Ketterhagen urges board to pledge no levy increase
By Jennifer Eisenbart
Staff Writer
The first steps in formulating the Burlington Area School District budget were taken Monday night, with a presentation of what the district could do – and some comments regarding what it should do.
With Business Manager Ruth Schenning presenting the timeline for reaching decisions, the state aid and tax levy formulas and budget areas, the district Finance Committee was also shown just how much the district has under-levied over the last few years.
In fact, the district could increase taxes by 15.8 percent and not even need a referendum to do it.
“We showed our levy authority because we have been prudent in recent years,” said BASD Superintendent Peter Smet on Tuesday. “No one is saying that’s going to be done, but we have to decide what our levy needs to be.”
The paperwork handed out at the meeting clearly stated, “assumes full levy authority,” which Smet said simply meant what the district could technically do.
However, with some rumors out in the community Tuesday that the board intended to raise the levy that 15.8 percent, Smet quickly and bluntly said that was likely not going to happen, instead saying the information was presented to show what tax authority the district has and to get the board thinking about what, if any, tax levy increase should be made.
“It’s something they need to think about as we move forward,” Smet said.
That didn’t keep the local fiscal conservative group WeVote Burlington from sending out a newsletter to members Tuesday morning saying the district was going to raise the levy by that amount – and urging people to come to their meeting Saturday at 3 p.m. at the Ketterhagen residence on Crossway Road.
“The finance committee began discussing the budget last night,” the newsletter read. “Budget talks is (sic) to levy to the max at an increase of 15.8 percent tax levy creating an additional $3.2 million in revenue.
“It appears to be up to the BOE to find the reductions and to prove it. Philip Ketterhagen spoke about zero based budgeting. Roger Koldeway said you can’t save $100,000 on paper, electricity, and heat. We must look at the largest budget item of staff salaries and benefits.”
The tax levy is just one portion of the budget equation. Right now, the district is waiting to see what the state aid portion of the budget will be. That information will not be available until mid-February, when Gov. Scott Walker announces his biennial budget.
When the district has that preliminary number, it can begin to calculate the other half of the equation.
That didn’t matter to Ketterhagen, who flat-out stated that this should be a zero-increase budget from the beginning.
“Whatever comes out (based on no increase) is proper in my mind,” he said.
Fellow board member Larry Anderson immediately countered, saying that there has to be some flexibility, because so much of the budget is dependent on payroll and benefits costs.
In fact, the district actually had to add staff for the 2012-13 school year last fall when kindergarten enrollment came in larger than expected. That money came out of the district’s fund balance – about $300,000 for five new teachers.
But while salaries are one part of the package, the argument about benefits – specifically health insurance costs – came up again. When Anderson pointed out that the district has some of the lowest health insurance costs in the state, both Koldeway and Ketterhagen called that into question.
“We’ll put some numbers together on that,” Ketterhagen said. “That is not a bona fide statement.”
Koldeway, meanwhile, wanted to also make sure the district begins to address the cost of insurance for retirees after it was mentioned in this year’s audit of the school district.
“So we’re not kicking the can down the road,” Koldeway said.
-
-
-
-
-