Friday, October 09, 2009

Pulaski Community School District, Who Got Fooled

I couldn't make the Pulaski School Board Meeting Wednesday night and haven't seen any news on it. I have to laugh when I see stories like this below.
From MacIver Institute dated Oct 8th.


"The Pulaski Community School District proposed a 12 percent property tax increase to make up for its loss, but voters turned it down. Now the district will have to figure out what to cut out of its budget.
" MacIver Institute

Back on Sept 16, the school board brought up they have a cash flow problem in the district. Till they get money in January 2010 they need a bridge loan to get by. The district said by law they needed to fill out forms to get a bridge loan and needed to know what the levy increase would be. By a voice vote they voted for a 10 % levy increase until they work through the budget. Did the tax payers get fooled with a 10% levy increase, will it be 2,4,6,8 or 12% increase for the people of the district? The Pulaski News dated Oct. 8th had no information on any cash flow problem or voice vote on a temporary levy increase. What the heck, the Pulaski News is a school newspaper, so I am not SHOCKED!

I would say the people of the school district are being played for fools and will keep paying year after year with no common sense from the people who represent them.
Like I said I couldn't make Wednesday's meeting and so far have not seen any news on it. Maybe all parties will educate the children of this district with a responsible budget during these tough times in the economy.

If anyone want's to pass on any information, please do. Maybe someone in the press will look into it. Next Meeting October 21, 6:00 pm.

Update 8:26 am from the Shawano Leader online. I guess I have to go buy a Shawano leader for the rest of the story.

Pulaski board mulls ways to cut budget

By Joan Koehne, Northwoods Media

PULASKI — The Pulaski School Board at its meeting Wednesday considered more than 30 ways to reduce the tax levy for residents of the district.

Refinancing long-term debt and reducing the community service fund tax levy were two major proposals presented, as the board seeks to reduce its budget after voters at the district’s annual meeting defeated the proposed tax levy with a 77-30 vote. About 90 people attended the meeting.

“We had heard loud and clear that the 12.2 percent levy increase was not acceptable to many people, and for good reason,” said District Administrator Mel Lightner.

The board needs to trim the proposed tax levy of $14,482,134, and is scheduled to set the final tax levy at its Oct. 21 school board meeting.

The first proposal presented was refinancing the long-term debt, which would bring significant tax relief now to the taxpayers, but increases the total debt costs over time. Under this proposal, the higher interest rate bonds (at 4.5 or 5.5 percent) would be refinanced at a 3.34 percent interest rate, and a restructured repayment schedule would be implemented. Under the new schedule, less debt would be paid back between 2010 and 2012 and more from 2013 to 2015.

The change would result in an increase of the total debt cost by $169,142, but would lighten the debt burden over the next few years. If the board approves the refinancing option, the tax levy increase would be 6.6 percent over last year instead of 12.1 percent. Any additional changes the board made could reduce the tax levy even more.

Lightner also proposed the board could transfer a significant portion of the community service fund to the general fund.

Other proposals involved reducing staff positions, including not filling a vacant clerical aide position at the middle school and eliminating the high school attendance secretary’s two-hour a day position.

“Because 80 percent of the cost for our school district is personnel, salary and benefits, it’s hard to reduce the budget without cutting personnel,” Lightner said.

More in today's Leader.

At least they are working on it. Time will tell. It looks like Mr. Lightner is working on this and you have to give him credit for his hard work.

No comments: