Print
E-mail
Comment
Rate
YSD Seeks Two-Year, $1.4 Million Opt-Out
 |
| Yankton School Board members Chris Specht, left, and Jay Williams study a PowerPoint presentation on the school district’s funding issues during a special meeting of the Yankton school board Monday night. The board unanimously voted to pursue a two-year, $1.4 million maximum annual budget. (Kelly Hertz/P&D) |
School Board Decides To Refer Measure To Feb. 28 Public Vote; Some Of The Shortfall Would Be Filled By Tapping Existing Funds
By Shauna Marlette
shauna.marlette@yankton.net
The Yankton School Board voted Monday night to pursue an opt-out attempt for a maximum $1.4 million per year for two years, and set it for public vote on Feb. 28.
The proposed opt-out, after subtracting the Yankton High School/Summit Activities Center bond levy that will drop off the books this year, would represent a net decrease of $0.405/$1,000 for ag property, a flat rate for owner occupied and an increase of $1.146/$1,000 on all non-owner occupied properties.
“I think this is a great option that we are presenting to the public based on the feedback that we have been getting from them,” said board president Kathy Greeneway during Monday night’s special meeting. “We heard the first attempt was too much money for too long of a time. Those are the things we looked at and tried to put into perspective by looking at our budget shortfall this time.”
Greeneway added that passing the two-year opt-out is only a temporary fix.
“If we can get the opt-out passed, it at least gets us down the road a little bit to see what is going to happen, if anything is going to change at the Legislature, (and) if the one-penny sales tax gets passed or doesn’t get passed,” she said. “It gives us two years that we know that we will have that funding and we can at least work going forward.”
Addressing the primary complaints from the first opt-out attempt, Greeneway spoke directly to those in the community who opposed the $4.1 million opt-out attempt in May.
“We have been taking a lot of input from the community and learning from what you had to tell us,” she told the packed house at the Yankton School District administration building. “One of the things we have learned is that the public wanted more openness and input, and we have addressed that. Our meetings are being recorded and are on the Yankton School District website for your viewing and are on public access channels. ... The board policy on speaking at our meetings has been amended. ... As a community we need to find that common ground that can be supported to continue the Yankton tradition of providing a great education system for this community.”
She added that education is vital to the community’s economic future. She noted that the board is not unsympathetic to the rising costs being felt by residents, and that there is a disconnect between many people who do not have children in the school system.
“We must remember, these kids will be our future doctors, our welders, our construction workers, our pharmacists, our plumbers, factory workers and the list goes on,” Greeneway said. “But overall, they will be on the payroll to support the social security tax.”
The board members said that they have spent months looking at ways to safely use the funds in the district’s self-insurance fund.
“We believe we have found ways to utilize some of those reserves and alleviate some of the general fund, but we want to be very cautionary in our use of those funds and not reduce them to dramatically,” Greeneway said. “We are looking for a way to gain additional support for education in this community with a near neutral cost for the majority of the taxpayers in the district. We believe that can be done.”
The board is proposing using a combination of funds to bridge the expected $2.2 million shortfall projected for the 2012-2013 school year. Those funds potentially include:
• using $500,000 of additional Capital Outlay funds (the district currently uses $800,000 Capital Outlay funds to offset general fund expenditures.);
• using $600,000 of health insurance reserves;
• using approximately $250,000 of unspent budget carryover from the 2011-2012 budget;
• using the approximately $700,000 of opt-out funds that would be available the first year of the opt-out.
Greeneway said that, if the opt-out fails, the potential harm to the district is huge.
“I don’t know how much more clear we can be about the cuts that we did last year,” she said. “The cuts that we did made a huge impact on the school, not just one school but to the four elementaries, the middle school and the high school. Any further cuts will just be more detrimental to that education system.
“If the opt-out doesn’t pass, we have a $2.2 million deficit. We will have to look to see what we can pull from reserves. Potentially we could be looking at $1.4 million worth of cuts if we use the insurance funds and capital outlay funds like we are proposing. With 85 percent of your budget being personnel, that would have to be a pretty strong place to look — more teacher cuts.”
Following a question-and-answer session among the board members, three community members addressed the board. Michael Welch stated that he objected to the tone used by board member Jay Williams in his comments and warned a negative approach by the board will guarantee that the opt-out will fail, but he offered approval to the board on the work they have done.
“I want to congratulate Dr. Gertsema and Jason (Bietz) for putting together a potential budget looking at $1.4 million,” Welch said. “... (It’s) a two-year budget, that we fund 50 percent of the deficit. That appeases the people who are paying the taxes, who are concerned about their property taxes. But it also sustains and supports what we have as a school district. ... We went from $41 million to about $1.4 million; it is a huge deal. I want to thank you for your efforts to do that.”
Yankton resident Rick Althoff addressed the board and said the community would not support an opt-out attempt without a free flow of communication between the district and the community.
He added that Gertsema and the administration have threatened and bullied the community, and that “the public’s trust has been violated.”
Althoff suggested the board “dedicate your energies to removing the problems before coming to the community asking for more money.”
Teacher Paula Weydert rebutted Althoff, saying that all the information needed to make an informed decision is readily available through the district’s website, in the press and on public access television. She defended the board and Gertsema, saying they have a vision and passion for the school system that is not seen in other districts.
During the meeting, the board also heard a motion put forward by business manager Bietz to authorize refunding of the series 2009 limited tax general obligation certificates at a savings of nearly $150,000 to the district over the life of the certificates.
Bietz explained that because interest rates are at an all-time low, the district can refinance the certificates at a savings of more than 3 percent per year.
The board approved the effort to refinance the certificates and approved D.A. Davidson Underwriting to work to refund the bonds.
The entire board meeting will be aired on public access television channels 3 and 98 at 9 p.m. tonight (Tuesday).
All documents used in the meeting are available on the school district’s website at www.ysd.k12.sd.us.
The proposed opt-out, after subtracting the Yankton High School/Summit Activities Center bond levy that will drop off the books this year, would represent a net decrease of $0.405/$1,000 for ag property, a flat rate for owner occupied and an increase of $1.146/$1,000 on all non-owner occupied properties.
“I think this is a great option that we are presenting to the public based on the feedback that we have been getting from them,” said board president Kathy Greeneway during Monday night’s special meeting. “We heard the first attempt was too much money for too long of a time. Those are the things we looked at and tried to put into perspective by looking at our budget shortfall this time.”
Greeneway added that passing the two-year opt-out is only a temporary fix.
“If we can get the opt-out passed, it at least gets us down the road a little bit to see what is going to happen, if anything is going to change at the Legislature, (and) if the one-penny sales tax gets passed or doesn’t get passed,” she said. “It gives us two years that we know that we will have that funding and we can at least work going forward.”
Addressing the primary complaints from the first opt-out attempt, Greeneway spoke directly to those in the community who opposed the $4.1 million opt-out attempt in May.
“We have been taking a lot of input from the community and learning from what you had to tell us,” she told the packed house at the Yankton School District administration building. “One of the things we have learned is that the public wanted more openness and input, and we have addressed that. Our meetings are being recorded and are on the Yankton School District website for your viewing and are on public access channels. ... The board policy on speaking at our meetings has been amended. ... As a community we need to find that common ground that can be supported to continue the Yankton tradition of providing a great education system for this community.”
She added that education is vital to the community’s economic future. She noted that the board is not unsympathetic to the rising costs being felt by residents, and that there is a disconnect between many people who do not have children in the school system.
“We must remember, these kids will be our future doctors, our welders, our construction workers, our pharmacists, our plumbers, factory workers and the list goes on,” Greeneway said. “But overall, they will be on the payroll to support the social security tax.”
The board members said that they have spent months looking at ways to safely use the funds in the district’s self-insurance fund.
“We believe we have found ways to utilize some of those reserves and alleviate some of the general fund, but we want to be very cautionary in our use of those funds and not reduce them to dramatically,” Greeneway said. “We are looking for a way to gain additional support for education in this community with a near neutral cost for the majority of the taxpayers in the district. We believe that can be done.”
The board is proposing using a combination of funds to bridge the expected $2.2 million shortfall projected for the 2012-2013 school year. Those funds potentially include:
• using $500,000 of additional Capital Outlay funds (the district currently uses $800,000 Capital Outlay funds to offset general fund expenditures.);
• using $600,000 of health insurance reserves;
• using approximately $250,000 of unspent budget carryover from the 2011-2012 budget;
• using the approximately $700,000 of opt-out funds that would be available the first year of the opt-out.
Greeneway said that, if the opt-out fails, the potential harm to the district is huge.
“I don’t know how much more clear we can be about the cuts that we did last year,” she said. “The cuts that we did made a huge impact on the school, not just one school but to the four elementaries, the middle school and the high school. Any further cuts will just be more detrimental to that education system.
“If the opt-out doesn’t pass, we have a $2.2 million deficit. We will have to look to see what we can pull from reserves. Potentially we could be looking at $1.4 million worth of cuts if we use the insurance funds and capital outlay funds like we are proposing. With 85 percent of your budget being personnel, that would have to be a pretty strong place to look — more teacher cuts.”
Following a question-and-answer session among the board members, three community members addressed the board. Michael Welch stated that he objected to the tone used by board member Jay Williams in his comments and warned a negative approach by the board will guarantee that the opt-out will fail, but he offered approval to the board on the work they have done.
“I want to congratulate Dr. Gertsema and Jason (Bietz) for putting together a potential budget looking at $1.4 million,” Welch said. “... (It’s) a two-year budget, that we fund 50 percent of the deficit. That appeases the people who are paying the taxes, who are concerned about their property taxes. But it also sustains and supports what we have as a school district. ... We went from $41 million to about $1.4 million; it is a huge deal. I want to thank you for your efforts to do that.”
Yankton resident Rick Althoff addressed the board and said the community would not support an opt-out attempt without a free flow of communication between the district and the community.
He added that Gertsema and the administration have threatened and bullied the community, and that “the public’s trust has been violated.”
Althoff suggested the board “dedicate your energies to removing the problems before coming to the community asking for more money.”
Teacher Paula Weydert rebutted Althoff, saying that all the information needed to make an informed decision is readily available through the district’s website, in the press and on public access television. She defended the board and Gertsema, saying they have a vision and passion for the school system that is not seen in other districts.
During the meeting, the board also heard a motion put forward by business manager Bietz to authorize refunding of the series 2009 limited tax general obligation certificates at a savings of nearly $150,000 to the district over the life of the certificates.
Bietz explained that because interest rates are at an all-time low, the district can refinance the certificates at a savings of more than 3 percent per year.
The board approved the effort to refinance the certificates and approved D.A. Davidson Underwriting to work to refund the bonds.
The entire board meeting will be aired on public access television channels 3 and 98 at 9 p.m. tonight (Tuesday).
All documents used in the meeting are available on the school district’s website at www.ysd.k12.sd.us.
 |
 |
|
| Daily Record: Incidents | Yankton County PAT To Offer Responsive Parenting Class |
Article Rating
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of yankton.net.
Mr.Yankton wrote on Jan 25, 2012 9:27 AM:
" If the taxes on my home will not go up, I think I can support this. Especially since it doesn't seem like the board is ramming it down my throat this time. "
antiteaparty wrote on Jan 25, 2012 9:40 AM:
" I wouldn't spend too much time patting yourself on the back for your prophetic insight, YanktonGuy. "
charlie wrote on Jan 25, 2012 10:04 AM:
" Taxes won't go up for residential. They will go down if the opt-out fails, which will help the lower income property owners. Bad spin on this by the board.
Between now and election time the savings available from the self-insurance will be made public and should fund the amount the board is requesting.
YanktonGuy is on the money concerning the tactics used by the administratin and the board. Don't be fooled that education will suffer. What will suffer is the prima-donna lifestyle of the school system. "
Between now and election time the savings available from the self-insurance will be made public and should fund the amount the board is requesting.
YanktonGuy is on the money concerning the tactics used by the administratin and the board. Don't be fooled that education will suffer. What will suffer is the prima-donna lifestyle of the school system. "
mjibg wrote on Jan 25, 2012 10:15 AM:
" I believe I could support this as well, but taxes will go up, that's what an opt-out does... raises taxes. "
dobalina wrote on Jan 25, 2012 11:11 AM:
" Charlie, how bout we try this... i think everybody understands no matter what you are going to be against increasing taxes to better fund education... everybody on this board understands that you think the school is running a gravy-train and that the fat cats need to go... we all get that... i think it is safe to say that we all understand that there is a group that exists that believes no matter how much money there was for schools it wouldnt be enough, there are people that are willing to fight tooth and nail to get the most funding available for kids... the "sky is falling" group as they are frequently referred to... but what if we just got both sides to stop and found some way to meet in the middle... i think that is what the board is trying to do... they have extended themselves why cant you do the same??? isnt the basis to politics compromise??? isnt that how we as a society move forward??? would i like to have seen the 1st opt out pass, absolutely! it didnt and so a compromise needs to be reached... c'mon man lets work together here... we all get it, you are against an increase in taxes, but the close mindedness has to stop at some point... "
sdjacks77 wrote on Jan 25, 2012 11:19 AM:
" PRIMA-DONNA LIFESTYLE?!?!?!?!?
I am dumber having read that. There are not words to describe how far some opt-out opposers are from reality.
I can respect anyone who opposes the opt-out and I don't even need a reason from them. It's the ones, like you charlie, who have to CONVINCE everyone the district is pulling the sheets over the heads of the taxpayers that i can't stand. You don't like it, don't vote for it. Leave it at that.
As I mentioned before, perhaps if the school board had a figure with a solid backbone, such as yourself, this "bad spin" would have been worded correctly. The school board need you, Charlie. "
I am dumber having read that. There are not words to describe how far some opt-out opposers are from reality.
I can respect anyone who opposes the opt-out and I don't even need a reason from them. It's the ones, like you charlie, who have to CONVINCE everyone the district is pulling the sheets over the heads of the taxpayers that i can't stand. You don't like it, don't vote for it. Leave it at that.
As I mentioned before, perhaps if the school board had a figure with a solid backbone, such as yourself, this "bad spin" would have been worded correctly. The school board need you, Charlie. "
charlie wrote on Jan 25, 2012 12:41 PM:
" dobalina - good post.
There are those who believe I am against any and all tax increases for the school district. Not so. What I am against is the board and administration electing to pass an opt-out when there are other solutions. It is the board who has steadfastly refused to look at insurance options. That is not in the spirit of compromise and certainly not in the best interests of the district or taxpayers. How 'bout we try this - bring the board together with knowledgable insurance representatives at a regualr meeting. Lay all the cards on the table pertaining to self-insurance vs. standard insurance policies. If the board can show their current plan is better for the dollars spent than a newly proposed plan then I will sport a bumper sticker supporting the opt-out. "
There are those who believe I am against any and all tax increases for the school district. Not so. What I am against is the board and administration electing to pass an opt-out when there are other solutions. It is the board who has steadfastly refused to look at insurance options. That is not in the spirit of compromise and certainly not in the best interests of the district or taxpayers. How 'bout we try this - bring the board together with knowledgable insurance representatives at a regualr meeting. Lay all the cards on the table pertaining to self-insurance vs. standard insurance policies. If the board can show their current plan is better for the dollars spent than a newly proposed plan then I will sport a bumper sticker supporting the opt-out. "
dobalina wrote on Jan 25, 2012 2:12 PM:
" Charlie... contact Rick Althoff, at his Summit at the Summit II there was a very knowledgeable individual that was involved in the negotiations that led to the self insurance policy... from what i understand the leg work in comparing standard vs self insurance was done then, and it made sense... the point i am trying to make is this: you are right, the board handled the 1st opt out in the wrong way, they dont dipute that, shoot, they have said as much!!! they have changed their approach... i just wish you didnt think everybody on the board and admin is trying to hide something, i wish you understood they are just trying to do the very best for the young people in our community... that is their main motive, nothing more... "
Birds wrote on Jan 25, 2012 4:31 PM:
" Nice post dobalina. Charlie your post was decent too. I think its a good step to everyone finally talking rationally and not treating each other like the other side is a bunch of idiots. "
mwesterman wrote on Jan 25, 2012 11:27 PM:
" Charlie is going to show us how to save $2 million on insurance, but only because there is an opt out. So apparently that same $2 million would not be available to be saved without an opt out? Well, either that or:
A - Charlie is full of "it"
B - Charlie is willing to let $2 million go to waste as long as the board doesn't ask for $2.8 million
In other words Charlie, no one believes you. Any possible shred of credibility to your claim went out the window months ago.
You've been making the claim for months, stating many times that it will be put forth upon the board asking for an opt out. They did. Let's see the plan - you have obviously had time to put it together, I expected to see it before the ink was dry on this article. Back it up with some facts or don't mention it again. "
A - Charlie is full of "it"
B - Charlie is willing to let $2 million go to waste as long as the board doesn't ask for $2.8 million
In other words Charlie, no one believes you. Any possible shred of credibility to your claim went out the window months ago.
You've been making the claim for months, stating many times that it will be put forth upon the board asking for an opt out. They did. Let's see the plan - you have obviously had time to put it together, I expected to see it before the ink was dry on this article. Back it up with some facts or don't mention it again. "
Submit a Comment
We encourage your feedback and dialog, all comments will be reviewed by our Web staff before appearing on the Web site.
Not registered yet?
YanktonGuy wrote on Jan 24, 2012 9:20 PM:
Also want to comment on Greenway's obvious jab at the elderly in our community--saying there is a disconnect from education by the people that don't have kids in school, and reminding us that the kids in school now will be supporting social security--both of these comments directed towards the elderly in our community. Bad move on her part since the elderly make up a large share of people that actually get out and vote. Between her and Jay Williams and their strong arm tactics and putting emotion into this, they set themselves up for failure. Way to go AGAIN school board.
The members of the Board and Adminstration even on this second opt-out attempt are using fear tactics, and almost bullying us into believing that the education system in Yankton is going to fold. Begging for more money; not wanting to tackle tough cuts. That is what lost the first opt-out, and that is what is going to lose this second opt-out for them. "