The five-year mill increase for the bond request would be an average of 1.19 mills per year. The mill rate per year is as follows: 1st year = 1.4 mills, 2nd year = 1.29 mills, 3rd year = 1.19 mills, 4th year = 1.10 mills, 5th year = 0.98 mills.
Home SEV Total Additional Property Taxes over 5 Year Bond (*), (**), (***) $50,000 $298 $100,000 $596 $150,000 $894 $200,000 $1192 $250,000 $1,490 $300,000 $1,788 $350,000 $2,086 Please note that these amounts are IN ADDITION to the high property taxes you are already paying as an Okemos property owner.
- (*) This assumes that your home SEV remains flat for five years. More than likely the SEV will go UP which means the additional property tax costs will be proportionally higher than what is shown in this table.
- (**) If this Tech bond passes, more than likely the Board will come back to the well once again in 5-7 years asking for yet ANOTHER Technology Bond. So passing this bond will set a precedent for continued Tech Bond renewals (and commensurate, ongoing additional property taxes to Okemos property owners) in the future as well.
- (***) If you own one or more income properties in Okemos or one or more commercial office or retail business properties in Okemos, you will be hit much harder by not only this Tech Bond but by the non-homestead renewal, as well.
So depending upon where you fall in the spectrum of SEVs you could be sending anywhere from several hundred to several thousand (or more) of your hard-earned dollars to the Okemos School Board, if this Bond passes. Why not instead consider putting this money aside for your child or grandchild's future college expenses? Or maybe invest it directly in your own home, to enhance its value directly instead of assuming that sending it to the school board will somehow lift your home's value here in Okemos. Think about that! Or maybe you need to pay down some debt. Well if this bond passes you'll have fewer dollars left for that!
The reality is, we don't. A lot of thinking that "we do" is based upon Public Opinion (often uninformed); public, media, School Board, and administrative hype; and the "I want my child to have the best at all costs" mentality. However, going back to the years of the Clinton Administration and forward since then, there has been a large emphasis and push put forward from the Federal government on down, that somehow the PC revolution and technology would "revolutionize" K-12 education. Technology would somehow become the Panacea for K-12 education. The PC manufacturers jumped aboard this bandwagon whole-heartedly (and why wouldn't they?), and many companies, such as Apple, gave away millions in PCs (primarily to California schools) as seeds to grow future markets. Educational software companies started showing up, jumping on the bandwagon too, and offering new programs with promises of increased learning benefits, better reading, writing, and math scores, and on and on. Ten to twenty years later (i.e. now), the verdict is still out regarding how much of a panacea "technology" is to K-12 education quality. There are many studies that even suggest students are in some cases worse off because of overemphasis and exposure to PCs and technology in K-12 education, and that the developmental influence (good or bad) on K-12 kids of this excessive technology exposure is not yet really understood. However one thing is for certain: it is very expensive, particularly if it needs to be upgraded every 5-7 years. It is so expensive, in fact, that many school districts around the U.S. are being forced to drop art classes, shop classes, other vocational classes and cut back in other areas, just to continue so-called "technology" funding. Even in some of the most technology rich districts in the U.S., such as Research Triangle Park, NC and NAPA Valley, California, there never seems to be enough money (even though they have some of the most dollars for technology of anywhere in the U.S.). There is not only the technology (hardware) cost, but installation and maintenance costs, software and OS costs, teacher and staff training (both on hardware and software) costs, and many if not most teachers were never trained for this stuff, constant upgrade pressures for those who feel compelled to always have the latest and greatest, networking and wiring costs, environmental facilities (HVAC) costs, software database subscriptions costs, Internet access costs, and so on, and so on, and so forth.The bottom line is, we don't HAVE to spend that much on Technology (that's why we have the Bond vote coming up. You're going to pay for it!!). It does not HAVE to be overdone. Our students are not going to be somehow "left behind". It is just not going to happen! (this is part of that uniformed public opinion). Okemos is not a computer engineering campus. It is a K-12 school. A lot of the fundamentals that our children need to be taught in order to be successful after leaving Okemos have not changed for many, many years. The ACT and SAT tests do not cover windows XP, MS PowerPoint, MS Word, Excel, Instant Messaging, AIM, or any other computer applications. These are things that will always be changing, things that students and adults will ALWAYs be learning, and re-learning as technologies evolve.
Absolutely not. This is a popular public opinion-driven fallacy that has no basis as far as real hard evidence is concerned. However, don't feel bad about that because a majority of Americans do, indeed, believe this! And it seems to have been a very effective fallacy put forth by school administrations and school boards to win Bond Millages for technology throughout the U.S.. But don't just take our word for it, check out our "Resources" and references on this website."Even at my technology heavy institution, new students can learn all the computer skills that they need 'in a summer'"
Joseph Weizenbaum, Professor Emeritus of Computer Science at M.I.T."In fact, when we're hiring, computer skills don't even enter into our list of priorities. We're looking for strong character, an ability to speak, write, and comprehend, and a rich education in the history of architecture"
Patrick MacLeamy, Executive VP, Hellmuth Obata & Kassabaum ( the largest architecture firm in the U.S.)"I've come to the inevitable conclusion that ...what's wrong with education cannot be fixed with technology. No amount of technology will make a dent... You're not going to solve the problems by putting all knowledge onto CD-ROMS. We can put a Web site in every school- none of this is bad. It's only bad if it lulls us into thinking that we're doing something to solve the problem with education."
Steven Jobs, Apple Computer Founder, 1996"A spokesman for Hewlett-Packard, the giant California computer-products company, told me the company rarely hires people who are predominantly computer experts, favoring instead those who have a talent for teamwork and are flexible and innovative."
Todd Oppenheimer, The Flickering Mind, 2003
Considering that the millage last year was voted down, one would think it would be prudent that the Okemos School Board scale back what it is asking for before it decides to plow forward within one year of having a bond fail, to again place it back on the ballet. However, this does not appear to be the case. This year's bond is slightly less in dollars than last years as a result of the district purchasing some necessary items using money from the fund balance. Otherwise, the dollar amounts asked for in this bond allocated to technology and transportation are relatively unchanged.
Popular public opinion has it that technology is an integral and necessary part of the education process for today's students. The bond proponents say the funds will be spent for "desperately needed upgrades" to "aging and over-worked computer network and infrastructure." And that the "equally aged phone system must also be upgraded" (to the tune of a quarter of a million bucks - $250,000!!!). For those of you unfamiliar, an executive multi-line phone system can be purchased for a fraction of $250,000. This budget item itself is an outrage!Here are a few other "integral and necessary" technology items they plan to spend your hard earned dollars on:
$325,000 for unspecified "Furniture" $273,000 for 228 "Room Amplification" devices (??) $23,800 for 68 "Digital Cameras" $17,550 for 27 "Digital Video Cameras" $40,950 for 273 "DVD/VCR Players" $62,400 for 156 "PDAs" $705,750 for 550 "Desktop PCs" averaging $1283 each. $308,400 for 222 "Presentation Devices" averaging $1389 each $25,000 for Cable TV upgrades! $335,000 for unspecified "Cabling Plus GigaByte" (??) $280,000 for unspecified "Building Security" $25,000 for a Single Imaging Server !! $500,000 for unspecified "Network Upgrades" $127,000 for unspecified "Electrical Upgrades" ..... and more.
Quality schools help maintain property values for all residents. This is true. However, spending $6.8 million on school technology does NOT directly equal quality schools. There is a lot more to quality schools than high tech machines, network cabling and anywhere internet access. It is that simple. Don't be blindly mis-lead by popular public opinion.The Bond Request will HURT retired fixed income residents in Okemos. Period. It will cost them more to live here, in their own home.
The Bond Request will HURT families who are living on a tight budget here in Okemos. Period. It will cost them more to live here, in their own home, and leave fewer dollars for other necessities, at the end of the month.
The Bond Request will HURT families with children since it will make it harder for them to save for a college education for their kids, by placing a higher local property tax burden on them. And by the way, by the time these families with kids actually head off to college, most if not nearly all of what this bond request is planned to be spent on, will be obsolete. Worthless, for the most part. And so would much of the training these kids would have received on these machines as well.
Yes, you bet they are!! Absolutely. Just last spring a local millage was passed to upgrade the Potter Park Zoo in Lansing. This additional property tax is just about to kick in on us, for those who might not remember it. Sure the Bond proponents can always find some other communities where the taxes might be a little higher, particularly here in the State of Michigan, which has quite high taxes on a nationwide comparative basis.Yes, taxes are high enough!!
The proposed Bond is asking us to raise our school millage 24%, from 5.7265 to 7.1265 mills.
If you believe that the business climate in Michigan is strong and improving, property values in our community are strong and heading up, the real estate market is bustling, and you personally have so much excess income that a few hundred or a few thousand additional dollars to Okemos schools from your property taxes is not a big deal, and you have no better places to put them, then go ahead and vote yes. You will be praised for your vote by the Bond proponents, and can probably even get your name listed on their website, albeit a rather expensive way to get your name in print, online.
Last year the bond failed. There were more no votes than yes votes. With good reason. Many items requested in this bond were non-essential and excessive, and not proven to improve K-12 learning. They still are. The Michigan economy was in the tank, particularly the automotive industry and tier 1 and 2 suppliers. It still is. In addition we now have major pharmaceutical and banking businesses leaving Michigan. The real estate market was in a real slump. It still is, and perhaps even more so with record level foreclosure rates.What has changed a year later? Well, the State Government is considering adding a 2% tax on all service purchases to help balance a nearly 1 billion dollar shortfall. That's a biggee! And yet the Okemos School Board plans to borrow money from the State to fund this Bond over five years? Someone explain that to us Common Sense folks, if the state is a billion upside down how can they loan us $6.8 mil? Oh well.
Also, Ford Motor Company is on the verge of bancrupcy with Junk Bond credit status, and having borrowed against every hard asset they own in an effort to prolong the day of fiscal judgement and chapter 11.
For those fiscally prudent among us, these are certainly times for saving dollars away for the future, and not spending dollars away that we don't yet have (current and future property tax increases).
These are solid reasons to Vote NO, this year.
Yes, it most likely will. There are numerous references on this website to back this up, too. Placing more kids in front of PC screens, the internet and other high tech gadgets for longer periods of time appears to be having some definite effect on K-12 kids. Although this is all happening so quickly and with such lack of serious forethought and concern it is not all that well documented, yet there are some reports out there raising serious concern, and to the level of attention of the Surgeon General of the United States. Kids are becoming less attentive in class, having more difficulty focusing and concentrating, are having their imaginations stymied, are exhibiting less creativity, are becoming poorer readers and writers, are more prone to plagerizing copy and documents off the internet by "cutting and pasting", are having more difficulty in rote problem solving and carrying out original thought processes, are becoming more socially isolated and introverted, are experiencing more so-called display of ADHD syndrone, are more prone to obesity, eye problems, and the like. This list goes on.Additionally, more widespread unsupervised access to the internet by our kids in schools will obviously open up opportunities for malicious on-line activity, email or chat room exchanges with unknown persons, sexual predators, and exposure to pornographic on-line content to mention a few. Yes, this new equipment will most certainly make a difference in our children's education.
This is a very good question that really deserves a serious answer. Unfortunately since we (CommonSenseForOkemos) are not privy to details of the School budget we cannot answer with any certainty. However, we can certainly speculate. First, if it were possible to trim the budget to fund technology and buses, there would be no need for the bond request. Since the School Board desperately wants this $6.8mil, they would not admit to it even if it were possible (which of course it is). Cuts are ALWAYS possible. It is just a matter of what, and who. It's quite Plain and simple. If the money is not there, things will be cut, they'll have to be. It's that simple. We can make some suggestions, but of course no one working in the schools wants any cuts, so the rebellion will likely be loud, particularly if they think they can go ahead with another tax increase on us!Here are some areas that could be cut without "having a great impact on educational programs for our students":
- Health Care: This is the fastest growing item in the budget, and in most all budgets of government and business organizations. Increase co-pays across the board for everyone in the district receiving a paycheck from Okemos schools. From the Superintendent down to the staff assistants, substitute teachers and related grounds staff. Tie the co-pays directly to increases in health care premiums so everyone feels the cost increases and shares in the expense. This should apply across the board for health, dental, and optical.
- Consider Privatizing Janitorial Services and Busing Services. Get competitive bids and see what savings can be generated.
- Look into eliminating non-essential classes in K-12. If it is not essential to the three Rs, or to scoring highly on the ACT or SAT pre-college tests, or to gaining employment in vocational areas beyond high school, consider eliminating the courses and corresponding commensurate expenses.
- Tie teacher compensation and salary increases to performance, (as well as the administration's). Base it on a fair, scientific measure using some metric related to standardized test scores.
Yes, they are. However beyond this question is the more important question as to whether there is any strong correlation between increased (& more expensive) technology in K-12 and improved learning. We have not seen this evidence, and in some cases we see evidence to the contrary. However, we concede that technology has been shown to offer a strong and measurable improvement in teaching and learning when used with special education children, those with learning disabilities and handicaps.Certainly some PCs used in adminstration and a limited number used by students in courses where PC programming or CAD is taught or where library PCs are used for internet research need to be kept upgraded. The notion of putting numerous PCs in every K-12 classroom, including elementary schools, is in extreme excess of what is needed or deemed essential.
We also concede that some network upgrades may be necessary as well as a main school server upgrade to support efficient teacher staff/administration/ parent communications. However we feel that spending hundreds of thousands of dollars or more to re-wire entire schools is unnecessary and extraordinarily costly to Okemos taxpayers. We support a balanced, common sense approach to technology in K-12 education. Most of the items being requested for funding by this bond, are not.
We can. It has been done in the past and should continue to be done to help alleviate expenses to local property taxpayers. However, going beyond that why can't we seek out corporate donors of computer equipment who are upgrading their departments as an effort to save additional taxpayer dollars? The answer again is, we can, and we should! Beyond this, there are a number of reputable PC suppliers of used, refurbished computer hardware - of both desktops and laptops that are available at a fraction of the new purchase cost, and which also come with full warranty packages. Some of the major computer manufacturers even operate such refurbished PC divisions. There is absolutely no good reason that Okemos taxpayers should have to foot the bill to fill Okemos schools with state-of-the-art, $1,300 dollar apiece desktop computers that are going to be primarily used for such low power tasks as word processing, Powerpoint presentations, internet research and emailing. This makes about as much sense as buying your 16 year old an Indy race car to take back and forth from home to school!
The Pro-Bond folks would like you to think that these are technology tools necessary in "modern" classrooms to "enhance and enrich students' learning experience".What we're actually talking about is a bunch of absolutely unnecessary technical gadgetry, whose only real promise is to complicate classroom instruction, require more teacher training and maintenance time and cost, introduce time loss due to technical glitches that are certain to come up more frequently, make teacher-student interaction less personal and more "pushbutton" oriented, and basically to more further de-humanize the classroom environment. And all of this at a HUGE financial cost to taxpayers.
Specifically what the Board is asking for in every classroom is more DVD players, digital cameras, handheld PDA devices, Infrared Class Room Performance Systems (fancy wording for handheld remotes for student feedback), Digital document imaging systems, Sound Field Systems (to amplify the teachers audio for students who refuse to shut up during class), Electronic Whiteboards, and widespread internet connectivity for multimedia streaming video. Sound rather like a George Lucas Hollywood production studio? Well, it might be close, considering the tab put forth in the Board's budget is around $726,000 of your tax dollars, not including the costs for the PCs and associated internet special cabling and wiring needed.
One final comment on these so-called instructional technology tools. We pay property taxes for our children to attend public schools to be educated, and to learn, NOT to be "entertained".
This question might more appropriately read "Why do the price estimates for most of the technology seem higher than those found in retail stores?"The answer is very simple. It happens in many situations when people are spending someone else's money. It's called padding the budget. That is, you put in budgetary prices as high as you can get away with, while still remaining within the realm of possibility. That way you'll be assured of having the money that you proposed that you needed, and if you're good, you'll have money left over for things that you might not have needed, and to be possibly allocated into other areas, unofficially of course.
A prime example is the new telephone system, budgeted for $250,000. Those of us that have run businesses know that you can get a new phone system for a fraction of this price. And a quite good one, at that. But those of you that don't know that, don't know any difference, and so you won't think twice about it. But let me tell you this is one heck of a bloated number. In fact you could probably rewire the entire White House with a new phone system for these kinds of dollars! On the other hand, if the Board is planning on putting a telephone station in every classroom (in addition to administative offices), in the teachers lounges, gyms, library, all bathrooms in the school, as well as a station on every hallway, then maybe $250k is not too far off. Do we need that? You decide. It's your money.