FoxPolitics.net - Appleton, WI News - What's really going on in the Fox Cities

FoxPolitics.net Blogs

FoxPolitics News

Local/State Govt Links

Salaries

• Appleton School District, 2007-08
• City of Appleton
• Town of Grand Chute
• City of Menasha
• City of Neenah

Candidates

City of Appleton

• Elected Officials
• Salary Watch
• Directory
• Mtg. Agendas/Minutes

Advisory Board

Blogroll

Selected News Sources:
Business Jrnl of Milw
Christian Science Monitor
Daily Caller
Drudge Report
La Crosse Tribune
Milw Journal Sentinel
National Journal
New York Times
Public Policy Forum
Real Clear Politics
Stateline
The Hill
TPM
Washington Examiner
Washington Post
Washington Times
WI State Journal
Selected Blogs - from the Right:
American Mind
Blaska's Blog
Boots & Sabers
Charlie Sykes
Dad29
Freedom Eden
Heritage Foundation
Jerry Bader Blog
Life Voice
Marketplace of Ideas
Marquette Warrior
Natl Review Online
No Runny Eggs
Patrick McIlheran
Real Debate Wisconson
RedState
Rhymes with Clown
Shark and Shepherd
The Lote Tree
Vox Populi
Wall Street Jrnl, Opinions
WI State Jrnl, Opinion
Wigderson Library & Pub
Wisconsin Family Voice
WPRI
Selected Blogs - from the Left:
Big Money Blog
Blogging Blue
Brenda Konkel
Caffeinated Politics
Capital Times
FightingBob
Folkbum's rambles
Griper Blade
Huffington Post
Lost Albatross
MAL Contends
Mid coast views
Moneyed Politicians
One Wisconsin Now
Open Left
Playground Politics
Political Environment
Rock Netroots
Talk to Tony
Uppity Wisconsin
Waxing America

Today's Blog: Time for the Guv to morph into Chris Christie
My husband and I and a couple hundred friends watched in Green Bay as ...(more)

Search Archives

Blogs

Time for the Guv to morph into Chris Christie (6/28/2011)

Time for Gov. Walker to talk more about the cake (3/4/2011)

Today, reality hits home (3/1/2011)

FoxPolitics News going on hiatus (1/28/2011)

Brown County Executive candidate forum Feb. 8 (1/28/2011)

Education done right (1/27/2011)

To Obama, the ‘We’ is Government (1/27/2011)

(more)

1/22/2008
Taxpayer-funded referendum "education"

This really bugs me. Kenosha Unified School District has budgeted $10,000 to campaign in favor of their $52.5M referendum on the ballot February 19 that asks voters to approve the building of a new high school. And be not mistaken, this is going to be repeated time and time again, school district after school district throughout the state, both February 19 and April 1. As reported by the Kenosha News:

…the school district is spending upward of $10,000 in fliers, surveys and color brochures to convince you - and all voters - to approve the referendum Feb. 19 to build a new high school.

The strategy is a one-two punch to get feedback from the community and sway voters to approve a new comprehensive high school to relieve overcrowding, said Pat Finnemore, the district's director of facilities.

Here’s more – and it’s a good thing the Kenosha News clarified the goal of that $10K that’s set aside for “educating.”

"It's not really about convincing so much as it is about educating," said [Pat] Finnemore [the district’s Director of Facilities], who has been intimately involved in the process for more than a year. "We truly do want to get people's input, and we also want to let them know about the overcrowding situation.

"The reality is if we spend $10,000 to get word out on a referendum that will cost $52 million, I think that's appropriate. I think we would be criticized severely - and rightfully so - if the only thing people heard about this came from word of mouth and (the Kenosha News). It's our responsibility to get this out and give it a chance."

So, that’s $10,000 of your taxes going to pay for efforts to spend more of your taxes. Now, if you’re a local community group that believes the referendum should not pass – for one reason or the other – where do you suppose your $10,000 is for campaigning against the referendum?

Put on your boots and start raising the campaign money you need, American style. Register as a campaign committee first so you don’t get in trouble with the Campaign Gestapo.

It’s a 2-sentence annotation in the Wisconsin State Statutes that permits all this to happen.

A school board that informs the electorate of facts pertinent to the subject of a school district referendum and does not expressly advocate for a particular [sic] need not register or file campaign financing reports under ch. 11. 68 Atty. Gen. 167.

I don’t know what it means to “not expressly advocate for a particular” – but you get the idea. The school district gets to “educate” you on your own dime.

The Green Bay School district provides a good example of a full court press put on by the school district all in the name of “educating” the public about their February, 2007 referendum. Here’s the home page for referendum information – and here’s the fancy brochure.

Another pet peeve. Every “educational” brochure you see put out by a school district “explaining” a referendum will include a chart of the Mill Rate History for the school district. You can see such a chart here, at the top of the .pdf of Green Bay’s classy "educational" brochure. They show the public, in some dramatic graph or another, how the mill rate has declined substantially since 1992-93. Well, duh. It’s been during the time since 1992-93 the state jumped in with the commitment to pay for 2/3 of school costs. And the state instituted spending caps. So the fancy graph is like comparing apples to oranges – and nobody (nobody that’s financed anyway) is out there to point out the errors of the district’s ways.

COMMENTS

Jo, once again I agree with you, however, neither side should have to send money if the local newspapers would report clear and unbiased information. Most people in the past relied on local newspapers to get their local information from, now it seems that some reporters feel the need to "make" news, or at least slant their reports. I see this in every "Post Cresent" article written about the Town of Grand Chute, by Bob Lowe. Editors need to ensure that their reporters are accurate and unbiased, then we can rely on their articles, and may not need to spend all kinds of taxpayer’s money on "communication and education". Keep the news "news" and express opinions in editorials.

Bruce Sherman (Tue Jan 22 09:02:35 2008)

Well said Jo.

David (Tue Jan 22 09:23:13 2008)

Jo,
Your article points out a line that is becoming so blurry that legislative clarification may be appropriate. When you look at the materials distributed by districts and their surrogates, they are clearly advocacy documents and not merely educational. If teachers approached their classrooms with this sort of advocacy education, only one side would be presented and the teacher could justifiably face rebuke for being an advocate rather than an educator.

An interesting irony is that members of the current referendum committee in Green Bay have the belief that the last referendum failed only because the district and local news media did not do enough to inform (sell) the public.

Terry Fondow (Tue Jan 22 18:28:53 2008)

You must remember Jo, "It's for the children."

(Tue Jan 22 21:16:48 2008)

Oh my gosh. Of course. For the children. That's all that need be said!

Jo E. (Wed Jan 23 03:36:02 2008)

My guess is that it'll suffer the same fate as our HS swimming pool, which was rejected, but that they are blowing $10K is troubling.

Jack Lohman (Wed Jan 23 16:01:56 2008)

I was led to this thread from Boots and Sabers. Jo, I don't think you can have it both ways. School boards and district expend tremendous effort to decide whether they should hold a referendum for extraordinary spending. It's not something they do eagerly. Your elected school board decides whether or not to hire professionals to explain the situation as even-handedly as possible. The consultants are not eager to get into trouble by allowing a district to cross the line into advocacy, either. (I believe the missing word in the annotation is either "result" or "vote", judging by the rest of Wis. Stat. 11.23). They go to great lengths to explain whatever fact situation they're given, to reach out to every community group and media outlet they can find, to answer every question. They can't advocate a "yes" or "no" vote any more than, say, AFP could've crossed the line on advocacy on their recent robocalls into West Bend homes. Yet AFP gloats when the DA finds they only came "dangerously close" to violating the rules. Both parties are held to the same scrutiny. We all get a vote. What can be more fair than that? Your (and Owen/Wendy's) suggested alternative is what - not trying to inform the public about a multi-million taxation proposal? Not seek expert advice on how to explain it fairly and not violate the law? Maybe they shouldn't use attorneys to make decisions, either, and the superintendent should shovel the walk to save a few bucks.

John Foust (Wed Jan 30 17:17:39 2008)

John, John, John. What could be more fair? I'll tell you. When a school district spends $10,000 for an "education" program, allocate $10,000 to opponents (would have to be organized and registered) of the referendum. Because a school district spends time and money studying an issue, that means the taxpayers should roll over and play dead? When the school district "educates" (and I'm not claiming that they go over any line and advocate - though they probably do), and there is no voice on the other side of the issue (there is ALWAYS a second side to a school district - or any governmental - policy issue), this becomes all the voter knows. This then is advocacy. One small example - the tax levy rate information I mention above, that is used by virtually every district out there trying to have a referendum approved - It's patently misleading information. My tax dollar is paying for that kind of "education?"

Jo E. (Wed Jan 30 18:09:39 2008)

As a reader wrote earlier today Dave, depreciation allowances - and other cash flow considerations, contribute significantly to decisions about capital expansion - or not. And without plant and business expansion, there's no employment growth. It may be you, it may be that neighbor down the street, who ultimately will be out of a job when businesses begin to spend less. You can't fabricate an economy any other way. There's no way that the value of dollars paid to a laborer (in exchange for no production) is equal to the impact of growing businesses, new jobs, more capacity, more production. If one of us gets extra time, we must review the economics of it. I'm sure ample research exists addressing the issue.

Jo E. (Wed Jan 30 19:48:24 2008)

Most school districts send out a monthly newsletter, run a web site, make public access shows, etc. to help keep the public informed of how their tax dollars are being used. The annual budget for monthly newsletters sent to taxpayers (parents of students or not) probably far exceeds this $10,000. "The school" is us.
If you don't want to spend money on pro PR, tell your school board. Similarly, the district's entire PR process - pro or not - is again under the control of elected school boards, hired supers, and often a good dollop of citizen committees. Go play and change their course. Tell them your view of mill rates.
Is the average private anti-referendum group subject to the same public openness, scrutiny and accountability? Of course not, and you and I wouldn't want it that way. I'm surprised you're advocating for this sort of public financing of elections. It's not just "us" vs. "them", after all, especially with multi-question referendums. How many sides and permutations would you like to fund? Play dead? No, all you need to do is vote "no". It's much more effort to participate, but maybe that's what you have to do if you want a more eloquent expression of your desires. I disagree John. Broadly. Specifically. Everywhere. Opponents of referendums are hindered in that they don't have the same funds at their disposal as does the district. It's as plain and simple as that. Voting without being informed - by all sides of an issue - is worse than not voting at all. JE

John Foust (Wed Jan 30 20:37:34 2008)

The mill rate chart does not compare apples to oranges. The laws and policies (revenue caps, a loose commitment to 2/3 funding state wide) that led to the mill rate reductions (by limiting the taxing power of local districts) created the current system where referenda are required to exceed the caps. It is all part of the same plan and referenda are integral to that system.

Thomas J. Mertz (Sat Feb 02 11:19:21 2008)

I disagree 300%. The graph discussed is very misleading. Nothing in the information tells voters the radical decline in property tax was attributable to state largesse. In addition, comparing tax rates is never, ever appropriate. The proper comparison is of the Total Tax Levy, one year to the next. See "It's the Tax Levy, Stupid". (Eek, that's the title of the FoxPolitics.net piece, I don't mean to be getting personal here!)

Jo E. (Sat Feb 02 16:38:22)

Post a Reply

Print this Article

Email Article to a Friend