MATC District Board Should Consider Stressed Taxpayers Before Asking For $134 Million
UPDATED
During a severe economic turn-down this is perhaps one of the more gutsy things that anyone has asked the voters to ponder.
MATC President Bettsey Barhorst has called this “an historic week” as the MATC District Board will vote Wednesday on sending a referendum for up to $134 million this November to the voters.
While there are points of merit in the large building request, there are other parts that speak more to wants than needs. For instance, MATC does not need residence halls! One has to question also the wisdom of tearing down the Mitby Theater, in order to build another, but smaller one. MATC is NOT the UW-Madison, and should perhaps be reminded of its mission. Though these items have been removed from the budget requests for Phase One of the project, there is no doubt these matters will be up for taxpayers to deal with down the road. This piece-meal approach is designed to get everything MATC wants at some point.
I hope also that the MATC Board and administration under the auspices of President Barhorst’s office explains in the upcoming campaign that this $134 million is but the tip of the iceberg of proposed changes to the physical plant of MATC. Page 14 of the Master Facilities plan, linked to earlier, shows that the price tag is actually much much higher. They are rolling out “phase one” of the plan so as not to terrify the voting public, but what they will eventually be asking for is more than double this current amount.
As the days go along voters will have a chance to see what MATC has in mind to do with the money for phase one if taxpayers allow it. But at a time of high unemployment and great uncertainty about the economic health of families in the area this is just not the time to make such a request, and tap family budgets that are already stressed.
The District Board at the meeting Wednesday needs to consider that taxpayers are not in a position to make the grand schemes of some a reality. After all, these are days when too many folks are trying to pay the mortgage and struggle with part-time jobs.
That is the reality of election season 2010.
The MATC District Board needs to be mindful of that fact.
.gif)
What is the average property tax bill for a $200,000 home in Oregon? Waunakee? Madison? What is the rate increase from last year? What is the average overall tax bill for the residents of these places from all taxing bodies? Pick three places from any of the counties that are impacted. What was the average increase in wages for the taxpayers in the last year in these places? These are all factors that the voters who are being asked for more money will consider when casting a ballot.
I mention that as I think it ‘rich’ to label another tax increase as somehow easy to pay for. There are lots of elderly people, and others who work two or three jobs that think another tax increase right now is just not the best thing for their personal budget. Why don’t you ask the elderly person who wonders if they should pay the heating bill or get the needed meds that may now be all their responsibilty with the ‘donut hole’? How much does another $27.00 mean to them on top of the other taxes. If memory serves me right those on SS did not get an increase last year…just to add frosting to your junk food idea. I really think you are not aware of the hard times real folks are facing when you comment.
While I think education vital in so many ways I also have read the Master Facilities plan and have problems with several areas of it. I know that MATC is a tech school. It is not the UW Madison, and should not pretend otherwise. The Master Facilities plan makes many think they consider their mission to be more than what it really is.
I also know that this is only the first request for more money from MATC. So one has to be careful when stating it is only $27.00 per year for the next (add in the years.)
The fact remains that this is not a good economic time to make the request that MATC Board is doing. That is why I am not fond of doing this vote at this time. After all, there are elements of the Masters plan I want to see implemented. Had this been done correctly I would have been using this blog space the promotion of the ballot measure.
But for many taxpayers they see the shadow of the larger plan which dealt with the idea of tearing down the Mitby Theater and providing yet more administrative space. Those are the issues, that rightly or wrongly get confused in the political debate about the larger education issues. But that is the fault of the Board, and not the media or others that report or provide insight into this matter.
Hello, interesting opinion piece.
Yes, this is a big, scary thing to ask voters for when the economy is in the tank and yes, there will a b lot of misinformed people regarding the true details of the referendum.
At the same time, what you failed to convey in your write up is that the total tax burden–for the year–would be an average of about $27.62 for a home owner with a home valued at roughly $200k. Twenty-seven dollars and some change. How much money does that average home owner waste on junk food in a year? The tax increase would be money invested–not simply “spent”–on real returns and employment opportunities in our communities.
Another thing you failed to express is that for every $1 invested in our local community college $4 dollars comes back to the communities around Wisconsin because of talent retention and employment (an estimated 89% of MATC grads find employment within six months of graduation). Again, another financial and economic win for Wisconsin communities.
Lastly, you use sort of a mild scare tactic when you say “…at a time of high unemployment and great uncertainty about the economic health of families in the area this is just not the time to make such a request, and tap family budgets that are already stressed” but you do not convey, sadly, is that this is the kind of project that will actually CREATE jobs and help boost families’ income as the project unfolds.
“Spending” does not happen in a vacuum. MATC doesn’t get “get the money and run”–they would have to hire lots of construction, electrical, plumbing, engineering, and numerous other trade/skilled workers to realize this project.
It would be nice to see a a more balanced and more accurate representation of what this opportunity holds for Wisconsin than to simply carry the flag of the doom and gloom of another “tax burden.”
Respectfully,
-Efrem
But we still need $800 million for trains nobody will ride?