![[Le Mars Daily Sentinel]](http://www.lemarssentinel.com/images/nameplate-small.png){kind=small}
RSS
Print
Email link
Respond to editor
Read comments (25)Board secretary Lisa Boehm reported a petition with 217 signatures was turned in to her Friday.
(Advertisement)
|
The Le Mars Community Schools Board of Education passed a resolution to implement the levy for five years at their June 9 board meeting.
District residents had until July 7 to petition to put the issue to a vote.
According to a timeline presented by Superintendent Dr. Todd Wendt, with the petition returned, the board at their July 14 meeting will now adopt a resolution of intent to participate in the ISL program and set a public hearing date. That date is expected to be July 25.
The vote would be held Sept. 9, the same day as election for board directors.
This is the second time the board has sought the instructional support levy. In December 2007, the board sought to implement the ISL for the 2008-09 school year to replace state funding which would be lost due to the decline in enrollment of 81 students in the 2007-08 school year. District patrons petitioned for an election which was held in March 2008. The issue was defeated with 1,708 no votes to 1,282 yes votes.
From reading this blog, i get the feeling that many people dislike Dr. Wendt. I guess youre entitled to your opinion of someone.
But your dislike for Dr. Wendt and his desicion making seems to be your main argument. Ask yourselves, should youre beef with Dr. Wendt be taken out on the students?
When punishing Dr. Wendt by restricting the budget and thus making his job harder, you are inevitably punishing the students, which is not right.
And I dont think that it is your place to say that he isnt doing his job. Im willing to bet that you have no idea what his job entails or how hard it really is.
Also, Dr. Wendt does make a lot of money. But he is a doctor, which takes many years of education and hard work. Shouldnt he be paid a larger amount? (the city engineer makes nearly as much as Dr. Wendt, and that only requires a bachelors degree) When comparing Dr. Wendt's salary to other school superintendents, he is right in that range. His salary is very ordinary, so that argument is null.
thank you for those facts dansmith
Talked to the Supt's office and his salary for '07-'08 and the coming '08-'09 are both the $123k figure. In '06-'07 he made the $119k figure.
FoodForThought and all,
Dr. Wendt's increase could have included insurance, but I will get that answered for you Monday.
I hope that passage of the ISL would have the effect of tightening of a belt. My basis for saying this is the original intent of the ISL was to cover 50% of the shortfall we would encounter with the loss of students. In the run up to the first vote we did cut what was projected to be 50% of the shortfall for the '08-'09 school year. The no vote required the second round of cuts.
Even with the passage of the the first ISL my guess is there would still have been another round of cuts because we will probably still have a deficit looking us in the face in the '09-'10 budget. In other words, the way I see it working is to have the ISL cover 1/2 of the deficit and cuts take care of the rest. The ultimate goal being a balanced budget.
Since cuts took care of the total of the shortfall in the '08-'09, my estimation would be that the '09-'10 problem would be much less (this assumes a fairly constant student count). That means the amount we would need to collect would be less than what it would have been the first time around and cuts would be less also.
Hopefully, some day, things balance out either through a proper use of ISL and cuts or increases in enrollment to where ISL funding would zero out (we have talked about it and we can legally reduce it to zero).
This is the way I see it working.
If this isn't clear I did my best and will try again if you want.
Sincerely,
FoodForThought, that was perfect.
I am not against any of the schools in this community. What I am for is a logically thoughtout plan that meets the needs of the school and does not break the town's financial back. Very well stated. Thank you.
Mr. Smith,
I appreciate that you take the time to respond to some of the topics brought forward in these blogs. If you're still checking, I have a question about your response that Dr. Wendt did not get a raise.
In a May 16, 2008 article, the Sentinel wrote, "Board members also approved a three-year contract for Wendt at Monday's meeting. The contract calls for a salary of $123,517 for July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2009. The second year and third year salaries shall be as set by the board but not less than the salary set for the first year of the contract." In their 5/25/07 listing of salaries, Dr. Wendt's salary was listed at $119,098.43. Whether you call it a contractual obligation, cost of living increase, or whatever, I call it a raise. Did I miss something in the public reporting?
As far as the Booster Clubs go, I am aware that they purchase things for these school activities. I have donated to both groups for years. My point was that the students who participate should absorb more of the cost of the programs in which they choose to take part.
I believe people DO want to support education, they just do not want to support free reign spending by a superintendent who has a track record of over-spending and protecting athletics. If you and the rest of the school board members could come up with a way to present this next vote in a way that offers us something new to consider, I think more people will look at both options again. After seeing cuts to programs and none to sports (activity bus is not a sport), we need a reason to trust you with our money. Give us that and you may succeed.
To all,
Extra curricular activities can not save everyone from failure. The same can be said about avoiding TV, cell phones, video games, and casinos. Some people can handle distraction and others can't.
We have raised fees for driver's education to cover our costs. The school lunch program fees went up last meeting with a warning that they might go up again during the coming school year. Other fees are being looked at for possible future action next year.
Our band and athletic booster clubs do pick up a portion of costs for running those programs. In fact we wouldn't have the quality programs that exist now without their help.
The rental receipts from the administration building, football field, school buses, gym use etc., do go into the general fund and help pay general fund eligible expenses. If we sold a piece of property the proceeds would would have to be put back in the "pot" used to purchase it in the first place.
Dr. Wendt did not get a raise.
I don't think anyone likes tax increases. Very good friends of mine voted no last time and told me why. It didn't change the way I feel about them.
This is not war, it is unrest in the community and it is understandable.
With respect,
If it is true that students who participate in extracurricular activities do better in school, then why are they banned from activities if their GPA falls below a certain level? Using your reasoning, shouldn't ANY student whose grades are falling be FORCED into some extracurricular activity?
Yes, I did participate in extra activities in a school smaller than LCHS. We had to raise money through fundraisers and fees to purchase uniforms and equipment. This process didn't damage us, it made us appreciate what we had worked for. As far as learning hard work, teamwork and the like, get kids out from behind their video games and into the work force. They'll learn all those values there, plus they will understand why people don't want to blindly hand over those hard earned dollars.
If the extras like school breakfast, all day kindergarten, free bussing, athletic programs, band, chorus, challenge programs, etc. are causing our budgetary issues, then let's fix the problem before asking for more tax dollars. Maybe some of these non-essentials could be scaled back. (They actually did cut the band program by one part-time instructor.) If it is so important to have these non-academic programs in our system, maybe they should have a cost attached to them, so that those who are taking advantage of a non-essential program help to offset some of the costs. (No, the $30 uniform cleaning fee doesn't count.) And before you start on the have's vs. the have not's, this would be the perfect opportunity for the Booster Clubs and the numerous service clubs in Le Mars to help those who cannot afford the extra fees on their own.
I would be more than happy to vote for the ISL if several things happen before it comes up for a vote. First, I would like a public statement by Dr. Wendt and the school board that they will not reinstitute the administrative position eliminated during the first round of cuts, nor will they add any new administrative positions, regardless of title, during the 10 years of the tax. Second, they change the wording on the ballot and remove the part that says they have free rein to collect up to 10% of their General Fund budget with no further vote. They keep insisting they won't increase their surtaxes, so why not prove it? Finally, the school board and administration need to agree to at least look at schools which have more user fees attached to their programs to see what might work for LCS.
RE FoodForThought
ok sure, the school does spend some money on extra curricular activities and it is arguable on the amount that should be spent. but do you really want to take away any of those opportunities from these children. extra curricular opportunities were probably given to you when you went to high school and probably enhanced your experience during high school.
and extra curricular activities often provide many learning experiences and educates students, maybe not in math, reading, writing but instead hardwork, teamwork, morals, etc. it is true that students that are involved in extra curriculars do better in school and excell after high school, as well.
1. its a blog, give spelling a break.
2.the private school gets many many free things from the public school, i could name several but not all (not my department)
3. This is about having a much smaller budget than usual and trying to make ends meet without destroying the educational opportunity of LCS students, as in raising taxes.
giving the school just enough money to do good business does cut it in my book
Im not pro one school and against another, i want all the kids in this community to be able do well. so allowing this tax is the best option.
1. The word is stadium, not statium. Perhaps your anger clouded your judgement?
2. The private school pays to play there, not sure as to the amount, not my department.
3. This is about spending money not in the budget, as in raising taxes.
Rather than be a bit sneaky, take all of the facts and put it to a public forum.
Current operating expenses, number of students, programs that do not have a good rate of return.
Putting together a budget/business plan.
If it is good and makes sense, I'd be happy to vote yes to it.
But, give the school extra money doing business as usual, does not cut it in my book.
That is all that I am asking for.
I am not pro one school and against another.
I want all the kids in this community to be able to do well.
RE oldonei, Can you tell me who uses the football statuim in Le Mars? Both Schools do! Then I remember that when the LeMars School Board was deciding what to call the new road that was just done in the last year by the statuim. The Board said that BOTH OF THE SCHOOLS USE IT SO IT SHOULD BE CALLED STATIUM DRIVE. It could of been called BULLDOG DRIVE. I am only that both schools are using the public school and it could hurt the private school to in the long run.
RE Dream_IT:
i Toally agree with you I think that some of theses top people need their salaries looked at Mr Wendt I think just got a raise. SAD SAD!!!
I have a question, if one "pot" is used for salaries and another "pot" is used for say purchasing a building, and the money in the pots, by law, cannot be transfered into each other, where does the money from the rental spaces go? I keep seeing on here that the school would be making money off the renters, but to me i just figured that since the money to purchase the new building came from one account shouldnt the rent go back into that account? Mind you, this is my 1st childs firt year of school and I am trying to understand all this.
I have a question, if one "pot" is used for salaries and another "pot" is used for say purchasing a building, and the money in the pots, by law, cannot be transfered into each other, where does the money from the rental spaces go? I keep seeing on here that the school would be making money off the renters, but to me i just figured that since the money to purchase the new building came from one account shouldnt the rent go back into that account? Mind you, this is my 1st childs firt year of school and I am trying to understand all this.
If voting NO will hurt education, maybe the school leadership needs to spend more of their existing funds to actually EDUCATE our children instead of focusing on the EXTRA-curricular activities. Perhaps "former resident" missed the word ACADEMIC in my statement.
I just do not think the reasons presented by the school board justify taking more money from those who can least afford it. Why should an elderly couple, who live on one meager Social Security check and have never had any children, be penalized because Dr. Wendt is only happy if he has the biggest budget when he goes to his administrative meetings?
If they really want the vote to pass this time, the board needs to ignore Dr. Wendt and use some of their OWN education to think out of the box. If they ask the same question, they will likely receive the same answer. Why not shake it up a bit and give us a reason to trust them with more of our hard earned money.
the kids that go to the private school get many free resources from the public school. ive stated this before and im sure you can come up with many things as well. maybe the families of the privates school students should help the other school who has given them so much.
There are pleny of people who will cast a yes vote, when it comes up for a vote.
I believe there are plenty more who will cast a no vote. Not every child who goes to school in this town wears red and black.
Is it fair to add to the burden of those who do not have a child who goes to Community?
Before people ring their hands and say, it is a private school and they pay for their own services, yada, yada. That is true. But that school also has to make hard and fast choices about what they can offer versus wht they can afford.
All that I am asking is that the LCHS board do the same. Public funding is not a cash cow. There are limits. If you really want to talk about students suffering, I suggest looking up Mission Honduras and that will give you all you need to know about being poor and a have not. This town and public school system are far from that.
how can someone say they are "pro-academic excellence" when voting no will ultimately hurt education. wouldnt that be anti-education? ..maybe im just silly and dont understand.
and im sure the school board has a good idea of what enrollment is for next year by based on enrollment from last year's classes. and guessing on their request for more funds, that future enrollment is most likely down, as well.
btw, the school recieves rent from others using that new building, so they are making money.
Drove by the old Wells Corporate and noticed some school maintenance staff mowing the lawn and trimming bushes and got me thinking who is going to vacuum and clean carpets, wash windows, maintain heating and air conditioning, remove snow, spray the lawn, maintain the sprinkler system, pay for the water, pay for heat and electricity, pay for additinal phone system, computer system, take out the trash, change the light bulbs,clean the bathrooms,(all 7 of them) fix the toilet etc. Yah I know, they'll just do it with current staff, if so then we have been way over staffed. Won't be long they'll be asking for a car for transportation back and forth to the school. Seems to be a lack of cost control going on at LCHS right now.
Oh, I too know all about the two different money funds so don't need to here that excuse again.
Let me begin by saying that I am 100% pro-academic excellence. Unfortunately, no one has convinced me that ACADEMIC enhancement is the reason LCS is demanding more of my money.
I agree with "oldone1." What has changed since the vote in March? The board and superintendent didn't even have the sense to wait until the enrollment numbers are known for 2008-09 before bringing this up again. If they had waited until after October 1 and the numbers are even lower than they were last year, they would at least have the argument that more cuts will be needed without the ISL.
As it is, the cuts have been made for the coming year and the budget has been certified, so why do they need a new pot of money opened at this time? Have they suddenly decided to plan ahead? That certainly wasn't the thinking when they purchased the building from Wells Dairy. (Before anyone brings it up, I KNOW the building was purchased with SILO funds! However, all of the upkeep, utilities, etc. come from the General Fund.) The sneaky timing of slipping that major purchase through just before they 'discovered' (over a month after school began) the decline in enrollment really makes me question any of this group's decisions.
Finally, the arrogance is the final straw in this whole fiasco. Dr. Wendt and the school board have consistently painted the 1700 citizens who voted against the ISL in March as being anti-education. How wrong they are! What they don't want to consider is the negative outcome is more likely a mandate against the current school leadership. However, when athletics was the one area unscathed by recent cuts, how can they convince voters that academics will be the primary beneficiary of the increased funding?
but things have changed, things have been cut. the school still needs that money.. get your facts straight.
So, let's say I go to bank "A" and want a loan and they say no. And they give me many good reasons why not. So, six months later I go back to bank "A" and tell them to give me a loan, under the same parameters as before. I'll just bet that they will be very nice but tell me no again.
Because nothing has changed to warrant the lending of the money!
People, it is not the good intentions part that I am stuck on. It is the ability to have to as a community repay. 5 million dollar pool, broken paver bricks on main street, and on and on.
Funding is not unlimited. I for one do not print the money I spend. I have to earn it. Therefore, I am very concerned on what I have to spend it on.
MAKE DO WITH WHAT YOU HAVE!
Our children do need a good education. But, programs that don't work, or don't have enough kids in them, try to be creative without raising taxes.
How about for once giving us taxpayers a break.
I agree that the levy is the best interest for LeMars. I also agree that some sacrifics may be needed, so I say, maybe get rid of the big shots in the school that really do nothing and get paid very well for it. :)
Sometimes we have to do what is good for the community and not only for ourselves. I don't have kids that will benefit directly from the levy but I, as a citizen of LeMars will ultimately benefit from the results of the levy passing. Our community will be providing strong programs that will benefit in molding good future citizens.
Sometimes, we need to look past ourselves and ask what is best for LeMars and, I believe, that the passing of the levy is in the best interest of LeMars.
Will all due respect, while I appreciate the article and what the school feels is necessary, this is a poor choice at the wrong time. I have voiced this once before and will voice it again:
make do with what you have. If you cannot make do, then make sacrifices. Be it sports, god forbid, or whatever it takes. You are a 3A school in a small town. Funding is limited. NOT unlimited. I am sure there are core items that must be met. Respect those and cut those that you cannot afford and are not must have's. HELLO?!