District Info |
Parent Info |
Instructional Support |
Departments & Programs |
Home
Q. What is the purpose of the referendum?
A. A quality education, which has been the hallmark of the Madison schools, requires highly trained and skilled teachers operating in small classes with appropriate support for every single student. A quality school district has safe and well-maintained buildings and fiscally sound management. The cuts required this year affect all of these areas. It is the community's choice to determine what type of school district Madison will have in the future. The referendum simply allows the district to maintain the current level of services - although the Board of Education (BOE) has already committed to cutting $3.0 million for the 2003-04 budget.
Q. Why doesn't the BOE just make the reductions necessary to balance the budget?
A. State-imposed revenue limits have been in effect since 1993. In that time the BOE has cut almost $25 million from the district's "same service" budget and eliminated over 250 positions. Over the last decade, cuts from existing programs - or the "same service" budget - have ranged from cutting teaching staff, eliminating central office administrators and reducing custodial services to reducing extracurricular opportunities and elective classes for students and increasing student fees for athletics and driver's education, among other cuts.
In this year's budget, the BOE has already committed to an additional $3.0 million in cuts, regardless of the outcome of the referendum. The cumulative effect of these cuts has reached the point where the impact will be felt in the classroom. Larger middle/high school classes, fewer electives, and a reduction of services for some of the district's neediest students are among the many reductions that must be made to comply with the state revenue limits.
The BOE believed the community should have the opportunity to decide the future course of the programs and services offered by the district.
Q. Why is the referendum in June, instead of coinciding with the April 1 election?
A. Gov. Doyle introduced the 2003-05 budget on February 18. It was at that time the district first knew the amount of state school aids proposed. The analysis of the governor's budget, combined with opportunities for public input, took us into late-March, thus the early June referendum date. The City needs 60 days to schedule an election.
Using the Doyle budget information, district administrators were able to craft "best case" and "worst case" scenario budgets. The best case is if Gov. Doyle's budget proposal holds and school districts are allowed a $233.53 per pupil revenue limit increase ($5.85 million for MMSD) and $100 million is transferred from the state Transportation Fund to school aids. That would require a $3.3 million reduction to the "same services" budget - $9 million (Doyle budget) minus $3.0 million (BOE reductions) and minus $2.7 million (savings from $3 million originally budgeted for teachers' contract).
The worst case scenario would be a freeze on school aids at the 2002-03 level and the Legislature's refusal to transfer Transportation Fund dollars to school aids. The Legislature could do either, or both. If the governor is unable or unwilling to make vetoes to restore the lost school aid, the district would have to reduce the budget $9.3 million - $15 million (no revenue limit increase, no Transportation Fund money to school aids) minus $3.0 million (BOE reductions) and minus $2.7 million (savings from $3 million originally budgeted for teachers' contract).
Q. Why is the referendum for only one year?
A. The BOE believed that with all the uncertainty at the state level regarding changes to the state's school aid formula, it would be best to ask a referendum question for only one year. Gov. Doyle has committed to revising the school finance system for the 2004-05 school year.
Q. Why aren't more cuts being made from the central office?
A. During the last decade, special effort was made to keep the cuts away from the classroom. The bulk of those cuts came from central office staff. Of the $2.7 million in cuts already approved by the BOE for next year's budget, about $1.2 million comes from centralized functions. A retiring assistant superintendent's position will not be filled; the district's registrar position and the district's coordinator of staff development position are eliminated, and a freeze has been instituted related to inflation increases for the same service budget, among other reductions. These cuts reduced what could have been a $15 million referendum question down to $12.3 million.
Similar to any $300 million business, the district - with over 5,000 full and part-time employees - must maintain efficient and highly skilled accounting, human resources and legal departments. The district also serves over 18,000 meals daily and has roughly the same square footage as the Sears Tower that must be maintained in nearly 50 schools and other facilities.
Q. How can voters be assured that the BOE will only use the amount necessary to maintain the current level of programs/services?
A. As the budget crystallizes the BOE will communicate to the public the actual amount that will be necessary to maintain existing programs/services. The recently settled teachers' contract allows the BOE to scale back the amount necessary by $2.7 million, and on May 12 the BOE committed to $300,000 in additional cuts. So, while the language on the ballot will read "...up to $12.3 million," the BOE has publicly stated that the savings from the contract will reduce the maximum amount needed to $9.3 million - in a worst case scenario. If Gov. Doyle's education budget passes in its current form, only $3.3 million will be needed and used from the referendum dollars to maintain existing services.
Final certification of the district's levy is conducted at an open meeting in October and will detail referendum-approved spending. This action assures public accountability.
Q. Why will the ballot say $12.3 million if the district needs less?
A. The city clerk needs 45-60 days to prepare ballots for an election. At the time when the ballot language was certified, the district had not settled contracts for the 2003-04 school year. So, while the contract settlement and additional BOE cuts on May 12 reduces the need for resources down to a maximum of $9.3 million - and the BOE has stated publicly it will only take what is needed to maintain current services - the ballot will still say $12.3 million.
Q. Why not make cuts of central office administrators?
A. There have been and will be cuts of central office administrators. Counting the cuts for next year, central administrative positions have been cut by 19% in the last 5 years. In 1998-99 there were 62 FTE central administrative positions funded through the operating budget. Due to cuts and shifting funding for the positions to other sources (grants, budget reallocation,) there will be 49.75 FTE central administrative positions funded through the operating budget next year. That's a reduction of 12.25 FTEs in the last 5 years.
Many of the 49.75 staff members are not truly administrators and do not supervise other staff members. They are service professionals such as accountants, attorneys, educational coordinators and technical staff whose services would need to be purchased if the position did not exist.
Q. What would the referendum cost homeowners in property taxes?
A. If the referendum passes, the cost to a homeowner would be for only next year and, depending on the status of the state revenue cap increase (see p. 1 above,) would be between $3.3 and $9.3 million. The impact to the owners of homes at three different values is listed in the table below.
Property Tax Costs to Homeowners Next Year* (rounded to nearest dollar)
| Total cost to taxpayers IF referendum passes | $150,000 home | $190,000 home (city average) | $250,000 home |
|---|---|---|---|
| $3.3 million | $53 | $67 | $88 |
| $9.3 million | $150 | $189 | $249 |
*Referendum is for one year only.
May 29, 2003