This week is less features, more hard news in the Garretson Gazette. In the interests of serving the public we're going to post our main news story on the School's Tax Opt out online for the public good.
Garretson School Board passes Opt Out, public to vote on proposal on March 22
by Gazette Editor, Garrick Moritz
The Garretson School Board met in regular session on Monday, Jan. 11. This was a big meeting with a large community turnout, over 38 people in all meeting inside the school library. The big topic of discussion, was the property tax opt out for $500,000 that had been seriously discussed at the last meeting.
The session began with the usual business of approving the agenda set forth, a report on finances and the payment of the school’s current bills. Next, Superintendent Guy Johnson announced the January Garretson School PRIDE award winner, which was lunchroom staff member Sheila Matthiesen. Johnson read out her nomination letter and said that Sheila does an amazing job every school day, remembers all the students by both name and number from memory, and is well liked by students and parents alike.
After that they got to the heart of the meeting, an open discussion about the tax opt out for the school’s general fund. It began with Supt. Johnson reviewing the discussion from previous board sessions and meetings with the teaching staff.
The problem is the School’s General Fund. Since the recession and the education funding freeze in 2008, the school has maintained its General Fund by spending down from the school’s reserves. Though the school is not in trouble this very moment, over the course of the next two years, if school General Fund revenues don’t increase, then they will be facing a crisis. To stave off that crisis, the board is considering a property tax opt out resolution.
The General Fund, as mandated by state law and regulation, is the fund that mostly pays for the school’s staff salaries and the programs the school has on offer. Per student allocation dollars from the State of South Dakota are what comprises the lion’s share of these dollars. The more students you have, the more money you receive per student, is the general rule. Garretson’s numbers have gone down in recent years; student open enrollment to other nearby schools has been a negative contributing factor.
After Supt. Johnson gave his review of the current situation, board president Shannon Nordstrom opened the floor for public questions and commentary.
“I’m glad to see all of you here,” said Nordstrom. “You’re interested, passionate and you care about the future of your school.”
There were, of course, several questions from the public and discussion ranged from nearly every aspect of the topic. Though there were some grim faces in the crowd, there were also many statements of solid support made from community members in attendance, wanting the school to continue to exist in its present form and willing to pay tax dollars to support that. If there were any angry or resentful feelings to be expressed, they were not expressed in the meeting itself; instead the comments and questions were focused on what actions needed to be taken and the best methods to do them by.
The legislative session so far this year, and the Governor’s State of the State Address that occurred the day after this meeting, is all a buzz in the news. Though many of the proposals will help the school district, they are all just that, proposals, not hard facts or laws. The legislature hasn’t passed anything yet, and there is a long process that has to happen before anything, good or bad for the Garretson School district, will come down the pipe. Meanwhile the board and the community have to work out a solution that works for us, without relying on help from the state or an outside source. Nordstrom joked that if anyone in the room got a winning lottery ticket (since high lottery numbers had all been in the news), that he expected the school to get a nice donation.
Several discussion items that came up during the public forum were of significant importance and should be mentioned here. The first was what can we do to make Garretson School more attractive to students and parents so that the open enrollment comes into Garretson rather than out of it. Continuing in that vein, what needs to happen to make the Garretson school district grow so that in 5 years when this potential opt out would expire, there would be no need to renew it.
These were good questions the board discussed openly with community members.
“It will take some work, that’s for certain,” said Nordstrom. “This is why the board wants to use the site of the old bus garage to become a new daycare center. That project is on hold while we wait to see if our local daycare association can get the financial backing they need to build. If they do, the school will jump at that chance, because it means an influx of potential students. All of the daycares in town are at max capacity and have to turn people away because of it. We don’t want to send people down the road; we want them to have a better option here.”
Nordstrom said that as far as making the Garretson school more attractive to potential students and families, that process has only just begun.
“Some folks are attracted to a smaller school setting like ours, and we need to find ways to encourage more of that,” he said. “I think we’ve been doing a good job in welcoming new families to the community, but I also think that we can do better. In the elementary I think we’re doing a great job. In middle school and high school, we have room for improvement.”
Principal Chris Long echoed that statement.
“Because of the tight budget, staff decisions have been made that have hurt our curriculum,” said Long. “As an example, we no longer offer a higher level calculus class, and I have students who would have taken that class, but it’s unavailable. We’ve also been giving our students as much technology and availability for video correspondence classes, but let’s be honest, students want teachers, a real person they can learn from and interact with. That’s the how and why of good learning.”
The discussion of what to do to make the school more attractive naturally led to the conversation about what to do to make Garretson more attractive. More real estate and homes for sale or lots to build homes on is a hurdle. Nordstrom said that the city has begun working with Rural Development to craft plans for improving and expanding housing and business opportunities in Garretson.
“Garretson has a lot going for it,” said Nordstrom. “But we all know we have to do more. The city is meeting right now and they are scheduled to vote on a meeting change time to the first of Monday of the month. This will be good for the general public and us as well, as we’ll be able to have board members attend city meetings and city councilors attend school board meetings. If we want to move the community forward, the only way to do that is to work together. The storm this past summer proved we all can work together and do great things, and so all we need to do is keep that spirit of can do and camaraderie alive.
Board member Tony Martens also threw down a practical idea for public and board consideration. While the General Fund levies are managed by the State, the Capital Outlay fund levies are set by the school board and have been set at the maximum possible amount for years. He suggested that those levies be scaled back to help ease the burden on taxpayers if this opt out was put into effect. Business manager Rod Fischer was not enthusiastic about that prospect but Supt. Guy Johnson said that was certainly the purview of the board to set that levy amount and it was an item that could certainly be discussed and enacted by the school board.
After a half hour of discussion and questions, they brought the open forum to a close.
“Now that we know where the budget is we need to discuss putting this opt out to a vote,” said Nordstrom. “We either act on it later this week in a special meeting or we vote for it tonight. Nobody is ever in love with spending more money, and as a business owner here myself I admit I’m more than a little scared by the prospect too. We have a hill to climb, but I think once we get over the hump, and we work really hard to make improvements in our school and in community at large, and we show that commitment to everyone, then in five years we won’t have to have this opt out.”
Board member Kari Flanagan moved to adopt the resolution and Ruth Sarar seconded, and the question was brought to a vote. Board member Tony Martens cast the only nay vote so the motion passed.
Martens spoke with the Gazette after the meeting.
“I didn’t vote no because I thought we didn’t need an opt out,” he said. “Unfortunately, the way the finances look, we probably will need one. Looking into the budget myself, however, I’m not convinced at the $500,000 number, I think we could make do with less if we trimmed some more fat off the budget. My vote in no way says that I don’t support the school or the community because I do, I have a senior at Garretson High School who I’m very proud of and it is my hope that someday I might have grandchildren wearing blue and white.”
This was also a discussion point that was brought up at the meeting as well. However Business Manager Fischer and Supt. Johnson contended that the $500,000 opt out was a better choice for the initial opt out, since it would be collected only bi-annually so the first installment would be $250,000 followed six months later by another $250,000. Also Fischer confirmed to the board and assembled citizens that the $500K would be a maximum cap, and that the school could request less as its needs were analyzed on a yearly budgetary basis.
Whatever the amount and whatever the school’s needs, everyone in attendance agreed on one thing; that the Tax Opt Out should be decided on by the people of the Garretson School District. Though the law doesn’t mandate the Opt out go for a public vote, it leaves the option open to be passed by vote of the district patron voters or by petition and referendum. The board voted to make the ratification by the voters the cornerstone of the resolution. The election will be held on March 22, 2016.
“We live in a representative democracy, and we as elected officials in that democracy must make every effort to give the people we serve the deciding choice,” said Nordstrom. “They should decide directly how their tax money is spent and what the future of our school will look like.”
On that note, the board moved to their next item which was to announce the vacancies of two board seats. The seats currently occupied by both board president Nordstrom and board member John Brinkman will come up for vote this year. “So if you don’t like what we’re doing, feel free replace us,” Nordstrom said with a smile, to the general mirth of all present. The board voted to set a joint election with the City of Garretson for April 12, 2016 as the city will have three open council seats this year as well as the mayor’s seat up for election.
As the board continued their meeting with more routine business the public began to trickle out in small groups. The board reviewed and approved policy changes to the budget planning and procedures and Supt. Johnson gave a few brief reports, and the board concluded their business for the night by 8 p.m.
