optimist, you could say that this current crisis may, finally, lead to system reform," says UW's Reschovsky. "I'm not sure I believe that, though."
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Some Ideas/Thoughts/Suggestions to Help Reduce Property Taxes
Note: See Link to Race -to-the-Top after posed question
In early February, I began contacting ALL in local and state government about ways I or any other citizen may be able to generate ideas about how we can work to lower the property tax burden. Some of these ideas are for the federal level of government, but many were not. I asked anyway whether the idea or question was realistic or not. I may say that of all I contacted only one handful replied (ONE) and one replied only because he was running for re-election. Here it is:
I have contacted many of you about issues that need to be addressed and in light of just complaining, I, as a voter and tax payer, would like to suggest some ideas where we might be able to open discussion or take some action by asking questions or directly submitting a suggestion. With this being said, some of these ideas may have been discussed already but may be worth reviewing again. Some of this may not affect you directly and some will. I will write from time-to-time as I want to introduce healthy discussion with your organization and so your organizations can/will communicate with each other to make it work.
- What are we doing with federal stimulus money to create jobs and increase our income tax base?
- In relation to this - are we generating renewable sources of energy and new ways to create it?
- Are we (Wisconsin/Madison/Dane County) accepting federal funding for schools/education? If not - why?
- What is happening with the governments race-to-the-top funding? Are we working for it? http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/education/blog/article_005d6408-7fc1-11df-960f-001cc4c03286.html
- Have we put a cap (no increases) on all elected officials salaries for the next two years?
- Are we going to plan on increasing the state sales tax and/or county sales tax by a fraction - say .25% so the tax burden is spread more fairly to all Wisconsin residents rather than just the property owners?
- OR - The Cty of Madison or any other city, township could create a mandate to have all cars/trucks registered within the city for a fee each year of say $15-$20 (many cities in Illinois do this on top of State car registration/licensing).
- We have many sources, PAC's, and now corporations (if Senator Dodd does not get an ammendment passed) to raise money for campaigns OR just to advertise for a cause/belief. Could we tax a small percentage of these contributions and ads (evenly, across the board) coming in and apply the funds raised to public schools and/or city and county governments? - FURTHER - if this was possible; could we give an INDIVIDUAL doner a small, annual tax break to give private donations an edge over corporate?
- We should make every member of the State Assembly turn in receipts for their daily expenses rather than just paying them the alotted per diem amount per day. It may be small but could add up as in years past the annual payout was well over $1 million (last year over $800,000).
- Increase hunting fees.
- Tax Payday Lenders.
- Mandate all businesses to insure all employees who work 20 hours or more to provide comprehensive health care by giving them a tax break, finding one insurance provider for the whole state to offer reduced costs to businesses so they can provide coverage. Not only would this increase competition by insurers but it would also provide competitive care and reduce costs (review Hawaii's health care system).
- Also ensure that any isurance company can not discriminate for pre-existing conditions, or higher risk individuals.
- Award insurers for offering healthy lifestyles like proactive health screening, weightloss programs, excercise programs, etc.
These are just some ideas and I am sure some of these have been thought of, debated, instated - it may be worthwhile to review again and discuss and build on.
Thank you,
C. Damian Michaelis
----- Original Message -----
From: cdmichaelis@sbcglobal.net
To: cdmichaelis@sbcglobal.net ; county_board_recipients@co.dane.wi.us ; patrick.fuller@legis.wisconsin.gov ; Robert.Marchant@legis.wisconsin.gov ; allalders@cityofmadison.com ; RStrauch-Nelson@cityofmadison.com ; Rep.Black@legis.wisconsin.gov ; police@cityofmadison.com ; board@madison.k12.wi.us ; Sen.Risser@legis.wisconsin.gov
Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 5:31 PM
Subject: Madison Taxes / Various
My apologies - correction made in body of text
Thank you All for your hard work over the years.
2008 was a great year in politics and exciting. 2009 missed a lot of opportunities to assist the public because of gridlock and partisanship, mostly at the federal level. It was also a year of wasteful spending by the US Government and the State of Wisconsin - much more at the state/city level than at the county level for Dane County and Madison. 2010 will be a year of unrest and anger because of the past and because of the economy and unemployment. It is unfortunate and embarrassing that this is happening. We live in a fast-food society where people think that 8 years of built problems can be fixed overnight and is where the anger comes in.
With this being said - most property owners saw large increases in their property taxes for 2009. I would like to know how the WI Legislature, City of Madison, and Dane County Board is going to work to reduce these taxes and think of a more creative ways to budget than going back to the property owner for more money. Let's ASK the property owners and citizens for input, ideas, support, etc.
How is the State Assembly going to stop deferring the annual budget process and work together? Why did the State Assembly give themselves pay raises last year when the economy was in a spiral downward? This is shameful.
How is the City of Madison going to utilize better common sense in selecting necessary capital and operational expenses for projects that are needed rather than wanted? Do we really need 4 year olds going to kindergarten?? Do we really need a ridiculously expensive library and grand hotel right now? People are hungry, cold, and without work. Let's make the citizen a priority.
20% of my monthly income needs to be set aside to pay my property taxes. I am lucky enough to have a job. If I wasn't - I would be homeless. Property owners in Madison and Dane County will soon not be able to afford to live in this wonderful community.
There is a lot of good that is done by you. But I need to know that the best interest of each individual will take precedent over the cost of waste and poor judgment to help us remain in our homes and balance the budget with realistic goals for 2010 and beyond. It is going to be an ugly year for politicians and voters. The media will have the most to gain. Let's show the country that we have a system that works as one unit and get done what needs getting done!
Thank you,
C. Damian Michaelis
In early February, I began contacting ALL in local and state government about ways I or any other citizen may be able to generate ideas about how we can work to lower the property tax burden. Some of these ideas are for the federal level of government, but many were not. I asked anyway whether the idea or question was realistic or not. I may say that of all I contacted only one handful replied (ONE) and one replied only because he was running for re-election. Here it is:
I have contacted many of you about issues that need to be addressed and in light of just complaining, I, as a voter and tax payer, would like to suggest some ideas where we might be able to open discussion or take some action by asking questions or directly submitting a suggestion. With this being said, some of these ideas may have been discussed already but may be worth reviewing again. Some of this may not affect you directly and some will. I will write from time-to-time as I want to introduce healthy discussion with your organization and so your organizations can/will communicate with each other to make it work.
- What are we doing with federal stimulus money to create jobs and increase our income tax base?
- In relation to this - are we generating renewable sources of energy and new ways to create it?
- Are we (Wisconsin/Madison/Dane County) accepting federal funding for schools/education? If not - why?
- What is happening with the governments race-to-the-top funding? Are we working for it? http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/education/blog/article_005d6408-7fc1-11df-960f-001cc4c03286.html
- Have we put a cap (no increases) on all elected officials salaries for the next two years?
- Are we going to plan on increasing the state sales tax and/or county sales tax by a fraction - say .25% so the tax burden is spread more fairly to all Wisconsin residents rather than just the property owners?
- OR - The Cty of Madison or any other city, township could create a mandate to have all cars/trucks registered within the city for a fee each year of say $15-$20 (many cities in Illinois do this on top of State car registration/licensing).
- We have many sources, PAC's, and now corporations (if Senator Dodd does not get an ammendment passed) to raise money for campaigns OR just to advertise for a cause/belief. Could we tax a small percentage of these contributions and ads (evenly, across the board) coming in and apply the funds raised to public schools and/or city and county governments? - FURTHER - if this was possible; could we give an INDIVIDUAL doner a small, annual tax break to give private donations an edge over corporate?
- We should make every member of the State Assembly turn in receipts for their daily expenses rather than just paying them the alotted per diem amount per day. It may be small but could add up as in years past the annual payout was well over $1 million (last year over $800,000).
- Increase hunting fees.
- Tax Payday Lenders.
- Mandate all businesses to insure all employees who work 20 hours or more to provide comprehensive health care by giving them a tax break, finding one insurance provider for the whole state to offer reduced costs to businesses so they can provide coverage. Not only would this increase competition by insurers but it would also provide competitive care and reduce costs (review Hawaii's health care system).
- Also ensure that any isurance company can not discriminate for pre-existing conditions, or higher risk individuals.
- Award insurers for offering healthy lifestyles like proactive health screening, weightloss programs, excercise programs, etc.
These are just some ideas and I am sure some of these have been thought of, debated, instated - it may be worthwhile to review again and discuss and build on.
Thank you,
C. Damian Michaelis
----- Original Message -----
From: cdmichaelis@sbcglobal.net
To: cdmichaelis@sbcglobal.net ; county_board_recipients@co.dane.wi.us ; patrick.fuller@legis.wisconsin.gov ; Robert.Marchant@legis.wisconsin.gov ; allalders@cityofmadison.com ; RStrauch-Nelson@cityofmadison.com ; Rep.Black@legis.wisconsin.gov ; police@cityofmadison.com ; board@madison.k12.wi.us ; Sen.Risser@legis.wisconsin.gov
Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 5:31 PM
Subject: Madison Taxes / Various
My apologies - correction made in body of text
Thank you All for your hard work over the years.
2008 was a great year in politics and exciting. 2009 missed a lot of opportunities to assist the public because of gridlock and partisanship, mostly at the federal level. It was also a year of wasteful spending by the US Government and the State of Wisconsin - much more at the state/city level than at the county level for Dane County and Madison. 2010 will be a year of unrest and anger because of the past and because of the economy and unemployment. It is unfortunate and embarrassing that this is happening. We live in a fast-food society where people think that 8 years of built problems can be fixed overnight and is where the anger comes in.
With this being said - most property owners saw large increases in their property taxes for 2009. I would like to know how the WI Legislature, City of Madison, and Dane County Board is going to work to reduce these taxes and think of a more creative ways to budget than going back to the property owner for more money. Let's ASK the property owners and citizens for input, ideas, support, etc.
How is the State Assembly going to stop deferring the annual budget process and work together? Why did the State Assembly give themselves pay raises last year when the economy was in a spiral downward? This is shameful.
How is the City of Madison going to utilize better common sense in selecting necessary capital and operational expenses for projects that are needed rather than wanted? Do we really need 4 year olds going to kindergarten?? Do we really need a ridiculously expensive library and grand hotel right now? People are hungry, cold, and without work. Let's make the citizen a priority.
20% of my monthly income needs to be set aside to pay my property taxes. I am lucky enough to have a job. If I wasn't - I would be homeless. Property owners in Madison and Dane County will soon not be able to afford to live in this wonderful community.
There is a lot of good that is done by you. But I need to know that the best interest of each individual will take precedent over the cost of waste and poor judgment to help us remain in our homes and balance the budget with realistic goals for 2010 and beyond. It is going to be an ugly year for politicians and voters. The media will have the most to gain. Let's show the country that we have a system that works as one unit and get done what needs getting done!
Thank you,
C. Damian Michaelis
How To Contact Your State Assembly, County, City Reps
Click on this link and you will get all the contact information you need to contact your State Assembly Representatives:
http://www.legis.state.wi.us/w3asp/contact/EmailDirectory.aspx?house=assembly#P
This link will take you to the Dane County Exec & Supervisor contacts:
http://www.countyofdane.com/exec/contact.aspx
This is for Madison City Counsil:
http://www.cityofmadison.com/Council/documents/2009publicroster.pdf
And this is WI Government Accountability Board:
http://gab.wi.gov/
Connect to Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance - WI Tax Payersalliance is not an activist group but an informative organization for the public to educate themselves on tax issue:
http://www.wistax.org/
School levy comparisons:
http://www.wistax.org/facts/2009_10%20school%20levies.xls
PLEASE contact any of these sites when needed as these are paid for by you and the employees are HIRED by you. You can fire them by VOTING!
http://www.legis.state.wi.us/w3asp/contact/EmailDirectory.aspx?house=assembly#P
This link will take you to the Dane County Exec & Supervisor contacts:
http://www.countyofdane.com/exec/contact.aspx
This is for Madison City Counsil:
http://www.cityofmadison.com/Council/documents/2009publicroster.pdf
And this is WI Government Accountability Board:
http://gab.wi.gov/
Connect to Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance - WI Tax Payersalliance is not an activist group but an informative organization for the public to educate themselves on tax issue:
http://www.wistax.org/
School levy comparisons:
http://www.wistax.org/facts/2009_10%20school%20levies.xls
PLEASE contact any of these sites when needed as these are paid for by you and the employees are HIRED by you. You can fire them by VOTING!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)