concern wrote on Mar 16, 2008 12:20 PM:
" Never cease to amaze me- The term 'counterparts' has been pointed out to you before. Deciding to cast counterparts aside does not answer the disparity. Government employees make more and receive benefits higher than their private sector counterparts. Now I do not care to argue a documentable fact. Lacrosse Schools are at the highest end of the government benefit list. So high that the retired IRS employee of the school board only could wish he had benefits like theirs. FACT!!! Benefits all across the Board (literal, illustrative, and figurative) "
Never cease to amaze me wrote on Mar 15, 2008 11:33 PM:
" Concern, if you look at what these people do and the budgets they manage you would see that a private sector job PAYS more with less benefits, at the school district they make less but get better benefits. It all evens out in the end. Guess you can only see the negative side of things. Sounds like you start your day with a cup of coffee while talking to Northsider. "
concern wrote on Mar 15, 2008 5:02 PM:
" Correction- That would borrow 4 million unprecedented dollars in Onalaska. Here in Lacrosse? We have decided to hang the shortage on another expense. Not really honest is it? Since the largest budget cost and fastest growing expense is pay/benefits? CRG has uncovered a lot of interesting facts, and statistics. Although they have been given their token article to compete with the pro spending barrage in many forms in the Tribune. "
concern wrote on Mar 15, 2008 4:57 PM:
" D.Ray- What you people cannot rationalize is that Lacrosse School employees make more than their counterparts in the private sector, and those private sector employees will never see benefits at those levels in their working lives. These unfunded mandates are already here, or we would not be calling funding shortage maintenance needs. As you and yours hide behind state labor laws that were signed by idiots that went before us. Even Onalaska went to front loaded annuities rather than come clean that they had no money to cover unfunded benefit promises. First year cost? $1.3 million up front. Answer? Borrow an unprecedented $million in their school system, and then lie about it all. "
Willie wrote on Mar 15, 2008 12:38 PM:
" Never cease to amaze me, don't blame the voter for wanting to vote down the $35 million referendum that we can't afford on the LaCrosse economy right now. If the goal was to fix things, why did they attach a $15 million building to it? Their goal is to build a new building and force the issue by forcing the voters to vote for needed repairs and piggy back the building with it. Congress does it all of the time. Savvy voters will vote NO. Send a message to the school board that if they want a building, ask for a building and stop playing political games. Mismanagement now will not help us down the road. They are to serve the district voters by representation and are not politicians. If they want to make a political name for themselves they should run for State Assembly or U.S. Congress! "
D. Ray wrote on Mar 15, 2008 12:21 PM:
" It's funny that when the economy was solid that the 3.8% cap was so popular with people--when the private industry employees were seeing increases of 5, 7, even 10% per year. Now that the pendulum has swung the other direction the 3.8% is suddenly "outrageous"! Sorry folks, but you can't have it both ways. "
D. Ray wrote on Mar 15, 2008 12:14 PM:
" Hmm... so schools are now a business? Things get tough so let's take away from the kids' education! If you think the economy is bad now, wait until undereducated students hit the work force, then we will really have problems! "
concern wrote on Mar 15, 2008 11:55 AM:
" Fair is fair-
Donations or questions?
Contact CRG
PO 1771
Lax 54602-1771 "
concern wrote on Mar 15, 2008 9:40 AM:
" I tend to agree. There are 35 million reason for people to get off their apathetic butts and vote NO on this one!!!!! "
enuffalready wrote on Mar 15, 2008 8:46 AM:
" To: Never
I see that you fell into the "if you can't win the argument, then change the argument" mentality. Too bad. "
Lloyd Christmas wrote on Mar 15, 2008 8:33 AM:
" Seems like "panic mode" has kicked in!!! "
Never cease to amaze me wrote on Mar 14, 2008 11:20 PM:
" VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES! "
Never cease to amaze me wrote on Mar 14, 2008 11:17 PM:
" to enuffalready
I see you are an expert of budgets why don't you step in and show them where to cut. Onalaska school taxes will rise soon enough, as soon as their schools become as old as the ones in La Crosse.
Also to Willie, I am not a teacher but I know pleanty and like I said before if this fails they will just ask for twice as much next time because there will be more to fix and replace. If the building referendum fails then no repairs are done. Maybe you nay sayers should have gone to the referendum meetings like some responsible people did and see the short comings.
to concern they are paid based on a total package, menaing if healthcare goes up, the amount they are paid goes down, 3.8% total package is not much compared to private secor jobs. "
enuffalready wrote on Mar 14, 2008 10:49 PM:
" To Never Cease:
Using the Current Inflation calculator at Inflation Data.com
$82,847,441 adjusted for inflation would now be $88,315,372 (using the period from July of '05 to July of '07, when the budgets were probably finalized)
So it appears to me that on a constant dollar basis there unquestionably has been an increase in expenses of 2 million.
Also, it's obvious that you don't believe in the concept of zero based budgeting.
"
concern wrote on Mar 14, 2008 6:47 PM:
" Who do you know that receives better health care while working than the Doctors at Gund/Luth, post early retirement health coverage from 55-65, and 11.7% matching pay contribution for retirement? In the private sector I mean. Don't all post at the same time, the system will crash! "
Lloyd Christmas wrote on Mar 14, 2008 5:48 PM:
" To: never cease...I never said I was 33 years old, you must be refering to one of the many others in this district that are'nt fooled by the "yes" group...I guess we'll find out soon enough...But like I said: GET OUT AND VOTE!!!
"
Willie wrote on Mar 14, 2008 5:28 PM:
" Never Ceases To Amaze Me, you must be a teacher, because I have children in school and I am against any referendum that wants to close schools only to build new ones. Our local economy can't support that. I am for spending money to fix up schools, (hence I support the operating referendum to replace the expiring one) but I don't know who can afford their school district taxes raising $100 to $150/ year (which in reality is what people will pay as I don't know how many homeowners own a $100,000 anymore). Hold a yearly fund raiser, then who ever wants to contribute can. "
Half Full wrote on Mar 14, 2008 4:13 PM:
" Northsider/concern- it is probably real easy for the Catholic schools to take a chance the Blessed Sacrament's boilers will make it through the school year because if the boilers break down there are plenty of empty schools in the Diocese they can move the students. I am sure if someone came up with the money Blessed Sacrament would want a new heating and AC system too. I would love to see the bill for heating that building with those big old single pane windows. "
concern wrote on Mar 14, 2008 1:22 PM:
" We need to have an open house at Blessed Sacrament School (CCS) for the taxpayers of this City. Once again the disparities will be blatantly illustrated. While you are there ask those employees if they are paid and benefited like Lacrosse School employees. Then go home and ask your private sector neighbors the same question about benefits. Watch out you do not receive any errant spittle when they laugh out loud and hard. Like we all do not know what is going on over there? As they hang on to State mandates, as if that makes it right? Somewhere, someone will have to say NO MORE!!! It is coming for us and they are paying for those benefits with dollars that should be directed elsewhere. "
The Real World wrote on Mar 14, 2008 1:04 PM:
" Half Full, Here is your explanation. The unit of government has a problem, they have no one who has an answer so they usually hire an Architect or a business man who deals with the problem. Architects have a great deal of education and leads them in the direction of new and modern and after all they make there money based on a percentage of what it cost to do the job. They have a financial interest to spend the most money. They might even believe that they are making the best decision, that is how they are trained. Old buildings can be updated at a very reasonable cost. Much of it has been done already. "
Senior Advocate wrote on Mar 14, 2008 12:40 PM:
" That is over an 8 million dollar increase in spending. Please understand that they look at funding like the federal and state people do.
They ask for an increase, lets say 3 million dollars, but wind up with only a 2 million dollars increase. this is then referred to as a 1 MILLION DOLLARD DECREASE OR CUT. They also base everyting on the prior years spending. They never examanine in detail all expenditures and determine if they are justified or if they can be cut. They just look at what was spent and add how much of an increase above that amount was requested for the new budget. Then any reductions made from the new total amount are considered cuts. "
Never cease to amaze me wrote on Mar 14, 2008 12:38 PM:
" to enuffalready
figure a 3.8 percent rise every year for inflation, state regulated 3.8 percent salary raises, and what not and a well informed person like yourself will see that your third number would have been 92,023,132.26. So looks to me like about a 2 million dollar cut. A pretty good chunk of change....whats that don't know what to say...maybe you should have gone to school in La Crosse and you could have figured out the math a little better. "
Never cease to amaze me wrote on Mar 14, 2008 12:32 PM:
" Lloyd Christmas, I didn't say all people who vote no are old, I said the people who make up those groups like CRG usually are. Go to a meeting of theirs and you will see. Might be some young followers but the people in charge are all old with no kids left in school. If you are 33 and you are voting no that would leave me to beleive that you have no kids yet or no kids in school. A word to the wise, if the referendums don't pass then the problems will get worse and cost more. Replace one building now or a couple all at once in the future. Follow the rest of the CRG sheep. "
concern wrote on Mar 14, 2008 12:24 PM:
" Good for this group. My check is in the mail today for them. I am amazed how all expenditures come out of the same pile of money, although they have chosen to call the funding shortage 'maintenance' needs, etc. They could have called the shortage anything, but they really do not want to call it unfunded mandate shortages. Lest we forget that pay/benefits is their largest expense. Benefits that their private sector counterparts will never see in their working lives. This is the epitome of dishonesty, and the label they have hung on the funding shortage is a sham. "
enuffalready wrote on Mar 14, 2008 11:53 AM:
" To jersey66:
From the School District web site:
Expenditures:
2005-2006 $82,847,441
2006-2007 $88,654,270
2007-2008 $90,929,840
Doesn't appear to me that represents cost cutting as you say.
And I don't have a dog in this fight, since I live in Onalaska. Just make sure that you know your facts.
"
Half Full wrote on Mar 14, 2008 11:31 AM:
" Real World- Why don't you explain how "the people who make decisions for government spending are people who stand to make a huge profit". Are the school board and administrators getting big kick backs under the table from "construction experts". Tell us what the huge scandel you are referring to is. They information I got from the meeting I attended was that the idea was to fix up our schools so they would last longer and be nicer for students. What is the real truth? "
Lloyd Christmas wrote on Mar 14, 2008 11:02 AM:
" DO NOT ASSUME THES REFERENDUMS WILL NOT PASS...GET OUT AND VOTE AGAINST THEM..THE YES PEOPLE WILL BE OUT IN FULL FORCE TO GET THESE PASSED...TO NEVER CEASE: NOT EVERYONE AGAINST THE REFERENDA ARE OLD AND RETIRED, THERE ARE ALOT OF YOUNGER FAMILIES THAT ARE AGAINST ALL THIS CRAZINESS THAT GOES ON. "
The Real World wrote on Mar 14, 2008 10:37 AM:
" I am a construction expert and one of the huge problems is that the people who make decisions for government spending are people who stand to make a huge profit. We can not get accurate info from these people because they are in it for the money. This project is absolutely not needed and it is a shame we don't have a system that allows us to get unbiased info. The administration and board don't know any better, they don't have the proper background. "
Half Full wrote on Mar 14, 2008 10:26 AM:
" I don't understand the problem people have with the school district. No one wants to pay any more taxes than they have to but the school district has been better at controlling taxes than the city, county or WTC. I looked up Mr. Petersen's house taxes and found that since 1999 his school district taxes have gone up 22% while the city's have gone up 50% the county 45%
and WTC's 33%. Compare that to health care premiums that conservatively have gone up 78% and gas has gone up 260%. Maybe a good school district is why Mr. Petersen house value went up 46% in that same time period. "
audifan08 wrote on Mar 14, 2008 10:20 AM:
" This is all about the teachers union. Their goals are to increase pay, which runs counter to taxpayers' interests, and to minimize accountability, which runs counter to citizens'. Teacher Unions' gain is the children's loss. "
Get it right wrote on Mar 14, 2008 10:03 AM:
" You should vote no because the school district has not even provided a plan for this new school. How do they know how much it will cost if there is no plan? More information is needed before you even ask citizens to vote. "
Willie wrote on Mar 14, 2008 9:58 AM:
" All of this revolves around smaller class sizes? Yeah like that really makes a difference. Kids can't read and write or spell because phonetic spelling is as good as proper spelling! They are more worried about their feelings than actually learning anything useful. I wasn't given those "breaks" in school. The school district only pushes kids through the education mill, just like they have always done and do everywhere else. So why not consolidate schools, double class sizes, and eliminate half of the administration. We could actually save taxpayers money in the face of $5.00/gal gasoline, $4.00/gal milk, and $7.00 loaves of bread. You will get your smaller class sizes when half the kids starve! "
dbl lung wrote on Mar 14, 2008 9:04 AM:
" When you have several adminitrators making over $100,000 yearly there is a problem. The problem becomes more antagonizing when the administrators say they are going to cut the positions who make them look good. Another comparison which could be made is the comparison of the public schools to the private ones. It seems the private schools don't have any problem updating and maintaining their buildings. Even better, private school leaders are glad to use old public schools. So does it really cost as much to maintain or update what we have? As a 33 year old who pays nearly $3200 a year for property taxes on a 50 year old home I will be voting NO. "
rprp wrote on Mar 14, 2008 8:39 AM:
" The superintendant say that the people want smaller classes. I believe the size of the class is a union issue and the WEAC along with the farmers union run this state. Also one commentor said that schools are not a business and I believe most people would say that is true. However, when the union was allowed to DEMAND negotiating rights it became a business. "
andy k wrote on Mar 14, 2008 8:37 AM:
" I'm voting yes, because the bulk of the money is spent on technology, instruction and long overdue updates to the schools that will save money in the long run. I considered voting no just because of the unnecessary and alarmist security measures. Why do we need cameras and state-of-the-art locks in ALL of our schools. I've asked this question and have not gotten a satisfactory answer yet. Even so, that part is about 3% of the total package, and I'm willing to overlook it. "
Never cease to amaze me wrote on Mar 14, 2008 7:57 AM:
" CRG is just a group of retired people who don't want to pay to educate other peoples kids, even though someone else footed the bill for them. These groups are made up of primarily the older residents because they younger ones are all working. They don't see that some of the schools are very old, If you are going to vote no then I suggest you walk into some of these schools and see the problems first hand like they showed at the forums. I attended and boy was it an eye opener "
Never cease to amaze me wrote on Mar 14, 2008 7:48 AM:
" re: smuckers1....I think Northsider changed his handle on here, he finally relized how wrong he is. The Citizens for Responsible Government have no idea why people leave the La Crosse area. They move to Holmen and Onalaska for the Bright Shiney NEW schools. It should not be that way but it is and yes while kids can receive just as good of an education in an older building, PEOPLE who pay taxes and put their kids in schools want to see shiney new and up-to-date schools. "
just the facts wrote on Mar 14, 2008 7:36 AM:
" C.R.G. , is right to oppose this referendum! We have approved additional taxes, and have at least one more year for the school district to itemize exactly what they did with that money! How were these supposedly hazardous conditions , allowed to happen? Next year we'll have another list of unsafe schools. We taxpayers deserve an audited explanation! My guess is that money was funneled into so called "programs", aka, teachers salaries! The business of educating our children is the most important business we have and we must account for every dollar! "
diana wrote on Mar 14, 2008 6:50 AM:
" Has anyone checked out how much the
administrators are being paid to operate
a school? I think there is a contest
on which superintendents and prinicipals
get paid the most. I believe there should
be a cap on administrative salaries. "
Krusty wrote on Mar 14, 2008 6:41 AM:
" Why does Lacrosse need to pump more money into the schools? Everybody decent is already moving to the outlaying communities already because of the insane taxes here. Raising taxes more while just drive out more people which raises the taxes more on the remaining people, it's not that hard to figure out "
jersey66 wrote on Mar 14, 2008 6:04 AM:
" “In the economics of business, you have to reduce expenses or you don’t stay in business,” Petersen said. “But in the public sector you just add taxes and get away with it.” This is the problem with how many people think...schools are not businesses. Also, it is not even an accurate statement. The school district has cut costs for years by reducing staff size, cutting programs and reducing energy use.
"
smuckers1 wrote on Mar 14, 2008 12:15 AM:
" Come on North Sider...where are ya? I would expect your keyboard to be on fire you are typing in your response so fast..... "