CARE, Recommending Less for More

.

Ahhh...those glorious days of last spring. When winter finally gave way to the green grass and flowers. Children started to play outdoors and the first robins arrived. The school district first claimed that delaying the bond vote to November would increase the cost of building a new high school by a mere $360,000.

Now, as we enter the heat of mid-summer, CARE has unveiled an all new and improved bond recommendation that is nearly identical to the old proposal. The CARE group recommends fiddling around with less than 8% of the total bond amount. However, the total recommended bond amount of $350 million remains the same.

Two questions immediately spring to mind on seeing this new proposal:

1) Who was it, among the 40 or so people who showed up at one of the CARE community meetins, that stood up and said, "We need to cut back on the athletic facilities and just plan to pay an extra $10 million for everything else."? As CARE was seeking community input with the super secret poll that forms the basis for recommendations to the BOE, did they ask the question "Would you like to pay more for less?" If not, where did the $10 million price hike come from?

2)How did CARE arrive at the $10 million figure for inflation? In the spring, interim superintendent Martin Libbert claimed that a delay until November would increase the cost for one high school by $360,000. If the district proposal were to build 27 brand new high schools a bump of $10 million might be justified.

In just three months, the cost of the plan have increased almost 3%. Even the most pessimistic economists are not claiming that inflation is 12% per year. But more importantly, what can taxpayers and parents expect in the out years? Will the FEMA shelters be completed on all the schools as the costs goes up?

The stated purpose of moving the election date was for the CARE group to educate the public about the bond issue, not to recalculate the costs of the bond. It's highly unlikely that the citizens of Wichita are clamoring to pay more for less. But that seems to be what CARE is proposing.

.

Bond Poll Results

.

The public is still waiting with baited breath for the release of the CARE public opinion poll on the $350 million bond issue conducted last month. True, the as yet unknown persons who funded the poll aren't required to share the results with the rest of the world. It does seem odd that CARE, or whoever, wouldn't be sharing the overwhelmingly positive poll results with the Eagle and public at large.

So, in lieu of talking about the CARE polling data, we are left with the results of a KWCH/SurveyUSA poll conducted on July 15th.

The first question, how much of an impact will gas prices and the economy have on the respondent's bond vote, sets the tone for the poll. 68% of respondents noted that it would impact their vote. It might be going out on a limb, albeit a very sturdy one, to assume that the slowing economy will make voters less likely to vote for higher taxes.

The second question isn't so black and white: "Should the vote be delayed until the economy improves?" The response was clearly that the vote should be delayed, 49% to 44%. However, this shouldn't be used as an indicator of overall support for the bond itself. Some bond supporters can clearly see that $350 million is a tough sell in a slowing economy and want a delay. Similarly, bond opponents may not want any further delays.

The third question gets to the heart of the matter: "Should the bond issue be scaled down in order to get it passed?". Again, 49% of respondents replied in the affirmative, while only 41% didn't believe the proposal should be scaled back. Both conservatives and liberals overwhelmingly (53% and 49% respectively) saw the need to scale the proposal back, although one would assume for different reasons.

The results are surprising, if the pro-bond groups are to be believed. The USD 259 website is chock full of claims that the entire community had input and is clamoring for a $350 million bond issue. CARE has had an additional 3 months to educate the public about the virtues of the bond plan.

What remains to be seen is if CARE/SJCF will propose that the school board proceed with the original bloated bond plan, submit a new proposal that nibbles around the edges, completely retools the proposal to address the real issues in the district, or suggests shelving the idea all together. Considering the money and egos involved, I'm guessing they won't concern themselves with something as insignificant as polling data.

It's good to be Kevass Harding

.
The USD 259 School Board has for the past six months been bleating about the necessity to generate an additional $350 million through a special bond issue. One of the more outspoken members of the board has been Kevass Harding. But how deep does his support for the bond issue really go?

WichitaLiberty.org had an interesting article on the good Reverend and his business plan to take money away from the school district and sink it into the Ken-Mar shopping center which he has purchased. How is he going to do it? Why a TIF district, of course. Where is that money going to go? Let's find out...

A Tax Increment Finance district is a special taxing district in which money, from tax exempt municipal bond sales, are used to invest in property improvements. As the property values increase, the additional tax revenue goes to pay back the bonds. Recently, in Wichita and elsewhere, the TIFs have been used not just to pay for better roads, street lights and parking garages, but for improvements to private property for the benefit of the property owner.

Allen Bell, City of Wichita development guru, said the TIF money at KenMar would be used to pay for land acquisition, demolition of a small store near 13th and Oliver, landscaping, and utility improvements.

In this case, Reverend/developer Kevass Harding is going to take money from the sale of bonds to make improvements on piece of property. He will receive the benefit of those improvements in the form of ownership of property that has a much greater value. Repayment of the bonds will be spread among property owners in the entire district, not just the owner receiving the proceeds from the bond sales.

The upfront money for the improvements will be repaid by the higher tax revenues generated by the business and homeowners in the surrounding TIF district. During the 15 year bond payback period, USD 259 will not see any of the increased revenue. Because of this, both the school district and Sedgwick County have the right to refuse the creation of the TIF district.

Several months ago, Kevass Harding indicated that he would spend as much as $8 million on the property over time. I don't know Mr. Harding's personal financial information, but according to his latest Statement of Substantial Interest Form filed on July 8th of 2008, he now owns a 30% interest in H.H. Holdings LLC. This company was formed in November of last year, and in June purchased the Ken-Mar Shopping Center for more than $2.2 million.

Kevass Harding's partners in this deal, Pat Ayars from Key Construction and Nick Esterline of Landmark Commercial, are both very experienced in real estate development. What remains unclear is exactly what Harding brings to the table. Does the pastor of Dellrose Methodist Church have the assets to buy a 30% stake in a multi-million dollar real estate transaction followed by an $8 million investment? Do two of Wichita's most accomplished real estate developers need Kevass Harding's guidance on refurbishing a strip mall?

Regardless of Kevass Harding's involvement in H.H. Holdings LLC, there is an obvious conflict between the Harding's financial interest and the interests of USD 259. While Kevass Harding might believe USD 259 needs an additional $350 million, it's not going to come from his new investment property.

Sarah Olson makes Chicken Salad

.


"I don't think (low turnout) is a statement that people are saying no. In fact, you could see it the other way around: People must not be that negative about it."

So says Sarah Olson, head of Citizens Alliance for Responsible Education (go ahead, google it). The problem seems to be that attendance at the Super-Duper rally meetings for the bond issue has been what can charitably described as "thin". The Wichita Eagle describes the scene:

About 40 people attended the first meeting at Seltzer Elementary School last month -- most of them school district officials or members of CARE. Subsequent meetings have drawn fewer people.

Our esteemed school board was kind enough to move the goal posts at the request of Sarah Olson and her CARE organization, to ensure that they enough time to adequately inform the public about the great advantages of the $350 million bond proposal.

This is the best CARE can do?

Nobody showed up because they all love the idea of higher property taxes and giving more money to a school district that can barely get 3/4 of the students to graduate?

Let's take Sarah absurdity to it's logical conclusion in a couple other contexts:

-If no one showed up to Mayor Brewer's campaign rally he could reasonable believe everyone thought he was doing a great job.

-No tickets are sold to a concert at the Orpheum because everyone enjoys the band's music so much they want to stay home and listen to their albums.

-Poor attendance at school would indicate that a student has already learned everything and is smarter than all the other kids.

-The lunch crowd at Crazy Joe's Possum BBQ is almost nonexistent because people just love that smoked possum too much.


Heck, even without the benefit of a secret survey, an 8 year old can figure out that if no one comes to her birthday party it doesn't mean that 'people must not be that negative about it.'


.

More USD 259 Deception

.

Today I happened to stumble across a nice little chart that is titled "2007 Mill Levy Comparison" on the USD 259 website. Looking at the chart, one would immediately surmise that the mill levy for Wichita Schools is lower than surrounding districts. In fact, the chart contains this little blurb "Adding 3.5 mills would still keep Wichita the lowest in the area".

Well how about that? Wichita has the lowest mill levy rate in the area! As you might expect, the USD 259 PR department isn't on the level. In fact, they are being purposely deceptive and their claim is patently false.

Lets take a look at three sets of numbers for local school districts...


+++++++++++Bonds++++Rec Com+++Total Mill Levy++++Total to Dist
Wichita ------5.88(9.38) ----0.00--------53.23 (56.73) --------53.23 (56.73)
Derby --------5.78------------6.89---------51.39------------------44.5
Haysville-----13.71-----------0.00---------58.88-----------------58.88
Valley Cen---14.96-----------4.42---------57.73------------------53.31
Mulvane-----12.68-----------3.32---------51.98------------------47.97
Clearwater---10.14-----------7.------------58.98-----------------51.00
Goddard-----19.11-----------0.00---------61.29------------------61.29
Maize--------13.67-----------1.00---------53.27------------------52.27
Renwick-----11.56-----------0.00---------54.68------------------54.68
Cheney------10.01-----------3.21----------60.74------------------57.53
Andover-----17.62-----------3.25----------59.49-----------------56.24
(not SG County)


A bit of explanation before we dive in: These numbers are from the Kansas Department of Education website from 2007. The "Bonds" column represents total mills to cover the cost of Bonds and Interest. The "Rec Dept" is the mill levy for local recreation departments. "Total Mill Levy" is all categories, including those not on this chart. The final category is the total amount that the school district actually receives.

Under Kansas law, cities or school districts can bear the responsibility for collecting the property tax for a local recreation commission. It is essentially a pass through and the schools districts do not keep those tax revenues. Why does it matter? It doesn't. However, if the USD 259 PR folks had not added the total irrelevant Recreation Commission numbers into their calculations, USD 259 would not show the lowest mill levy as they claimed.

In fact, Wichita is 8th of the 10 Sedgwick County districts, and would jump to 6th in overall mill levy with an additional 3.5 mills to cover the bond issue.

It's interesting that the 259 officials would bring up the Recreation Commission revenues. In the last column, I subtracted the Rec Com mills to get a figure of the mill levy amount that is actually going to the school district. Currently, Wichita ranks 6th of 10 school districts. With an additional 3.5 mills, 259 would jump up to 4th.

Here's the rub, besides the dishonesty of the 259 leadership in putting this together, the proposed school bond will drive the total mill levy in USD 259 higher than Maize. In real terms, USD 259 would even receive a higher mill levy than Andover Schools.

If the Wichita School Board is complaining about families moving out of the district now, wait until the raise the mill levy higher than the 'rich' districts while still not improving the 76% graduation rate.

Wichita School Board Abdicates

Few truly believed that the members of the USD 259 school board were ever, really, in charge of what has been happening in the district. Yet, the decision of the school board to publicly abdicate their responsibilities still comes as something of a surprise.

The story in Sunday's Wichita Eagle seems to indicate that CARE will be making the decisions regarding the size and shape of the bond plan.

Citizens Alliance for Responsible Education (CARE), a group of volunteers who support the bond issue, will hold a series of public forums in coming weeks to gather input from voters.

The hope, said co-coordinator Sarah Olson, is "to engage the community, and also to find out what people's concerns are."

"Depending on what the community tells us... we may have to reformulate (the plan)," she said.

Really? Sarah Olson and CARE are going to reformulate the plan? I don't recall seeing Sarah Olson's name on a ballot.

Joe Johnson, senior vice president for Schaefer Johnson Cox Frey, said it's too early to say whether the bond proposal will change because it may have strong support now.

But "it never hurts to get public input," he said. "And if there are compelling reasons (to reduce the bond), then CARE needs to take a look at that, and they will."

CARE leaders plan to collect feedback from the forums, as well as from a recent telephone survey, and present recommendations to the school board July 28. The board would have to vote by mid-August to put the issue on the Nov. 4 ballot.

After the decidedly negative public response to having a $350 million shoved down our collective throats, it's nice that we have permission from Joe Johnson to give public input, as opposed to the 79 hand selected members of the 'advisory group'. But there is still hope that the public will rise up and demand higher taxes and a $350 million bond plan.

Interim superintendent Martin Libhart hopes the upcoming public forums -- one for each quadrant of the district -- will show rousing support for the bond issue plan.

Then again with a headline like this "Low turnout for bond issue meeting" and fewer than 40 attendees at the first public meeting, mostly CARE members and USD259 employees, it seems unlikely.

The Wisdom of Betty Arnold

Wichita School Board Member Betty Arnold should be saluted for her clear statement on what she sees as a lack of clear goals in the evaluation process of a former assistant principal.

Board member Betty Arnold said her main concern was what she saw as "a lack of objective, measurable goals" in the evaluation process.

"You need to have goals in place that you can quantify, that are not subjective," she said. "That did not seem to be the case here, and that's a problem."

It sounds like Betty "gets it". To measure success, there must be some clearly defined goal, and a way to measure progress towards that goal.

For instance, a goal for the district could be something like "reduce the drop out rate from 24% to 10% within the next five years," or "improve the pass rate of 10th grade students on state math tests from 42% to 60% by 2012."

Let's take a peek at the USD 259 Strategic Plan:

1. We will deliver an aligned curriculum based on challenging standards, measure achievement, and ensure all students meet the standards.

2.We will recruit, develop, support and retain a high-quality, diverse teaching, administrative and support staff to improve staff performance and enhance student achievement.

3. We will provide educational programs from pre-kindergarten through post-secondary that promote life-long learning to enhance the quality of life for all students.

4. We will have safe, positive, disciplined and drug-free schools.

5. We will build and maintain strong relationships with parents, families, the community and businesses.

6. We will develop, implement and maintain a scheduled plan to upgrade district technology.

7. We will design and implement a plan that lifts the burden of desegregation from any one segment of our community, and removes the effects of racial isolation, and increases programs of choice.

8. We will upgrade and maintain district facilities to support and enhance student achievement.

9. We will ensure sound financial stewardship throughout the system.

10. District leadership will continuously evaluate the performance of the district in reaching district goals.

Well, Betty...how do you thing the board is doing on meeting those goals?