See this levy is not right it does not address the long term financial needs of our schools.
The sjsd also knows this and in this article says they know it is not going to be enough.
They also have said they would have to look at making further cuts to programs but they would not right away but they would later down the road.
Lets translate that they will be cutting services further for our children.
Now the main wuestion is if they know this not enough and does not address the long term financial needs of the schools and district then why in the heck did they put it back on the ballot this November?Why did they not engage the ENTIRE community and work with the community to gain support and come up with a long term levy proposal that would address the needs of our schools instead they have choosen to go with a outside group that is out of touch wit hthe needs of the schools and the wants of the community as a whole.The have wasted 6 months to bring back something that is not going to work and also have come back at a time when the district has done nothing to solve the current mess they have created for the community and the teachers and children.I m sure these people are educated but lok they sure are not showing it in their decisions that they are making.So in all realality if the levy passes it still is not going to address the finanacial needs and they still will take programs away and if it does't pass they will take programs away.So why vote for something that is not right for our schools and is going to get things taken away anyways.So they need to get off of their butts and wuit acting like a bunch of bullies and get out in the community and roll thier sleves up and get this levy right with the community support.It may take a few of you alls Saturdays as your teachers have to do to get ready for the next weeks classes because of the mess you have created for them.What a Joke do it the first time not over and over and over.

--"As a result, the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education would take over district operations."

At least our little friends won't have to worry about the evil BoE anymore.

Yea there might be a upside to this after all.A bunch of out of touch people removed from office.Then there would be a special election at some point to replace them all.Just personal opinions but why would you let the situation get this far before you worried about things?They had 5 years under the last levy to get it right and also back in April they had to know this 63 cent levy was not going to be enough.So what is really their plan does anybody including the admin and board actually know?I would say they are the ones running our schools right into the ground not the public.You do not know what they want or need as well as they do not know.And their unwillingness to address the community and gain support and trust.And they want people to trust them.Also how does this levy if they know it is not enough over the next 5 years is this going to help with the long term plan of our schools?I mean look they will be asking and asjking for more and more on the ballot in less thenm a couple of years and this article just about comes out and said that so why not do it the first time?I t also said it would not affect thetax rate till Nov 2010 meaning they would not get the additional revenue till 2011.By going at the levy this way and having to come back does not help the cuase and will not get passed everytime it is on a ballot.50,000 dollars wasted to puit something on the ballot that is not right what a waste.Hold on people they are going to run the schoools straight into the ground.What bunch of out of touch people in charge.If this fails and it probably will they have till next year before November elections to get it worked out and get it back onto the ballot with community support for the revenue will come in the same time in 2011.But this approach will have them coming back to the tax payer several times and it will not pass anymore when they have already admitted this is not enough at this time and person can see this unfolding in front of our eyes.Maybe someone can go ahead and place that call to the state and invite them to go ahead and come.Our children education is going right down the drain because of a select few out of touch people.

Apple they have said the 63 cent levy is not enough so why would you persue it and not do what is right and do it the first time?
And the a reserve also brings on more questions then answers if they say this time 63 cents is not enough and it is not enough.Why would you want to continue to fight the voters everytime you ask for more levy increases?Is the sunset what we really want?Does this really address the finacial needs of the schools?No it does not and they will have to come back before the 5 year levy expires.They have also said that with the 63 cent levy they will still be a distressed school district.So if you have till next year to get something passed which is right why proceed this way when they know it is not right.All this going to do is cause more issues down the road and it will be harder the next time to get more from the voters.Surely you understand this.You yourself say that we need to do what is right and this is not right and they have said this.

The "threat" that the state of MO will "take over" the SJSD is a complete red herring!

Many powerful people in KCMO have been begging the state of MO to take over its school district and it keeps turning a blind eye after the mess it is experiencing after taking over the St Louis, MO school district.

Our community is no where near having its school district taken over by the state.

"She added that at the end of four years, the reserve fund would be at about 6 percent, which would place the district on the state’s financially distressed list."

Again, WHY??? The 63 cent levy with the sunset clause does not address any immediate needs or solve any long term problems. WHY???

Why wait and see if you are going to make cuts again go ahead and tell the public instead of making more people nad when you harshly make these cuts you will probably be making.

mm it is because they have no reason to make cuts they have plenty in the reserves to spend as they had been spending with NO cuts.

We seem to have two lists going so:

If the 63 cent levy does nothing then why have it? Trixie's premise is flawed. While it appears from some reports that this levy is not the end all be all, it does raise some money and leverages money from the state under the finance formula. So there is additional cash.

Sure, it is not the silver bullet sought by so many. Is the better for the district to have the levy at 63 cents or none? Is it better to have the 63 levy with a sunset clause or none? If you were to talk with members of the task force (call them what you like) who are supporting the current pending levy request, they would agree that a higher levy without a sunset provision is most desireable. They are trying to perform first aid and stop the bleeding. Then they get a more detailed long term plan in place (or at least one that exists outside of Dr. Smith's head) so that they can rally the community to support it.

So many on this list seem to not like the current proposal because it is not the endgame. Yeah, but we are laying by the road bleeding. Stopping the blood flow is the first priority. Second will be getting the surgery done to repair the damage.

If you think the district has undisclosed contingency plans why don't you make a sunshine law request and then post the results.

yougottabekiddingme,you are correct but I bet and really believe there will be more cuts as they have stated if nothing else to look like it is our fault the levy failed if it indeed does.I will say one thing if the levy passes and it is for 5 years they can come back and back several time and we would not support any more till the end of the 5 years just because they know themselves this is not enough and not the right way to go for our school and they indeed plan on coming back before the levy would expire.Do it right or not at all.This is also in my opinion going to hurt their long range plans for the schools and biulding new schools if indeed they do come back to the public and ask for more operating money before the levy is ready to expire in 5 years.They are their own worst enemies.

mm1967, so why don't you ask the question as I suggested above?

drb. there is no need for a sunshine request. i was at the meeting when the BOE specifically asked their attorney to give them an example of the language that would be on a subsequent ballot either allowing the district to add on to the 63 cent levy or to replace it with a completely separate issuance.

the BOE was assured by their legal counsel that simply because they are going with a five year sunset does not prevent them from altering or superceding this levy with another.

Check out this new op-ed piece from the NY Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/13/opinion/13allen.html?_r=1

Would anyone complain if they sold Central and leased it back? What if they got 20 million and used it to buy St. Joe Christian and converted it to a grade school? What if they sold Benton and used the proceeds to build a new grade school in the south end?

dr, I like it. Looks like an easy fix. The only problem I see is that it requires Congress to do something that makes sense. How do we get them to change the language?

I'm not so sure as it is merely an IRS regulation not a statute. But, here is where to get their addresses:

http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/

Write your letters

(make sure to copy Obama)

I say we do away with the socialist system of public schools and make people who send their children to school be the only ones to pay for their education. I mean in the big scheme of things this is the suggestion people are making about public health care.

Ok apple by them telling us they are going to make cuts and they will wait till next year to tell us what the cuts will be is like as snake hiding in the grass getting ready to strike.Go ahead and tell us because it will be their fault anyway you look at it because they know this levy is not enough and they went ahead and in my opinion wasted 50,000 by putting the levy back on the ballot and they knew it was not enough if it passes.So in all reality they will be making more cuts if it passes or not.This is the way I see it because this amount does not indeed take care of the financial needs of our schools.

dr - I guess we will have to count on Mr. Rangle (tax cheat) to cut us taxpayers a break then. I am not sure cc'ing Obama will help much of anything unless I sit on the committee of a group that is offering some kind of prize.

Perhaps we could convince the state to give him a blue ribbon award....would be about as deserved as the Nobel Prize.

Worth a shot. Surely there is a loophole of some sort. Any tax attorneys out there?

Perhaps the Shearin Prize ... A Steak Across the Face!

drbjr,
I think this is what the public has gotten from the district a slap in the face a time or two.But both sides need to get past this and do what actually right for our schools,children,teachers.

How about a comment on the proposal?

takes two to tangle,don't see alot of good dancers in this town.

[re:1:l8 PM] Dr. B., First off, I would not want to be on the board or administration that proposed selling Central High School or Benton High School. This would arouse an ire that would make me think it might be wiser for me to leave town. Over 2/3 of this town would erupt. If a building with asbestos in it, which I believe these buildings have, though safely wrapped for protection, were to be sold, the asbestos would have to be removed---cost prohibitive. Then you get into boilers, air conditioning, mold, air quality things. Plus, I wonder what the good folks at CHS or BHS would think if they were evicted from their building.The South would surely rise again. Relating to the purchase of St. Joe Christian...I think somebody better talk to them first, before you buy their building. I think any grade school would enjoy their football field for a playground. Wait a minute, I've got a better idea. Let's buy Bishop LeBlond. After all, they have a new gym, and a football field with good seating. I also like their front sign and after all, they have a great carnival every year. :)

dillygent1, did you read the article I referenced? The plan would be for the lease back of the buildings and the refurbishment by the new owners. The excess proceeds could be used by the district for other purposes.

The real idea here is lets consider other ideas that are outside the box and not just immediately dismiss them.

drbjr,
As dillygent1 said I do not think it would go over very well in the Central or Benton district to do this and I think she said the south would rise for sure then.And as dillygent pointed out I do not think anybody would be willing to do all of the work involved in renovating these biuldings that were biult in the early 1900's and if they did the district could not afford what the owners would want tot charge for the lease.I am not saying this is not a workable plan but not for our schools and our community and as stated above would not go over very well in the community.

It seems to have worked in other places so why not look at it and consider it? If memory serves central was built during the depression. Benton was largely built before that.

drb, just got a look at your article.

looks like a win-win. i wonder if the "developer" would be able to skirt other aspects of government building regulations ( for instance using union scale) for another perk to this route? can the schools depreciate their buildings now? would the new "owners" be able to? i would assume that the lease would be negotiated to lock both parties together in perpetuity.

public-private cooperation..... how novel. we could have state of the art schools on a par with the mead building in its modernity.

That article is a great example of thinking outside of the box. That kind of problem solving is something that the downtown administration is lacking. It reminds me of a news story I saw last week where instead of asking the town to pass a levy, the superintendent looked for ways to save money. He said he spent some time amounting to about six weeks added altogether bargain shopping, he got donations and bought used items from businesses that were going out of business or relocating. I can't remember how much he saved but it was a substantial amount of money and he got good stuff. One thing he did was buy cubicles that a business was selling and then turned around and leased them to another business providing another source of revenue for the district.

I am thinking that if we saw stuff like this going on downtown, it would go a long ways to establishing trust.

"public-private cooperation..... how novel." Perhaps Heartland could spend some of its record profits building a school in the Northeast. May help them fix their PR problem and help out the district. Win-win.

There you go yougottabekiddingme let Heartland biuld the school to the NE and lease it to the district.But they have a long way to go with the PR problem it would help some but therest would man rolling their sleves up and getting a little dirty.

no dumb dumb, that would be stupid. I was giving examples of what another district was doing to save money. But, if they needed something, like say, new office furniture for a new administrator, that could be purchased used. I hear there are lots of good deals on Craigslist. ; )

Apple you are correct name calling is not right but remember you reverted back to it last night when I was giving you a complement.I think I was called a idiot again and then when you realized someone was giving you a complement and it took you a while you came back with your famous line it was a joke.So lets quit the name calling all together.

heritage, I'm no expert on accounting, but governments don't pay taxes so they would not depreciate for tax purposes. They may depreciate for other accounting purposes.

The idea behind this is similar to what has happened on the Townsend and Wall building. I have seen the financial projections on it and it makes very little money. No where near enough to justify the money spent on the building. The real deal is that by the time they sold off the tax credits there was very little debt left on the building. The purchase price can be depreciated and the improvement subject to various tax credits which can be sold to finance the whole thing. At the end of the deal the properties tend not to be worth much so the district could buy it back for a song.

Dr. B., Sorry, I still haven't had time to read your article, but I did catch the part about the lease. It is definitely thinking out of the box, which this town does need, so I shouldn't treat it lightly. Aren't TIFF's involved with some of the remodeling downtown? There would still be an issue about asbestos in buildings and old boilers. Relating to the asbestos, if the owner doesn't change, it is grandfathered in and is allowed. If the owner changes, you have to pull the asbestos out. Who's maintaining the buildings? The landlord who bought the building, or is it still the school district's responsibility? There should be liability insurance for injuries on these premises, which would put the owner at risk. Given the school district's pension to change technology, often, would wiring and hook-ups for new technology be a district expense or an owner's expense? I guess my big question is that if the school district sells the building and leases it back, what is the responsibility of each party? The other thing to keep in mind is that when you float some kind of ballot referendum, which I would almost think you would have to here, because it is the taxpayers who own the buildings, you have to sell the majority of the voting public.

The devil is in the details isn't it? I would guess that would be a negotiated deal. It isn't like this is the first time someone has sold an old building and leased it back so there are other deals out there to look at and see how it worked out. It is a lot different than renting a house or apartment.

On the asbestos, I thought the district did that years ago, but just selling a building doesn't mean you have remove it.

With new boilers and such, there may also be green tax credits available.

Instead of viewing this as a negative, let's try to come up with new solutions that work. Turning the Corby Building into a school probably would not work, but at least it is an idea. Rather than continue to gripe or bicker like some on this list want to do, lets brainstorm and get some ideas out there. Maybe someone will take the time to catalog them and give it to the Board.

I hear people crying the 63 cents is not enough, your right they should asking for over a dollar, but do you think that would pass even with a long term plan, in this town yeah right.Colonel Sanders himself couldn't sell that.

I personally think it would if people trusted the district but you are right till they get off of their butts and get out and work with the community and sell the levy for the long term financial needs of the schools its seems as if nothing is going to pass.Only time will tell and Nov 3rd is coming very quickly.

Apple please do not start the name calling I have told you several times I do not Hate get it in that think skull of yours already.

So apple after the election on the 3rd can we expect you to tell us what you involvement with the district or the TF or the GOF is actually?

Ok apple continue to hide.After reading some of your other post you apple indicate by saying we when refering to the district and or the TF so see some believe you are involved or employed by in some fashion and those are just personal opinions."We" says you are involved in those post of yours.

Apple
I have a very nice wife apple,might I tell you a gorgous wife that graduated from Benton High School that is not garbage.So I do not really need to find a woman my wife just happens to work in the medical field and works 12 hr shifts at night.You might want to go read those post the last one I read you were talking about the district and you specifically said "we".

Might I add you may want to take another break yourself before you go off the deep end.So apple as I asked you in the other post why have you flip flopped on the levy issue first you said you were against it and now it seems as if you support it.

You are sorry person that all I can say I will not make a hind end out of myself I just enjoy watching you make one out of yourself.I like how you handle someone asking you questions about the "WE" statements

Thank you apple I am glad to see that you think that the sunset is not the right direction.And thank you for answering.Now you may be correct but you fail to see thattheir is other underlying issues at this point that is now hurting their cause on this levy. lIKE ALL THAT HAS TRANSPIRED SINCE April when the voter turned down the bond issue and the levy.So now they have a larger challenge and they did not address it before the levy was put back on the ballot and apple might I remind you in some of your other post you have said this as well.

Apple one of your post on Oct 13 at 8:09.

all i wish is that the people of this town would stop and look at what this levy not passing before and possibly again can do to our families..yes i work for the district, yes my position was cut after the levy failed and i got put somewhere else( because i had a little seniority), and yes i took a pay cut...and i dont make alot of money here, my children get reduced lunch from the district that their mother works for, my income is that low...i do this job because i love children and want them to thrive...i am scared to death that if this fails, i will be cut again and not get placed somewhere else...i wish we would all stop the fighting, maybe give up a small luxury a month to help pay for this tax and take care of the children and others who live in our city...we need to quit placing blame and coming up with the we should, we could of, etc and do the right thing...i am afriad many higher up than myself has just thrown in the towel, as they have no chance of losing their 6 digit salaries..we are stubborn, selfish beings and thats a sad thing to instill in our children..

noneya - please realize many of those posting comments that aren't supportive of the district actually would support a HIGHER levy with NO SUNSET. I believe almost everyone's primary concern can be tied to a lack of trust between the BEO & Admin and the local community.

I think you will find that most also empathize and sympathize with your situation and really respect the work and sacrifices you are making to help your kids.

Noneya, do your fellow employees feel the way you do? I have always voted for school revenue issues, but I still believe that if staff and parents support this levy, it passes. I would give anything to see a poll that would ask 2 questions of parents and staff...Are you registered in St. Joseph, Mo. to vote for this issue? Will you support the 63 cent levy? If they are registered and if they truly believe the money is needed, this issue passes. Noneya, I also hope your financial situation improves.

I am not sure on how everyone else feels, but I do know that myself and co-workers on our own time have worked hours and hours to help get the public informed, get the right facts out in an adult, honest and truthful manner....I know alot of citizens think that we are paid big bucks..I would be more than happy for anyone to take a look at my paycheck, to look at the endless hours I spend of my own time for the love of my job and to look at the amount of my own money I use for the sake of the kids...I get great joy when I see children learning, smiling and feeling loved in my environment and that reward outweighs any paycheck...I am a voter, i will once again vote yes..I am a homeowner, so I am also hit hard in this tough economic time and I just tighten the belt at home..I do know that there are many like myself, who worry about losing jobs, as many in the nation are...Thanks for all the kind words and lets hope things go well for us at the polls..Blessings...

With due respect, my rationale for not supporting this levy has nothing to do with salaries, how much staff cares about kids, volunteering efforts, etc. I highly respect all those elements. I disagree with the present direction and my argument supports the direction is not the best way to go. I will not support solutions that have been proven time and time again to be ineffective. This present direction was highly critisized in the last go around as not the right way to go for the future by alot of people and the fact the mindset now is there is no confidence within the community to reargue for what is truly needed is not good enough. I am believer the sunset clause has hurt progression in the past and will continue to hurt progression in the future. I also believe the last levy was entirely used for all its intended purposes which gives me more validation this is not the way to go. I believe the sunset clause hurts the future educational processes for childern more then helps it. Because of the unstability of this approach, more time and effort is spent on utilizing extreme conservative approaches to budgetary concerns then for growth and then this comes up again every five years, so once again time and effort is taken away from planning improvement and progression and is placed on campaigning for the next go around with the public. Argue for what we truly need or we do not need it, that is what I stand on, I put my name to it, and No in November is how I will vote.

What bothers me is that the classrooms suffer for administrative blunders. Most of my complaints about the school district have centered upon the decision making and community relations processes.The thing a voter has to realize is that no matter what else happens, it is what goes on in the classroom, that matters. What happens at this level concerns me more than what happens downtown. I think Mr. Snethen had the right idea when he suggested waiting, getting their act together, then presenting a plan to the public.