Written
responses of superintendents to open-ended questions
Q30.
State law allows districts to exceed the revenue caps by passing a referendum.
What is your opinion of this policy?
Difficult to accomplish.
Does not seem to fare too well with taxpayers.
Very difficult - even though this is our 1st year we have levied to
the limit.
Very difficult to pass.
Very difficult to sell to public. Should allow boards the ability
to increase the levy.
Referenda have failed in a majority of districts trying to get them
passed. The referendum approach is not helping many districts that need
it.
Support it.
The public does not understand and when you hold a referendum, thinks
you are not properly managing it.
Good idea but hard to do.
We tried to pass a revenue cap referendum, but it was defeated 65%/35%.
Positive - This gives the local communities the power to control or
add to financial resources.
It's one way the local citizens can decide whether or not to raise
their taxes.
Won't pass.
Good.
Extremely difficult especially in a decreasing enrollment environment.
At least it provides some flexibility - better than a "hard cap."
Very tough to go to the voters and ask them to increase their taxes
so we have more to spend.
Just about futile in the present economy.
Temporary band-aid. It is like borrowing on your credit cards.
1% solution would be better - majority of the board.
Unreasonable - we just passed a $15 million building referendum -
we can't go back to the voters to exceed the caps.
The "referendum" requirement makes it too difficult for
small, rural, poor districts.
Excellent policy.
Feel that boards should have authority to exceed caps.
Our school board will not consider the option.
We need some way to increase revenue. Exceeding revenue caps by passing
a referendum is certainly one way to do this.
While difficult, it can work. We passed a recurring exemption to revenue
caps by a 2-1 margin last November.
3 tries all failed--the last on 09-25-01.
I have passed 13 referendums in my career - other states do it, no
big deal!
I would like the flexibility to exceed by 1% the cap on operational
costs of a new facility.
This is an ineffective method of raising funds due to the time, effort,
and generally poor results of these referendums.
Unrealistic.
I would like to see more flexibility provided rather than having to
go through the referendum process.
Agree - should be a local decision.
At least the state allows limited local control even if it is very
difficult to pass this kind of referendum.
The problem is that many districts are facing referendums for operational
costs. This is far more difficult to pass than capital expense referendums.
Other than energy costs (which have increased) most costs are for QEO
increases (and insurance increases) which are so difficult to "market"
with the public.
It is a challenge to pass a revenue limit override.
It makes it very difficult to go to referendum without cutting program
and staff first.
Difficult to pass - we were unsuccessful w/ 2 previous referendums
asking this question related to construction.
When there are districts that have reduced significant services -
it may work - but not in our school district.
It is very difficult to convince the citizens to support (or understand
the need for) increased taxes for instructional purposes (our attempt
was overwhelmingly defeated).
Very difficult with 75% of taxpayers not having kids in school.
Unfairly restrictive.
We are facing a crisis in retirement benefit costs for retiree insurance.
We can't negotiate fewer benefits; health insurance costs are increasing
at an alarming rate. There is no way we would be able to pass a referendum
on this issue.
Referendum to exceed revenue caps simply is not an option in our district.
There is little chance of a referendum passing because of increased
concerns about property taxes by those who do not utilize public schools
- elderly and Amish.
Very restrictive - takes control of budget away from elected representatives.
Referendums are used for big-ticket items. Taxpayers don't want to
vote every year to increase the levy for small amounts.
Puts pressure on school board members to avoid going to referendum.
Increases local participation and accountability but difficult to
do.
Should be a decision of the Board to increase revenue caps.
Need will result in passage. Most have been successful. As close to
democracy as we can get.
The process uses up resources that could be committed to improving
programs for students.
Our district would take no other approach
Acceptable - very difficult to convince Board to go to referendum.
We may have to consider a referendum within the next 2-3 yrs.
We were successful in passing a referendum for operation, but only
after the third try, and after very negative consequences (not purchasing
buses, delaying maintenance, not replacing staff).
Exceeding revenue caps should be a local decision - made and financed
locally.
It is a farce.
Very limiting
Difficult - need must be clearly understood by public
Board should have more local authority to represent its district -
even if the amount is non-aidable.
Not realistic given current political climate.
This is a very difficult process. We ran 3 referendums in 2000-01,
and were not successful until we cut $250,000 from the budget. The public
then approved a $250,000 override for 8 yrs (1/2 of what was needed).
It is nice to have the statutory option but it often isn't a viable
local option until services are dramatically reduced.
This makes the ability to get revenues almost impossible, especially
in a community where voter population is outside the school.
Since 70 to 80% of population does not have students in school it
would be difficult to pass referendum. All 20 to 30% of parents would
have to vote.
I believe it has merit, especially for large ticket items. I do not
agree with it when it comes to operation expenses though.
It shows that districts need help but some administrators are afraid
to go to referendum for this, as it may not pass.
At least it could be an out for some districts - many districts cannot
pass a referendum to accomplish this.
It won't happen in___________.
We have lost 3 operational referendums.
I think it is very unfair. Legislators know how hard it is to pass
a referendum. The .70 of 1% would have brought welcomed relief.
Two neighboring districts unsuccessful in 3 referendums to exceed
caps!
Our board is on record as not using this option for operations. If
I proposed such a referendum, the board would not approve it.
Hard to pass with citizens already being heavily taxed.
Allowing districts to exceed only through a referendum is too restrictive.
Very difficult to get one passed in this district.
Would be very difficult in our district!
The _______ community approved 2 overtax referenda. They are required
in order for a district that receives only $85,000 in equalization aid.
Boards are reluctant to go to referendum until it's too late.
We've tried twice in _______ - both failed. Similar fate awaits the
next one.
What else can be done? We are about 2 years away from this process.
In a low-income area this is one of our only options.
There should be some exemptions to this; that would allow the local
boards some options to meet district needs.
Won't happen here!
[We] passed an operational referendum in the fall of 2000. Without
it, the district would have had cuts and reductions that are unacceptable.
We have had one unsuccessful referendum and will be trying again this
spring. The problem I see is a lack of public understanding causes failed
referendums. People do not want to know the truth.
Passed referendum to exceed cap - extremely difficult but possible.
Very difficult because it becomes a wage/salary issue vs. school needs
issue!!
It is the last hope and we must not lose that thin thread option.
Not likely to pass in this district.
Fund 80 allows some exceeding of revenue cap.
Would have liked to have some flexibility.
Simplistic approach by our state politicians! If they think that's
such a good idea, why not implement this policy for highways, prisons,
state capitol improvement, etc.
We would avoid this because it would be very difficult to do in our
district.
Not a practical solution to financial difficulties created by the
revenue cap. Is this a political play for legislators to have coverage?
Very difficult to get public to understand complicated formula and
reasons behind the needs.
Tough sell to taxpayers.
Good option for a few districts. Perhaps we should do the same for
state government and watch them start whining when they run out of money
and figure out that it's not worth going to referendum to ask for more!
Near impossible to achieve - have same restrictions on all government
agencies, then it'll be same playing field.
Deadly to do. Need to be able to exceed for insurance benefit increases!
A school board is elected to represent district residents. They should
be allowed to exceed without referendums.
Good if needed.
Restrictive to local school boards.
It worked for us this year, but just barely (17 votes).
Succeeded in one of my districts - $300,000 per year.
We need this, but we also need to continue it each year not just the
prior year.
Can create dissonance in the community. Time-consuming process especially
for small schools and the resource it redirects.
BS!!
It is very difficult to pass a referendum to exceed the revenue limits.
A percentage increase (1%) per student without going to referendum would
be beneficial.
The board is not willing to do this.
This is something that must have clear and identifiable objectives
that the community can easily understand.
Should be left to the board of education.
Creates very negative PR, us vs. them. All municipalities should have
to-not just schools.
Boards should have authority to set tax levy, period!
Districts need to come forward and try a referendum. A district cannot
say, the present system does not work without trying.
My doctoral research would indicate that some districts have greater
difficulty depending on demographics and ability to pay.
I am in favor of it. I would rather see a super majority of the board
be all that is required.
Unlikely in our community - most jobs are $10/hr - people cant' afford
more property tax.
This is very difficult to do. It is the only instance when taxpayers
are asked if they want to raise their taxes.
It's worked very well for us, but I know statewide the trend and success
of passing these is getting less and less.
$600,000 recruiting for technology replacement approved April 2001.
$103,500 recruiting for PSLO approved April, 2000.
Important for many of us!
Disagree - most people will not support something that will cost them
money - Some districts have a referendum to buy a bus - how sad is that!
Targeted referenda needs (e.g., school safety, technology, building
projects) seem to be more successful than exceeding the revenue limit
for operational purposes (staffing, increasing costs of health insurance).
Exceeding the revenue limit by 0.78% by local boards did not appear
unreasonable.
I believe it is necessary - at this point there is no other option
available.
Better than no option at all.
Local levy impact is great. Makes this opportunity useless at this
point in time.
It allows the legislature to say . . . so the final decision rests
at the local level.
Archaic and expensive and time-consuming.
In our area it would be very difficult to pass.
No chance in heck of passing a referendum.
Next to impossible to convince already overburdened taxpayers of the
need.
It would be fine if all other government and educational units had
to follow the same rules. As is, it remains the voters only chance to
say "no".
We passed a referendum to exceed revenue caps in 1999.
Good.
Denigrates the referendum process.
Very difficult to get passed. Can only use the option once or twice
before voters are tired of it.
Good.
We passed a referendum 2 years ago - but it is not enough and we probably
can't pass another - this is a poor policy.
Local school boards should be able to set the tax rate and levy without
going to a referendum.
It is a good policy. We passed a recurring referendum last year.
I believe school districts need to have some flexibility under revenue
caps to help fund increases in health insurance, special education,
etc.
Good policy, but it's not the answer.
Great! If you are in a wealthy district! Cities where the average
salary is $35,000 and 1/2 the town is on food stamps will never pass
a referendum - schools are doomed here!
I'll recommend a referendum when the cuts we need to make are made.
Very difficult to pass a referendum for spending.
Gives the legislators a convenient "cop out."
This policy has saved us. Had it not been for passed referenda, we
would have had to cut programs and staff.
School districts will be forced to reduce programs and services before
these types of referenda are supported by public.
I believe it is very difficult to convey the revenue limits and make
them understandable to the public.
Because we cannot borrow any money without a referendum, maintenance
is a problem.
We have tried twice and failed. The system is unfair since other governments
don't need a referendum to increase taxes.
We tried once as part of a building program. Was not supported.
Our district would have a very difficult time to pass.
We passed 2 questions - one to increase capital project spending by
$300,000 for ten years, one for $500,000 in operation costs to open
a new school.
We have no options / it does allow a community to provide if they
choose to.
It is the only option many school districts have in lieu of significantly
reducing or eliminating programs and services.
This alternative is not great because it is "dis-equalizing."
However, it's our only legitimate option.
Great if you pass one. Districts should have the ability to tax to
provide educational opportunities for children.
No success passing.
I support this allowance.
The state should supply 100% of required programs funding. (Example
- water testing, etc…)
Allow boards to use their right to tax without referendum.
Citizens are reluctant to support an increase in taxes. This is especially
the case when most citizens are not directly impacted by public schools.
The state is irresponsible when they place the burden on the voters.
We succeeded once for a $200,000 increase in revenue cap; this is
a very difficult process and can't be used very often.
Fine if successful
It is necessary unless state funding is changed.
Difficult to win . . .
I would like to see us able to exceed the revenue caps through the
annual budget meeting and not a referendum.
We have not tried this yet. This option reduces our flexibility in
funding education.
Need greater flexibility. Passing a referendum is too divisive to
the school system and the community.
Good in theory - results have been disheartening.
This policy leads to greater equity problems.
Very difficult to accomplish.
It is a messy and sticky band-aid to a much too serious disease.
This is difficult because public can vote without any impact on those
without children and don't look at the total picture.
That is how we dealt with revenue problems. We passed a $150,000 referendum
last April for each of the next 5 years.
In a small, rural, conservative district this is unlikely to happen
unless faced with consolidation.
This law is absolutely necessary given revenue caps.
Very cumbersome.
We have a greater need to pass a remodeling referendum. It would be
difficult to pass two referendums.
We have done this.
Poor policy made necessary by 2/3rd commitment.
Fair; allows taxpayer input, although scary because taxpayers don't
always understand implications.
The district failed in its one attempt to exceed the caps via referendum.
If the law is so good, extend to all units of government, state and
local.
An easy way out for legislators.
It is near impossible to get the local taxpayer to approve because
other governments increase without approval.
We passed a referendum to build athletic fields and add technology,
plus to exceed reg. budget. So - it's okay.
Creates unequal opportunities between school districts.
Good legislation. However, the legislature should allow school board
to exceed by 1-2% (or .89 percent) as was proposed in the revenue limit
flexibility - "2 percent for kids"
It would be difficult to pass in this rural district. Our folks have
not felt the effects on programs yet.
Undue pressure upon a school dist. to reduce ed spending.
It's a good policy, although it would be better if we had local board
authority to exceed the revenue cap by 1% by board vote.
We used this (the referendum) to exceed the revenue cap in 1997 by
$175,000 recurring to support the operating costs of our building addition.
Good - but the state law should allow this.
A good idea.
Counterproductive.
Poor policy - needs are not taken into consideration. Voters that
may not have any stake in school get to decide your budget.
The school board should be able to exceed caps by a reasonable amount
(1-3%).
If needed, we will implement this option.
You must be kidding.
This is the only time people get to vote on whether their taxes increase.
It is unfair; counties, cities, states don't do this. It should be a
board decision.
It provides opportunity to districts, which is good.
We are a 41% tertiary aid dist - not likely!
Districts should have flexibility to do so by board action of a super
majority.
Referendum ability does not transfer into a realistic possibility.
It is very helpful. We did one for $125,000 for five years.
It's like pulling teeth to overcome public apathy to educate the public
about the need for the additional revenues.
The state should adequately fund all education in WI
It is a difficult concept to convince the electors . . . This should
be done at the annual meeting or left to the school board.
It's really the "only game in town."
Should be allowed more flexibility to board of education to do this
type of action.
Too restrictive. The school board should have more flexibility.
With higher taxes - won't pass.
Wish we did not need to do so but we will. We need this provision.
Okay if citizens supportive; sometimes it takes a lot of work to get
a referendum passed, or even fail!
Boards are reluctant to request additional operational funds through
referendum.
Ridiculous - revenue cap override referendums are largely unsupported
by popular votes.
Thank goodness this "only way out" exists. Unfortunately
over time it will lead to unequal support for education.
Too restrictive, they are very difficult to pass and perception is
negative amongst voters.
Not viable in most instances.
Won't ever happen in this district.
Should be left up to elected board of ed., not senior citizens or
"dinks" (dual income/no kids).
Not good at this time - poor climate for referendum.
The law needs to be changed.
We posted a referendum in June 2001 for $350,000 for five years. It
worked for us this time
Won't fly in our district.
Not feasible in our community - we recently passed new high school.
No way - people will not vote for higher wages!!!
Difficult to pass referendum in county.
Doesn't work around WI - should have to pass entire budget so public
realizes they have responsibility along with power.
How many districts have been able to get a referendum passed to exceed
the revenue cap? -Very few- the policy is pathetic!
Very difficult to do. If school districts must do this, so should
the state, county, and local governments.
Referendums require purposefulness - the process in itself is OK but
is it necessary?
It is a poor way to run our districts. We are at the mercy of the
electorate in their one opportunity to say no to taxes.
I agree for building, but for operation it really limits a school
district.
There is little chance of passing such a referendum in _______ .
Virtually impossible in our district.
We were successful in doing this - 5 million over the caps. We support
this action but in many towns, find it to be impossible to convince
the community until things are worse than terrible!
At least it provides one possible outlet. Prefer board super majority
up to a maximum.
Many districts, due to nature of community, find it nearly impossible
to do so. Yet, education is a state responsibility, a student right,
and should be equitable throughout the State of Wisconsin.
Difficult to do within the present economy and Wisconsin's allegedly
high property taxes.
It took multiple referendums and 20 years to pass the last referendum.
What would our chances be of passing one? Failing doesn't help.
Because we are a "negative .70," this is not a viable option.
Will not happen here.
Support without referendum!
State must change funding formula!
Definitely interested in a referendum.
Passing a referendum is extremely difficult in _______ County.
We tried a referendum last spring and lost big.
The State pays 68% of our budget. The cap is probably the only way
to control our spending since we can add programs for 30¢ per dollar.
We are almost debt (2004) free and need to do some larger scale remodeling
due to having to go to referendum; [it]was very hard and difficult.
In April it failed and the remodeling did not take place.
Poor - people are voting against all government programs and not voting
for schools.
It shows how gutless the legislators are. We (I) have to do what they
won't.
Should be local school board decision - referendum difficult to pass
- people don't like to vote for increasing their own taxes.
Communities don't understand caps and therefore do not generally understand
caps referendums.
It appears to be becoming increasingly difficult to pass these referendums.
This option is being discussed.
It's lousy. The state should be subjected to its own policies and
then be held to a high level of accountability.
Poor state policy.
We were allowed to go over our cap "this present year - 2001-02"
by $175,000 as a "small, but needed school."
Need more flexibility than a referendum.
Good.
In an anti-tax climate, this is very difficult to do. Changes in our
local community contribute to this difficulty.
_______ passed $400,000.00 - recurring new cap April 2001.
