mr killgore, i would like to wsh you and the task force the best of luck in your endeavor. i hope that yor're able to achieve your objectives with as little opposition as possible. however these are tough times, a lot of hard working folks are out of work, and the sjsd has already lost a lot of credibility, and a heated election.

for an alternative view :

ALLIANCE FOR COMMUNITY EXCELLENCE OPEN MEETING

ACE is a community advocacy group which is interested in promoting further discussion on the proposed November ballot initiative of a renewal of the $0.63 Levy with a five year Sunset. We are hosting an open forum on Tuesday, July 7 at the Mitchell Park Plaza ( Mead Building ). In the interest of offering open access to everyone we are having two meetings in order to accommodate those who have difficulty in attending the traditional time slots! Please join us at either the 10-11 AM gathering, or at 6-7 PM. This is a simple effort to gather information, to offer the chance to sign a petition to POSTPONE THE DATE OF THE NOVEMBER ELECTION, and to have citizens express themselves by placing their suggestions in a box, or to talk amongst themselves. All are welcome. The Paper Lofts has generously given us the use of their public rooms on the ground floor. The Lofts are at 1300 S. 11th Street, phone number 749 4234.

we are already going door to door collecting signatures to have a more measured approach to this community need.

Regardless of whether the election is held in November of this year or April 2010, the funding will not be available until the following tax year.

Due to the diligence of the District's savings ( which was needed because of the sunset clause) of $32.5 million) we will be able to meet our obligations fully without sress. ( source sjsd financial statement and the task force's own auditor)

state statute asks districts to keep 3% ( or about 3 million)of the annual operating budget in reserve. source: dr roger dorson at the department of elementary and secondary education

the letter makes invalid points.

there is no danger of the lights going out or teachers being reduced ( unless the administration chooses to do so)

the november election will accomplish only one thing. the next candidates for BOE won't have to be accountable to the voters on this issue.

Something that really hasn't been brought up, that I would be curious to know is, when they talk about the conservation of the school district, how did they do it? How did they build a 32 million dollar reserve fund? Did they do it at the expense of the teachers? Did they have fewer teachers than they should have had, while keeping salaries lower, in order to stockpile 32 million? Did they make it up through the charging of student participation fees or activity fees? After all, when the city charges a fee, many concerned tax payers just call it another way of taxation. Did they do it through the stock market--you know, gambling with tax payer dollars? How did they do it? With the economy crashing down around us, how did they build their reserves? Yes, they laid off teachers, but did they really need to do it at this time, while they were also hiring more new teachers and creating new (previously unneeded) administrative positions?

heritage - Hope the community makes the effort to attend and participate with ACE. A logical long range plan, truly neutral and representative of all voices, has been lacking and needed in correcting course on this matter if success is to be obtained.

I appreciate the fact Alliance for Community Excellence is inviting everyone to get involved. I'm certain the Rev. Killgore's group has good intentions, but it's difficult to get excited about self-appointed and self-anointed saviors of the educaztion process. Their whole organization smacks of elitism, it seems to me.

Heritage makes aa good point that a spring electon would require Board of Education candidates for the two open seats to explain just where they stand on critical issues and why. With no other issues scheduled for November, an election then would mean an unneeded expenditure of perhaps $50,000 -- even though the group says it will raise that money on its own.

Or to sum it up, you voted it down but it will be voted on again and again and again til they get it done...if you like it or not. There should be at least a 2 year waiting period before any issue voted down be allowed to be brought up again.

It is my understanding that most of the reserve was created by refinancing existing bonds. How funds for school districts are invested are controlled through legislation and laws are on the books for this.

The reserves have to be created and expanded to max level because when 34% (I think I remember that figure correctly) of your revenue can be taken away from you each five years with the sunset you better be prepared. I thank Dr. Smith for at least putting us in position to survive a school district without an operating levy.

"The reserves have to be created and expanded to max level because when 34% (I think I remember that figure correctly) of your revenue can be taken away from you each five years with the sunset you better be prepared. I thank Dr. Smith for at least putting us in position to survive a school district without an operating levy."

........and your group is choosing to provide the district with another such excuse to be forced to hoard funds? sounds like that black cloud must have been in your vision when this short sighted and completely unwarranted move to place the levy on a ballot in november was made. that makes absolutely NO SENSE.

I agree with Apple that a sunset clause is not the answer. I do, however, question two of her points. One, I don't believe we were coming off the "worst economic news of the past century." I believe the Great Depression of the 1930s was significantly a bigger blow. Apple likely isn't old enough to have lived through it, but I assume she has heard about it

Two, this is not the first time the distict attempted to pass a levy without a sunset clause. To my knowledge, the only time the district ever used a sunset clause was in its immediately previous election. Historically the sunset clauses have been used here only for a capital projects. Through the entire 20th century, no school district levy issue here ever had a sunset clause.

This is soooo silly for all of you to sit and post solutions to the problem. In speaking with people in our community that I trust and I think have a their finger on the pulse of what this town will and will not do I have come to the conclusion that right now there is no way a levy without a sunset clause will pass. The task force has accepted this and will fund this ballot item with private donations, mine included, to give the schools the operating money they need. I would love to see the levy pass without a sunset clause so all of you who want one put your money where your mouth is and fund the campaign and get it done.

I cannot answer that question. I do know that the foundation is not on any of the information I have seen or been told about. I would suggest that the task force take no money from the foundation, if the task force takes funds from the foundation then in reality it is not funded by private funds thus I would not donate.