Elk Konnected Hand out at County Commissioners meeting on 4/25

[Ross]

I just found out that the petition telling the school board that they need to come to the voters for a property tax
PASSED CERTIFICATION
And the school has been notified.

The next move is on the school board and their attorney.

If they have any respect for
the voters
the property owners
the taxpayers
and the citizens of Elk County
At all
they will accept the voters wishes
and bring it to the voters.
Plain and simple.

THANKS TO ALL THAT MADE THIS WORK !     THANKS TO ALL THAT MADE THIS WORK !     THANKS TO ALL THAT MADE THIS WORK !     THANKS TO ALL THAT MADE THIS WORK !
Busy day sorry I posted this o the wrong thread.
I think I'll do it again and post it with Mr. Moore's Political Statement too!

[redcliffsw]

Good job! 

Glad to see someone in Elk County will carry the ball for American liberty against the tyrants' team.

[Ross]

Good job! 

Glad to see someone in Elk County will carry the ball for American liberty against the tyrants' team.

As they say Redclif it's not over till the fat lady sings.

I'm afraid Mr. Moore opened a bag of worms and I'm trying to let them out of the bag.

See the following post please.

[Ross]

Fellow Kansans,
The rebuttal of critics to our previous message on school finance was, at best, flimsy and so easily refuted that a sequel was only appropriate. Their tired champions were the usual suspect editorial writers and the litigation prone attorney representing Schools for Fair funding, a taxpayer funded group demanding more than $1 billion in additional funding for schools.
In their response, they correctly point out that both bond and interest and capital outlay projects receive local funding. This is indeed the case. To finance new buildings, school districts turn to voters asking them to approve a defined bond package. Citizens assess the validity of the request and vote accordingly. But here's the critical piece of information they left out: The State of Kansas contributes millions of dollars each year to support these efforts. The State Division of Budget reports that last school year alone the state gave $147 million to districts in bond and interest aid and $29 million in capital outlay equalization funding. It's also worth noting that state contributions to these two funds have more than doubled since FY 2010.
Critics are often quick to dismiss KPERS funding, along with capital outlay and bond and interest aid, claiming it doesn't count as education funding because it isn't operating funds. The fact of the matter is this: if the state didn't contribute $456 million in these three categories last school year, that money could have gone toward general operating funds. John Robb, attorney for the ever-litigating Schools for Fair Funding, asserted the state had "no hand" in bonds, and that local districts were able to increase teacher pay only by robbing "Peter to pay Paul." $147 million certainly qualifies as "a hand." While the state doesn't designate funds specifically for teacher pay, it does contribute directly to bond packages, technology, and KPERS, freeing general operating funds to go toward teachers—the most important asset in any classroom. Furthermore, and quite ironically, Mr. Robb himself is taking money out of Kansas classrooms to fund his war on taxpayers. He is robbing Peter to pay Robb.
This conversation highlights one of the most significant flaws in the old funding formula—it prioritized and incentivized non-classroom spending. The state spends millions more on new schools, administrative facilities, and technology, while educators complain about the lack of operational funds. Many districts, however, still have enough additional operational funds to provide higher pay to their teachers. How can all of these things be true if state funding for schools is declining? Last spring, KCK purchased a $48,000 piano illustrating this exact problem. While admittedly an exorbitant expenditure, the old formula required the district to spend those funds on capital outlay items and prohibited the district from using the funding to hire a new teacher. The new formula Governor Brownback is working to craft along with legislators and educators will not include such absurd mandates. Instead, funding should be flexible, giving local districts the ability to determine what will best serve their students.
As always, thanks for remaining informed and engaged.

Melika Willoughby
Deputy Communications Director

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

I DO BELIEVE THIS MAN HAS PROPER AUTHORITY FROM THE AUTHORITY OF THE GOVERNOR TO WRITE LETTERS OF THIS SORT. That's my personal opinion. And he is not attacking any specific individual with nonsense.

[Ross]

What part of deception and mis-information have I failed to provide for here?

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

[/b]

-------Original Message-------

From: Fury, Ian [GO]
Date: 09/10/15 09:38:42
To: I have removed my personal e-mail address and I have changed nothing else.
Subject: Funding for USD 282

Mr. Ross,



USD 282-West Elk received a $259,033 increase in the first year of the block grant (14-15) and a $351,570 increase over the life of the block grant (3 years.) Of this $351,570, only $64,052 is an increase to KPERS. That means that only 18.2% of the total increase is in KPERS. If the school board claims that the increase is only to KPERS, then they are ignoring 82% of the new money we are giving them.

Teacher pensions are a legitimate education expense, so we are creating greater transparency in school funding. However, in order to prevent schools from using teacher pension dollars for operating costs, the money is routed to a separate KPERS account shortly after it arrives in the USD's general fund. This way, we can show with greater transparency the total level of support that the state is giving to the district, but we also can make sure that KPERS dollars are used for KPERS.

I hope my information was helpful. If you have any follow-up questions, don't hesitate to ask!

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         

Sincerely,



-Ian Fury

Policy Analyst

Kansas Office of the Governor

Ian.Fury@ks.gov

Desk: 785-368-8211

Cell: 785-250-5254

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

[/b]


The gentle man from the Governors Administration has provided his e-mail address and phone numbers and I am certain you are as welcome as I am to contact him with any questions you may have.

And remember every one has a boss in a higher position. In this situation the State Government is just that.

So to answer Mr. Moore's letter and specifically"

September 4, 2015

TO:              Parents, Patrons, and Tax Payers of West Elk USD#282

FROM:        Bert Moore, Superintendent of Schools


The state of Kanas changed the funding for school districts this school year to a "block grant" which basically froze school district budgets at the same level as the 2014-2015 budget.  When you hear that we received more money that is not the fact.  The state began flowing the KPERS retirement fund to school districts to show that they had added dollars to school budgets; however the money is deposited and within 90 minutes is transferred out of the account.  This is where the extra money for school districts came from.  The state also reduced its funding for Capital Outlay equalization aid as well as Local Option Budget state aid.  This reduction in state aid is what will cause a raise in the mill levy, not 8 "additional Capital Outlay mills being used to save for a new building".

Let me repeat a portion of the above for clarity:

however the money is deposited and within 90 minutes is transferred out of the account.

The money sure is within 90 minutes is transferred out of the account in to the School Districts accounts.
Oh what a deceptive statement, I find that statement Mr Moores post to the Parents, Patrons, and Tax Payers of West Elk USD#282.

Once again these are only my opinion and i have provided you with a contact with the Kansas State Government you may contact with any questions. Please be sure to develope your own oppinion.
And feel free to question my post and contact the above named State emlooyee, with my blessings.

[Ross]

The following is my e-mail to the editor of the Prarie Star:


Jenny Diveley
Editor Prairie Star

Letter to The Editor,

You printed a letter from the West Elk USD-282 Superintendent which questioned the School Districts State Financing.

I took the time to question his statements to the public and I received information in the following e-mail.
The only alteration of the e-mail is the removal of my personal e-mail address. I have permission of the the author of the e-mail to have it printed. His government information is included in the e-mail if you please, you can call him and confirm the consent to publish. I am also posting this e-mail and everything in it to our local forum. Let's get the real facts out there. I look forward to next weeks paper.

Thank you,

The e-mail:

-------Original Message-------

From: Fury, Ian [GO]
Date: 9/10/2015 12:07:33 PM
To: I have removed my personal e-mail address and nothing else has been altered.
Subject: RE: Funding for USD 282

You may use my email for the paper. I am also including a one sentence introduction to make it read a little bit better for the paper:

Mr. Ross, I'm happy to respond to your inquiry. These are the state funding numbers for West Elk.

USD 282-West Elk received a $259,033 increase in the first year of the block grant (14-15) and a $351,570 increase over the life of the block grant (3 years.) Of this $351,570, only $64,052 is an increase to KPERS. That means that only 18.2% of the total increase is in KPERS. If the school board claims that the increase is only to KPERS, then they are ignoring 82% of the new money we are giving them.

Teacher pensions are a legitimate education expense, so we are creating greater transparency in school funding. However, in order to prevent schools from using teacher pension dollars for operating costs, the money is routed to a separate KPERS account shortly after it arrives in the USD's general fund. This way, we can show with greater transparency the total level of support that the state is giving to the district, but we also can make sure that KPERS dollars are used for KPERS.

-Ian Fury

Policy Analyst

Kansas Office of the Governor

Ian.Fury@ks.gov

Desk: 785-368-8211

Cell: 785-250-5254



From:
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2015 11:39 AM
To: Fury, Ian [GO]
Subject: Re: Funding for USD 282





Sir,



Would you object to me asking our local paper to print this e-mail from you in the local newspaper to clear up the mis-information presented in the School Superintendents letter that the editor published.



I would sincerely appreciate your consent so the voters and taxpayers know the truth.



Thank you.

 

Will we see this information in the next Prarie Star?
We will have to wait and see, won't we?
Will the truth be published.

[Ross]

From: Ross
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2015 3:46 PM
To: Fury, Ian [GO]
Subject: RE: Funding for USD 282

Mr. Fury,

I do appreciate your help. Especially since I don't fully understand all the various funds.

I have to ask about the other funds our school Superintendent claimed were reduced.

I'm sorry, if I am being a pain in the butt.

He said the state also reduced it's funding to the Capital Outlay equalization aid as well as the Local Option Budget State Aid. He claims this reduction in state aid is what will cause a raise in the mill levy.

Well look, here is a link to his letter on our local forum.

http://www.cascity.com/howard/forum/index.php/topic,17105.0.html

I think he is very busy blowing smoke up everyone's back side. So I need to ask these questions.

Thanks once again.

LW Ross


-------Original Message-------

From: Fury, Ian [GO]
Date: 9/10/2015 4:07:35 PM
To: Ross
Subject: RE: Funding for USD 282

Mr. Ross,

My previous response should answer all of your questions. He can argue about dollars coming from specific areas, but total state funding to USD  282 has increased, as the numbers that I have sent you will show. West Elk should have an increase in its operating budget for the next school year based on state dollars. 

As Melika's original email will show you, state aid for Capital Outlay has increased during Governor Brownback's time in office. Under the block grant, funding for the two funds that he specifically mentions has been frozen at a flat amount. Nevertheless, I have already shown how total funding has increased.

Hope this helps!

-Ian Fury


Folks is this clear enough?

Think again who is being deceptive is it me or Superintendent Moore?

Does Superintendent Moore have a legitimate leg to stand on as far as raising our property taxes even 1 mill?

Really it is not Superintendent Moore's job not at all. The decision to raise the tax mill levy rest solely on the School Board members and it is their job to know about all this state aid information and not have to rely on misinformation from the School Superintendent.

It is not in the Superintendent job description to be misleading the Elected officials that make up the school board.

This is one of the reasons the School Superintendent should not be sitting on the school board, the real reason is because he was not elected to the school board.

The School Board and the Superintendent both understand the principle of this and democracy and therefore should immediately correct the situation at the next School Board meeting.

But will they do it?

Will they have proper School Board Meetings?

Or will they perhaps invite the School Principal to sit on the School Board as well.

When does leadership kick in with this School Board?

Will the Prarie Star Editor print the e-mails I sent them or will they be biased and side with the School Superintendent?

Or is the Elk Kon nection stronger than the truth? Just asking.

Only time will tell, the honesty of the Prarie Star.

Will I be sued for asking for the truth> Will I be sued for expressing what I believe to be the truth?
Will I be sued for sharing my opinions?   No! I don't think so.

What do you think?

[Ross]

After thinking about the School Superintendent's letter!  And showing proof about the extra money that the State gave West Elk for operating expenses, which is added to the original state aid! And after providing an explanation of the money put in to a special KPERS fund, that he said is only there for 90 minutes and then is gone!

I have got to ask about the rumors Mr. Moore was talking about in his letter.

Has anyone, I mean anyone else heard the rumor of clandestine or secret School Board Meetings?
I have been asking an awful lot of people if they had heard the rumor and no one has heard it?

Let's expand on that rumor he discussed, just for fun, not don't take this serious. Let's pretend there is a conspiracy as is suggested about the Federal Government. You know the one about a shadow Government? Suppose the School Board has a shadow government or shadow School Board, such as the old guard! You know the old guard, Elk Kon nected said they weeded out from getting in to their organization. Then the School Board wouldn't need to have clandestine or secret board meetings, would they? Of course they don't have a shadow School Board do they? But wouldn't that be a heck of a rumor?

Oh my gosh, did I just inadvertently start a new rumor by pretend playing? Sort of the same way with the Superintendent talking about rumors in his letter that I had never heard of?
We will have to wait and see won't we?

And some more about the rumor of people saying the School Board is raising taxes to secretly build a new school building. Just thinking about that, I wouldn't exactly call that a rumor but perhaps a feeling. You see feelings are built and feelings of this nature are built frequently by actions and words.

The School Board shut down our two grade schools with what everyone thought were fabricated excuses and ignored the peoples wishes to keep them open. The people believe the real reason for shutting down the grade schools and moving all the students to the school just outside of Howard was to please Howard.
It's been said, the losing of a school harms a community but that was lost in the shuffle wasn't it? And it is believed that Howard, thinks if they have a Taj Mahal of a school, people will move to Howard. Howard even discussed moving their City limits to encompass the School. Remember? 

And please remember, Howard West Elk is that unsightly eyesore in the center of Howard. It is an unsightly albatross that doesn't seem to go away. It is a public safety hazard isn't it? Shouldn't it have a fence around it for the safety of children to prevent children playing close to it or in it? Or do you sit back and wait until some child is hurt before taking preventive actions?

The school board ignored the peoples wishes when they shut down their grade schools and that was followed by ignoring the people when they said "NO" new grade school and the board spent perhaps $50,000.00 or more on architects and ran a bond issue. The school board received another resounding "NO" from the voters!

Then they come back and spent another $50,000.00 or more for architects and contractors, and they follow up with a mail-in survey. That survey was not designed to allow the people to say, "NO" !  It was designed to force the people to accept the construction of a wing on to the present building by only allowing the people to say which part of the wing should be built. Again they received a resounding. "NO". People wrote on the survey "NO" or wrote "REOPEN" the Moline Grade school on the survey forms, or they simply threw the survey away. And even though the school board received a resounding "NO" on their survey, they still spent more money to run a bond issue. And once again received another resounding "NO"!

After recieving the resounding "NO" The School Board President got mad at the school board meeting and angrily said his children would have to do without the peasure of having a brand new gymnasium to play i, a
And he angrily said they needed to get the Bond issue on the upcoming April Ballot. He was then told by a board member that he needed to slow down and that he was going to piss off the voters and he even more angrily stated he didn't care how pissed off the voters got. So just how are the voters suppose to trust the School Board or their judgement? Just explain to us where that trust is suppose to come from, please Mr/ Superintendent?

No, I wouldn't call it a rumor, I would definitely call it a feeling. A very strong feeling of distrust of the West Elk School Board. Related to the School Boards actions.

The Superintendent invited you to come to the School Board meetings, well I agree with that! Come and see how unprofessional their meetings are. Come and see what the kids are being taught. I'm talking about the older kids that are required by their teacher to attend School Board meetings, I assume to learn about school board meetings? Perhaps the idea is to show them how Roberts Rules of Order is not used or how there is absolutely on parliamentary procedure in use. I'm don't know what the teacher is trying to teach by having the students attend the School Board meetings. Does anyone have any idea what the kids are expected to be learning through this exercise? Just something to think about. Sure come on down to the School Board meeting and see what actually goes on.

So why the Political Letter from the School Superintendent? And if he wants to build trust, why spread rumors in his letter? Why can't he understand the people? Why doesn't he understand, he was not elected to the School Board? Why doesn't he understand, he is required to be at the meetings but he is not required to sit on the school board? Why doesn't he understand he is an employee of the School Board the same way the Principal is? The Superintendent is required to be there to make his monthly reports and answer questions for his employer the School Board just as the Principal is also required to be there with his monthly report and to answer questions! And the Principal is sitting in the proper place in the audience. The Superintendent  is also required to attend Executive sessions when requested.

Now about that rumor of clandestine or secret board meetings! Nobody else seems to have heard of the rumor and I wonder why that is? Is it possible that the Superintendent threw stories of rumors into his letter just as fillers and to muddy the issue of property tax hikes and to help support the issue of money being placed in an account that merely goes away after 90 minutes?

The Superintendent stated, "The state began flowing the KPERS retirement fund to school districts to show that they had added dollars to school budgets; however the money is deposited and within 90 minutes is transferred out of the account." The money is then transferred into the School Districts General fund and can then be redistributed to the School District's various accounts.

Of course the money goes away! Nothing mysterious as what he wants to believe! If you had a special account for paying your home mortgage and put money in it to make that payment, and 20 minutes later make that payment to the mortgage company and went back to the account minutes later the money would be gone from that account! What is mysterious about that?

In my opinion the School Superintendent's letter will most likely bring even more distrust of the School Board and the School Administration.

As I pointed out the school Superintendent was shown the Opposition Petition on September 2nd
and on September 4th  he released his Political letter. Which, I feel was an attempt to dissuade registered from signing the opposition petition and from doing their civic rights. Otherwise why the rumors?
Were they included just to fill the letter or to muddy the real issue of the letter?

Or did he write the letter to attempt to discredit me?

Well folks I have never asked you to believe any of my opinions, but I have suggested that you discuss them and develop your own opinion. And when I could I gave you a link or as in this occasion an e- mail letter from the State funding body of the state. It has the phone numbers and email address in the e-mail and I suggested that you check out the authenticity of the e-mail by using the phone numbers and the e-mail address. Does the Superintendent do the same thing? "NO". But he does flood the area with his political letter by placing it here on this forum, printing flyers and having them delivered through out the area, and having it printed n the newspaper and having his editor friend support the letter in his new paper on the front page. He also sent a copy of his political letter with each and every student.

I'm tempted to call his actions political propaganda on a mass level, but that might be considered misleading, so I won't call it that?

I don't have access to all the people he does as School Superintendent and I am a not friend with the Newspaper owner.  And I don't have the Elk Kon nected Konnection. So I am unable to communicate with everyone as he is. I can not afford the expense of all those flyers! And I doubt the School Superintendent would allow me to use your tax dollars, by using the Schools secretary to post my rebuttal as he has. Or allow me to use the schools copiers and paper and printing ink as he did. And he would not permit me use of the Schools employees to print and distribute my rebuttal and to provide all the people with the State e-mail disputing his letter as he did with his political letter. Do you think he would allow any of that? So why did he do his political letter in that fashion? At the expense of the taxpayers and the school childrens monies?

Should school children be carriers of Political letters from the School Superintendent, I'd really like to hear your opinion on this activity !

Why does the School Superintendent avoid the questions he has raised with his political letter?

Why doesn't the School Superintendent dispute the e-mail from the State that disputes his statement, "When you hear that we received more money that is not the fact." ?
The e-mail says and proves otherwise.

. The Superintendent said, "This mill was necessary because the state reduced their state aid to school districts for Capital Outlay."  Well the State did not reduce State Aid to the Capital Outlay, but they did freeze it and I believe at the 2014 level. I believe that means the State neither raised nor lowered the Capital Outlay State aid. The School Board itself lowered the amount of cash in the Capital Outlay fund by spending it on a professional football field and automatic sprinkler systems and only God knows what else! That is money that could have been used towards the cost of the new school bus that the Superintendent alluded to in his letter. The School received increased (extra) funding as explained in the e-mail and it was placed in the Schools General Fund and it is apparently up to them to place the amount of money in the Capitol Outlet Fund that they deem necessary. Therefore, there is really no need to increase the mill levy by the 4 mill the Superintendent said they can take and raising out property taxes in my opinion. And therefore the extra mill is not necessary, huh?

The school also received extra funding when the State raised property values for taxation purposes. That raised the dollar amount of each and every mill taxed on the properties with in the School District.

Once again, I ask you not to believe anything I post, but talk about it and look for verification of the information. I also suggest that you develop your own opinions and not simply accept my opinions.
Does the School Superintendent do the same in his political letter? "NO".

Their Resolution not to exceed 5 years and not to exceed 8 mill did not proper cause for the School Board to warrant such a Resolution. The body of the Resolution was essentially a lie, because it was copied and pasted from a Kansas web site and did not fully apply to West Elk USD-282. Simply type the body of the Resolution in to google and find out for your self. Perhaps the first two lines will do the job for you. That is very deceptive in and of itself.  See I never said they were asking for 8 mill, but I believe they would try to if they thought they could do it. But the opposition petition has basically ended that opportunity for the moment.

Trust is earned and can not be demanded.

I've got work to do, so I am out of here for a while.

[Ross]

Reminiscent of the School Board feeding the sports cost of West Elk don't ya think?

[proelkco]

What do you have against sports? Many students get athletic scholarships that help them go to college.