|
|
Post by Arch on Mar 3, 2009 12:45:00 GMT -6
I will never... let me repeat that... NEVER vote to approve giving one more damned dime to the current majority on the school board.
A new crew has to prove themselves, then I will consider it... The current majority lost it forever.
|
|
|
|
Post by researching on Mar 3, 2009 12:46:23 GMT -6
IMO we should follow the example set forth by a neighboring school district:
from the Ledger-Sentinel Newspaper:
www.ledgersentinel.com/article.asp?a=7721
Below is a portion of the article date 1/1/09:8 from '08: Stories that captured headlines by John Etheredge 1/1/2009 Years from now area residents will likely look back on 2008 as the year gas topped $4.25 a gallon and a deep recession overtook the nation's economy and dramatically slowed the longest continuous population growth spurt in Kendall County's history. The impact of the national economic downturn was felt quickly at the local level this year and figured prominently in many stories reported in the Ledger-Sentinel. Here-in no particular order-is a look back at eight of the big local stories for 2008 as selected by our staff and why they were important: 1. Recession hits and homebuilding all but stops. As we entered 2008, new home construction had slowed from the record levels of 2004-2006. The building pace throughout the county, however, was still comparable to levels seen in the early years of this decade. But by mid-summer, new home construction had slowed to levels not seen in Oswego and Montgomery since the mid-1980s when the country was just coming out of another recession. Several new retail stores opened in the two villages in 2008, especially in Montgomery. But as the year came to a close, commercial developers seemed in no hurry to pursue previously announced plans for new retail projects. The homebuilding slowdown had a dramatic impact throughout the community. County residents looked to see the growth in their home assessments slow as the real estate market sputtered. Meanwhile, the Oswego School District shelved planning work on a proposed third high school and chose not to open two new schools last fall. The two schools sit empty for now.Despite the drop off in home starts, the school district did report another big increase in enrollment when schools opened for the 2008-09 school year. A total of 712 more students showed up for class on the first day of school, bringing the district's total enrollment to just under 15,000 students. The homebuilding slowdown was also felt at the Oswego and Montgomery village halls. Over the past several years officials in both communities had been working to extend municipal services to meet the needs of their growing populations as developers and their attorneys continued to submit still more plans for residential developments. In Oswego the village's handling of new development had become a key issue in the 2007 village board election. But with this year's dramatic drop-off in home construction, the pressure seemed to ease and the focus in both communities shifted to updating existing plans and preparing new plans intended to help officials in both villages better cope when the pace of development picks up again. 2. Oswego School District Superintendent to leave July 1. There had been speculation in recent months that Dr. David Behlow would leave his position as chief administrator for the school district. Where there was smoke, there was fire: Behlow announced two weeks ago he had accepted a position as superintendent of the North Shore Elementary District in north suburban Highland Park. Behlow will, however, remain with the Oswego School District through the end of June which should provide the school board with ample time to complete a search and, hopefully, hire a new superintendent. However, the school board-which deadlocked for nearly two months on the appointment of a district resident to fill a vacant board seat-will have to conduct its search amidst the backdrop of a school board election in April. The board's handling of the superintendent search could become an issue in the race.
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Mar 3, 2009 12:55:32 GMT -6
Doc, I have no will to debate the third high school need or not. It is not that this argument is unimportant or the fact that many #'s regarding this situation seem out of whack. My concern has to do with moving forward as a district. With MVHS almost done I am more concerned with how the "bills get paid " with this new addition. If the #'s you state are correct a substantial budget shortfall will only be compounded by the drop in the commercial and residential real estate market. The lack of much new development only compounds this situation. Rather than just looking at the past, the time is now, as to how to address this situation. Maybe those running for board positions could address this situation in a context that is realistic and direct. Please note that I am not minimizing mistakes made in the past, just trying to put the present situation in a context that will help the district going forward into the future. Some clarity with costs now and moving forward along with the revised #'s of revenue and a good dose of "Give Me the Bad News...How much is this going to cost!!!" Along with this "Bad financial News" Please put it in a format that the non-financial guys can understand, no more of the mumbo jumbo crap that I need to send to the CPA to get real #'s. Here's why IT IS important SSDM -- do you want the same people who made the decisions above and put us in this position spending your money going forward too ? I don't and as you say, nobody - regardless of who is in offfice is going to have any easy time getting one more dime out of anyone in this district -- when you couple the imcompetence up till now with the state of the economy. I seriously would prepare for cuts etc if I were you as our SD is not going to be immune to what's going on in the world around us - I do not want to steal any thunder - so I am going to hold the exact charts for a bit -- but they are available thru FOIA is what I can tell you. here is the net net though ( and yes those charts have line item detail for all the CPA's) - you better be sitting down my friend before you read this ( you will see charts soon) the School district predicts it will be in an operating deficit of $12M in 2011 escalating to 29M - 50M and 74M by 2014. This is not mumbo jumbo as you call it, not idle speculation - these are their projections. You tell me how we're going to fix that ? And yet you are only concerned with opening the d**n HS that contributes heavily to the yearly operating costs - and $1M a year to the transportation costs --If anyone thinks a referendum will pass to cover this they have lost their common sense. And here we sit spending $12M to date on expediting the shiny new school you are fixated on. It's like the person filing for foreclosure who just has to have the new Cadillac and finances the d**n thing for $10K over cost for 7 years. It is why this country is where it is today - people spending way beyond their means. Forget the merits of whether we needed the d**n school- we could not afford it with all our other costs- and what we did to extend our bond issues out on existing debt so that your kids and mine will be paying for that school when I am sitting in Florida staring at the ocean. SSDM we need some damn common sense in this district - Oswego shelved plans for a 3rd HS and let 2 schools sit complete and not open them due to costs last year --yet our 'leaders' continue to pour expedite money into a school that will not be complete when opening anyway" No you tell me who has common sense and who is spending our money like Sailors on shore leave ? |
|
|
|
Post by southsidesignmaker on Mar 3, 2009 13:11:00 GMT -6
Doc,
Thanks for the numbers I look forward to the charts to come, I will be back later after I pick myself up from the floor regarding the projections ( I won't need the CPA at this time). Maybe just a medic.
|
|
|
|
Post by southsidemom on Mar 3, 2009 13:17:36 GMT -6
Doc, I have no will to debate the third high school need or not. It is not that this argument is unimportant or the fact that many #'s regarding this situation seem out of whack. My concern has to do with moving forward as a district. With MVHS almost done I am more concerned with how the "bills get paid " with this new addition. If the #'s you state are correct a substantial budget shortfall will only be compounded by the drop in the commercial and residential real estate market. The lack of much new development only compounds this situation. Rather than just looking at the past, the time is now, as to how to address this situation. Maybe those running for board positions could address this situation in a context that is realistic and direct. Please note that I am not minimizing mistakes made in the past, just trying to put the present situation in a context that will help the district going forward into the future. Some clarity with costs now and moving forward along with the revised #'s of revenue and a good dose of "Give Me the Bad News...How much is this going to cost!!!" Along with this "Bad financial News" Please put it in a format that the non-financial guys can understand, no more of the mumbo jumbo crap that I need to send to the CPA to get real #'s. Here's why IT IS important SSDM -- do you want the same people who made the decisions above and put us in this position spending your money going forward too ? I don't and as you say, nobody - regardless of who is in offfice is going to have any easy time getting one more dime out of anyone in this district -- when you couple the imcompetence up till now with the state of the economy. I seriously would prepare for cuts etc if I were you as our SD is not going to be immune to what's going on in the world around us - I do not want to steal any thunder - so I am going to hold the exact charts for a bit -- but they are available thru FOIA is what I can tell you. here is the net net though ( and yes those charts have line item detail for all the CPA's) - you better be sitting down my friend before you read this ( you will see charts soon) the School district predicts it will be in an operating deficit of $12M in 2011 escalating to 29M - 50M and 74M by 2014. This is not mumbo jumbo as you call it, not idle speculation - these are their projections. You tell me how we're going to fix that ? And yet you are only concerned with opening the d**n HS that contributes heavily to the yearly operating costs - and $1M a year to the transportation costs --If anyone thinks a referendum will pass to cover this they have lost their common sense. And here we sit spending $12M to date on expediting the shiny new school you are fixated on. It's like the person filing for foreclosure who just has to have the new Cadillac and finances the d**n thing for $10K over cost for 7 years. It is why this country is where it is today - people spending way beyond their means. Forget the merits of whether we needed the d**n school- we could not afford it with all our other costs- and what we did to extend our bond issues out on existing debt so that your kids and mine will be paying for that school when I am sitting in Florida staring at the ocean. SSDM we need some d**n common sense in this district - Oswego shelved plans for a 3rd HS and let 2 schools sit complete and not open them due to costs last year --yet our 'leaders' continue to pour expedite money into a school that will not be complete when opening anyway" No you tell me who has common sense and who is spending our money like Sailors on shore leave ? Wow Doc you are spot on. Passing future refs, while homes sit empty from foreclosure and those in preforeclosure looking for light at the end of the tunnel, just won't happen. Spoke with a friend whose child will attend MV in Fall. She was all gung ho until it is now sinking in how much it will potentially cost her (oh and she is pending lay off!) We need new SB members that do due diligence on the finances and not automatic rubber stampers. GUYS WE MUST GET IT RIGHT THIS TIME OR WE WILL PAY THE PRICE (AND I AM NOT JUST TALKING $)! |
|
|
|
Post by blankcheck on Mar 3, 2009 13:21:27 GMT -6
Doc:
Thanks for the info. When are they going to let the public (taxpayers) know this information? I can only hope in the VERY near future. I have been asking this question for a very long time.
|
|
|
|
Post by d204mom on Mar 3, 2009 13:38:31 GMT -6
Realistically, what can be done by the new board?
Do we know much operating income we can save if MV does not open? It is sickening to think about how much has already been spent, but a $74 M operating deficit is a crisis that demands dramatic action - and an operating ref has a snowball's chance of passing.
What if we turned Owen into a MS and distributed those kids to undercapacity Elementaries?
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Mar 3, 2009 13:39:03 GMT -6
Doc, Thanks for the numbers I look forward to the charts to come, I will be back later after I pick myself up from the floor regarding the projections ( I won't need the CPA at this time). Maybe just a medic. I wish they weren't true - trust me-- this is going to cost us all one way or another. But the financial planning needs to start today- and EVERYTHING needs to be on the table as short term and long term solutions |
|
|
|
Post by sam2 on Mar 3, 2009 13:41:16 GMT -6
the School district predicts it will be in an operating deficit of $12M in 2011 escalating to 29M - 50M and 74M by 2014. This is not mumbo jumbo as you call it, not idle speculation - these are their projections. Doc, if I read the current budget correctly, we are spending 389 million this year, including about 87 million for capital projects. Our local tax revenues are 232 million, plus 42 million from the state and 7 million form the federal government. That's roughly 300 million in tax revenues. Is your 74 million deficit in 2014 a total, accumulated deficit or is it the projected deficit for one year? It makes a huge difference in our projected tax bills. It represents nearly 25% of the tax revenue - state local and federal - that the district collects/year today. So, I see our taxes going up either 5% per year if the projection is cumulative or 25%/year if the 2014 projected deficit is for 2014 only. Also, does the projection include the operating referendum to cover MV, if so how much is that forecast to be? |
|
|
|
Post by researching on Mar 3, 2009 13:56:42 GMT -6
Realistically, what can be done by the new board? Do we know much operating income we can save if MV does not open? It is sickening to think about how much has already been spent, but a $74 M operating deficit is a crisis that demands dramatic action - and an operating ref has a snowball's chance of passing. What if we turned Owen into a MS and distributed those kids to undercapacity Elementaries? by John Etheredge 1/1/2009 Years from now area residents will likely look back on 2008 as the year gas topped $4.25 a gallon and a deep recession overtook the nation's economy and dramatically slowed the longest continuous population growth spurt in Kendall County's history. The impact of the national economic downturn was felt quickly at the local level this year and figured prominently in many stories reported in the Ledger-Sentinel. Here-in no particular order-is a look back at eight of the big local stories for 2008 as selected by our staff and why they were important: 1. Recession hits and homebuilding all but stops. As we entered 2008, new home construction had slowed from the record levels of 2004-2006. The building pace throughout the county, however, was still comparable to levels seen in the early years of this decade. But by mid-summer, new home construction had slowed to levels not seen in Oswego and Montgomery since the mid-1980s when the country was just coming out of another recession. Several new retail stores opened in the two villages in 2008, especially in Montgomery. But as the year came to a close, commercial developers seemed in no hurry to pursue previously announced plans for new retail projects. The homebuilding slowdown had a dramatic impact throughout the community. County residents looked to see the growth in their home assessments slow as the real estate market sputtered. Meanwhile, the Oswego School District shelved planning work on a proposed third high school and chose not to open two new schools last fall. The two schools sit empty for now.Despite the drop off in home starts, the school district did report another big increase in enrollment when schools opened for the 2008-09 school year. A total of 712 more students showed up for class on the first day of school, bringing the district's total enrollment to just under 15,000 students. The homebuilding slowdown was also felt at the Oswego and Montgomery village halls. Over the past several years officials in both communities had been working to extend municipal services to meet the needs of their growing populations as developers and their attorneys continued to submit still more plans for residential developments. In Oswego the village's handling of new development had become a key issue in the 2007 village board election. But with this year's dramatic drop-off in home construction, the pressure seemed to ease and the focus in both communities shifted to updating existing plans and preparing new plans intended to help officials in both villages better cope when the pace of development picks up again. 2. Oswego School District Superintendent to leave July 1. There had been speculation in recent months that Dr. David Behlow would leave his position as chief administrator for the school district. Where there was smoke, there was fire: Behlow announced two weeks ago he had accepted a position as superintendent of the North Shore Elementary District in north suburban Highland Park. Behlow will, however, remain with the Oswego School District through the end of June which should provide the school board with ample time to complete a search and, hopefully, hire a new superintendent. However, the school board-which deadlocked for nearly two months on the appointment of a district resident to fill a vacant board seat-will have to conduct its search amidst the backdrop of a school board election in April. The board's handling of the superintendent search could become an issue in the race. If I understand the article correctly, Oswego chose NOT to move forward with a proposed 3rd HS and chose NOT to open 2 completed schools despite the fact that 2008-2009 enrollment INCREASED for them by 712 students. Maybe they know what they can afford and what they can't? Refreshing! Maybe they thought it was better to have a couple of empty completed schools rather than increasing a deficit by the cost it si to run them.
ETA- Sorry for the double post. My computer froze and my post got lost in cyberspace...or so I thought!  |
|
|
|
Post by twhl on Mar 4, 2009 14:12:36 GMT -6
204 facing tough financial times
March 28, 2007
By BRITT CARSON Staff Writer
Even though enrollment continues to increase in District 204, money from the state does not.
"While the number of students continues to grow, our general state aid has not grown accordingly," Holm said. "It has been flat, or even gone down some as well as our transportation reimbursement." - so busing kids half way around the world and back helped the transportation reimbursement Mr Holm ?
Holm said next year the district will start to feel the financial crunch and a deficit is projected.
and just a few months later ...........................
Indian Prairie finances looking bright
September 6, 2007
By BRITT CARSON Staff writer
The financial picture is looking better in the Indian Prairie School District.
David Holm, assistant superintendent of business and finance, said if state finances maintain their current course, the School District could see more money than previously thought.
"Where it stands now, it is more than anticipated, but things are still a little iffy until the Legislature and governor agree on a budget implementation plan," Holm said. "Then we will have a clearer picture as it relates to education funding."
However, Holm said if the increase in the so-called foundation level -- or amount of state spending per student -- is approved at $400, the district would see additional funding.
The district had already planned to spend $2 million on technology improvements. In the past, those improvements and large building projects were funded through referendums. But after the first referendum for Metea Valley High School failed, voters decided to fund those projects through regular budgetary funds.
The result is, although some building projects have been completed, technology is lagging behind, Holm said.
"We need to go through a process and prioritize our needs," Holm said. Nothing more truer can be said Mr Holm. We need that like now
That could mean more money for technology, or saving the money to help with future expenses.
The School Board last week unanimously approved a tentative budget. Holm said district revenues and expenditures for 2008 will be about $257.3 million. Preliminary numbers, pending approval of the state budget, show the district will have a $17,225 deficit. With the current condition of the economy and State one mite imagine this hasn't improved
Holm said the budget will be on the board's agenda for approval at its Sept. 24 meeting. He said it is possible more details about state funding will emerge after that date, but hopes to have a more solid picture by then of what the district can expect
|
|
