Print this story |
E-mail story |
This story has 29 comments | Add your own |
iPod friendly | Bookmark this
What is this?
Keenan, Kritzer and Lees elected, referendum fails
Published Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Voters elected Aaron Keenan, Jeff Kritzer and Richard Lees to the Austin School Board Tuesday. They rejected a levy operating referendum.
Keenan, Kritzer, Incumbents Lees, David Simonson and Mary Kleis, and Jeff Ollman were vying for three open seats.
Newcomer Aaron Keenan, vice president of operations at Austin Medical Center, lead the race with 2,303 votes. He came in with the most votes in five of six precincts.
“I thank the community for coming out and voting. I am happy with the school board election results, and sad about the results of the referendum,” Keenan said.
Another new face on the board will be Jeff Kritzer, an attorney and partner with Baudler, Baudler, Maus and Blahnik, LLP, who took 2,104 votes.
Incumbent Richard Lees, fourteen-year board member, retired teacher and current probation officer, received 1,961.
“I am pleased I can be a part of the board for the next few years,” Lees said.
The election ends retired Austin Police Department lieutenant David Simonson’s 18-year rally on the school board — at least for now.
“I enjoyed listening to the other candidates during the forums, and I am sure those elected will do a fine job,” Simonson said.
He said he is not sure whether he will run in the future.
“I have been on the board a long time, and right now I am fine sitting back,” he said.
Incumbent candidate Mary Kleis served one term. It was Jeff Ollman’s first time running.
The levy operating referendum was denied by a margin of 116 votes.
“While I am definitely excited, and very grateful to be elected,” Kritzer said, “I am also very disappointed that the referendum did not pass. We are going to have to make some tough budget decisions.”
The 10-year referendum would have in effect revoked two existing operating referendums that provide $304.53 per student, and instead provided $531.32 per student per year.
The two existing referendums are due to expire in 2010 and 2011.
The referendum would have brought $1.09 million in revenue into the district, effective the 2010-2011 fiscal year, costing owners of a $100,000 home a property tax increase of $84.
The proposed increase was in response to legislative funding freezes for 2009-2010 and 2010-2011, and a poor outlook for future state funding.
“The referendum is the thing that most of us were the most concerned about. The results are very disappointing,” Lees said.
More than 90 percent of the schools in the state have operating levies. A total of 58 schools across the state voted on levies Tuesday.
The referendum could be brought to a vote again next year.
“The district is going to need that funding,” Simonson said.
“I am sure they will clearly demonstrate the need to voters next year, and the people will step up to help the district out. The students need it,” Simonson added.
There were 12,392 residents registered to vote before the election. There were 4,306 voters who cast ballots in the school board election, and 4,270 voted on the referendum.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SHARE THIS STORY?
Comments
Posted by nitsua (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 12:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)
its nice to see that we we the people were on hand to stop this referendum, we don't need more taxes to pay!
my thanks to the people that came out to vote,
Posted by oldman (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 12:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm so happy to see that the referendum vote fail, has the school board looked at cutting 10 administration and director jobs??? I doubt it cuase the they always look to the classroom to make the cuts first. If they cut 10 jobs from the upper level I bet they could save close to 1.5 million every year by the time you figure wages and benifits!!! Maybe this is a wake up call to the school board and administration to wake up and pull their heads out of an end zone and smell the roses, how much do they think the taxpayers of this school district can afford when we have been hit with a good 15% tax increase this year by the county for the new Taj Mahjail that we really don't need!!!
Posted by johnypopper1 (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 5:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Too bad it didn't pass. Hope that we can keep up the pace with the other schools with curriculum. However they need to streamline the upper management jobs and see what is needed and what they can do without. Then leave the money in the classroom. At least we were not voting on a new school, that one will come down the road!!!!
As far as the jail, we didn't have a choice to build. The DOC made it very clear the county can't operate the current jail. We would pay far more in the long run to house all of the fine law abiding citizens in an other county. Now when their over crowded, maybe we can make some money on them! And by looking at it, I've saw more elaborate jails. Just a thought.
Death and taxes.....only two gaurentees in life......
Posted by austinmn55912 (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 7:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"As far as the jail, we didn't have a choice to build. The DOC made it very clear the county can't operate the current jail."
The above statement is NOT true. The DOC did NOT tell us that we could not operate our current jail. They only told us that we could not house prisoners for longer than 90 days. We are running the jail TODAY under the DOC guidelines and it is working just fine. We will spend 600,000 this year renting space. Once the new jail is in place we will spend 3,000,000 per year for the same thing. ANYONE that can run even a simple amortization schedule can figure out that there is NO WAY this will save money. Not in our kid's lifetimes.
This 30,000,0000 drunk tank cost us the school referendum.
Posted by leftys2221 (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 8:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
They will not cut administration jobs, it will be teachers. Larger class sizes are on the way.
Posted by usedtolivethere (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 8:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It is too bad you people can only think about the jail! It is not the children of the district that caused the jail to be built, but their parents! If you quit thinking about the children, you will need a larger jail to house the delinquents that you gave up on!!!
Posted by notsuprised (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 8:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It's for the children!!!!! Give me a break.
Posted by metisman (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 9:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Tax payers are weary of decisions that result in increased taxes.
I've asked for an accounting of the highest paid individuals in the school district. I suspect there are dozens of high paying jobs that have no contact with students.
Anyone with answers? Maybe an investigation by a tv or Herald reporter?
My guess is that the highest paid jobs are for people who are not in the classrooms. Is one administration worth several teachers?
Cut a number of administrators, save lots of money, save teaching positions. Because it is all about the kids, right?
Posted by highway105 (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 9:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Absolutely it's for the CHILDREN! Thanks for voting no-what does that prove?? Administration will still take home the same paychecks-you did nothing to change that.
Posted by notsuprised (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 9:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Personally I did not vote, as I didn't know who to vote for. I just think you're having to going to do better then a cliche to get people to open up their wallets in this economy.
I think people might be shocked to find that many folks would have to check their account balance before writing an $84.00 check.
Posted by austinmn55912 (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 10:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I predict that the sky will not fall. It will pass next year.
Posted by dirtyduster (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 10:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)
austin I believe towards the end of the decision process the state gave a certain amount of time to decide on the jail then they were going to shut it down.....to bad the referendum failed, now once again the kids will pay the price.....
Posted by tcsmiley (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 11:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I am sorry but the jail has notheing to do with this. The administrators always get their cut, but the teachers and students are the ones who suffer. When an administrator quits their job or wants out of their contract, why does the school district pay out their contract? (I know this because my co-worker used to work at the school in an administrative position) They are the ones who quit, what a big waste of school distirct money! I think you need an overhaul of your system!
Posted by callmepd (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 11:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)
When faced with the decision to cut a teacher a couple of years ago, the superintendent in Lyle decided to cut his salary to about half instead. And he's an administrator that does spend time with students. He's at the front door in the morning to greet the students as they come in and supervising them at lunch time. He didn't propose another referendum this year, though the money could have been used because it's bottom of the barrel time, but after the taxes from the new school that would not have been good to the community. The school is making due the best they can.
Follow by example, Austin.
Posted by metisman (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 11:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)
There has to be a million $$$ wasted in excessive management positions. Cut there first and then ask if you still need more money. Show some good faith efforts first.
I still challenge the board to produce a list of where the management money goes. I'd like to see how many positions make more than classroom teachers. And how much money total is spent on those positions.
Posted by Rugger05 (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 11:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Austin please do not follow Lyle's lead. That school is a money trap. The number of students does not justify the taxes that landowners are paying. NRHEG just passed their levy on home values rather then property beyond the homestead (cause land onwers to carry the load), that is the fairest way if the schools feels the need for more money.
Posted by austinmn55912 (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 12:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
@tcsmiley.... this has EVERYTHING to do with the jail. We were asked to vote to increase our taxes....again.
I love it, it's only 84.00 per year for a 100,000 house. Plus the "onlys" from every other thing coming up the pike, 10.00 here, 12.00 there... Plus, lots of homes on the tax roles are valued at much more than 100,000. Many people have seen their property taxes double and triple in the past few years, all from these "onlys".
That said, I support the referendum. BUT... I think the jail was the deciding factor.
Posted by AnonymousCitizen (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 1:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I think the per student increase was too high, it probably would have passed if it wasn't such a big increase. I agree that the school wastes too much money on admin and not enough on the actual students. EVERYONE has been asked to trim fat and reduce operating costs in this poor economy...why would the school be any different? Hopefully some of these new faces on the school board will be able to do just that.
This is NOT a good time to be trying to raise taxes, especially with the Crow Bar Inn and Suites that is being built. Remember your County Commissioners and Sheriff during the upcoming elections! Voting is power to the people, make your voices heard.
Posted by johnypopper1 (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 1:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
First off dirtyduster, you are right, there was a timeline or it would have been shut down.
People are afraid of taxes, myself included. I for one voted for it. Maintaining the current services and the money per property tax payer was pretty minimal in my oppinion. Cutting funds at the education level is not the way to do it. Unless its elemination through atrition or unnecessary staff. If we have good schools here, we can draw new students in which in over time the parents of these kids will move to town due to the good schools and taxes will level out or there will be more to share the tax burden.
Hope this passes next time around. It is an investment in our community.
If education referendems fail, we'll probobly have to pay for an expansion of our new "crow bar inn and suites." No this isn't a fact so take it easy here!
Posted by ALYLESTUD (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 1:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Oldman & Metisman,
You guys are right on! I'll be the first to jump to the front of the line and yell "Kids are important" and I'd be willing to tighten my belt so that they can have all they need for an education......but lets be honest here, Austin is short of money because of wasteful spending on administration. A finance director who makes $125,000.....obsurd!!!
I'm glad Austinians made a stand. No more taxes for now, until the ISD makes a good faith effort
Posted by sherwood22 (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 1:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The Activities Director at the Austin High School is the highest paid Director in the Big 9. Start there.
Posted by luvzcatz (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 2:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If the school district needs more money per student than send a bill to the parents of the students. That may sound selfish but my property taxes have increased almost 75% in the past 6 years. No more!!
Posted by MnWildFan (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 2:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Based on the grammar and spelling in the posted comments, I think most of you should worry about how we are going to fund education to our future generations. Obviously we didn't spend enough when you were in school...
Posted by happy101 (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 3:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Most of the time I really enjoy living in Austin. It's a small town and perfect for raising a family. Sometimes I do however grow tired of the small mindedness that often comes with small towns.
Excellent school systems raise every property owners property value and lower crime rates for the whole town. Additionally, towns with excellent school districts enjoy a larger influx of new citizens- particularly well educated citizens. So, if you want docotrs, dentists, lawyers, or other professional to chose to either move to or stay in Austin, we need to have great schools, and yes, great schools cost money. Great schools benefit the whole town and need to be paid for by the whole town.
And luvzcatz- yes, you are selfish. I'd like to be too. If you don't want to pay for the "students" of Austin then I would like to stop paying for the "Seniors" in Austin. You vote down the schools and those of us with young children will vote down social security. If you're not willing to support our youngest citizens, why should their families and they support you?
Posted by youllneverknow (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 3:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I don't think any of us realizes how much money is wasted in the schools. Not just with administration, but everywhere. Yes we need to take care of the children, but my kids know we've had to tighten our belt, I don't see why the school district can't do the same. I hope our school board can rise to the challenge and make it work without punishing the kids with larger class sizes.
Posted by parentof4 (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 4:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It is very sad that this didn't pass. Do you realize the class sizes that the children are going to have to deal with and the teachers that we may lose that are GREAT teachers. I guess an increase of $84 a year is not that much. Are the kids not worth it!!! I think we have all spent that kind of money on something worse than kids????
Posted by Norman (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 5:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)
So, board members, seems the consensus here is you need to slash administrators pay, and pass the savings along to your relatives.
Posted by JoFriday (anonymous) on November 4, 2009 at 11:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Disappointed that the referendum went down! So, now it is time for the board, district, and community to look at re-structuring, or re-vamping etc. I HOPE this impacts ADMINISTRATION....... cuts need to stay FAR away from the students.
The time is now.
Posted by phipho (anonymous) on November 5, 2009 at 7:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)
An increase of $84 per $100,000 valuation of property and you guys are squealing? That is pretty cheap. You get what you pay for, if you want a quality system you are going to have to fund it.
Post a comment (Terms of Use Policy)
(Requires free registration.)