If you ask for or provide too many facts about the proposed OHSD M&O levy, you must be a Fascist, tin-foil-hat-wearing kid-hating bully

Author:BillB

Just your typical Fascist, tin-foil-hat-wearing, kid-hating bully?

Oak Harbor School District social studies teacher Kevin Kindelberger replied to questions I posted at the WNT Facebook forum about the Schools gearing up for levy kickoff article. In doing so, he only slightly veiled his labeling of me as a Fascist, choosing instead the phrase a “March on Rome” to convey his point.

 

 

I am utterly disappointed that Oak Harbor High School social studies teacher Kindelberger offered nothing to back up his “March on Rome”claim. After all, when I penned Teacher Militancy Increases as Teachers Campaign for 39% Increase in Local Supplemental Pay + Video: Union Teachers Advocate for Marxism in the Classroom I provided a screen shot of the teacher-celebrated graphic directly from the OHEA Facebook page and a video to show how this was not just a one-off, isolated incident.

The Oak Harbor Education Association and its members quite obviously and seriously want to keep people ignorant of the facts about this levy. That alone should be a big clue to folks as to why a “no” vote is completely justified.

Here’s a letter I have penned about the proposed OHSD levy. Below that is Kevin Kindelberger’s WNT forum posting, following that is proof-positive as to how our local teachers’ union swings politically, and, below that, my most favorite video about teachers’ unions.

“Voters should reject the Oak Harbor School District’s (OHSD’s) proposed 2013 Maintenance and Operations (M&O) levy. That levy would literally double local property taxes presently being paid towards that single M&O levy and would raise property taxes overall by about 10%. The OHSD’s existing and ongoing property tax bonds – paying for things like a new high school and stadium – are already programmed to increase local school property taxes by 4% to 5% annually, and even so if property values drop more or stagnate for years. An additional 10% plus-up in local property taxes is unjustified as I have demonstrated in an article titled “Oak Harbor School District claim of “massive cuts” is phony baloney” available via a Google search on the internet.

A main reason our local teachers are so gung-ho about the proposed levy is that they have been promised a 39% increase in local supplemental pay if the levy passes, via more “TRI-Days”, so they are literally campaigning for their own paychecks.   Via TRI-Days, the teachers’ union already skims about $1.5 million annually into their own pockets from local discretionary revenues such as Federal Impact Aid and the local M&O school levy.  TRI-Day dollars could pay for anything and everything that this giant unnecessary levy might. 

Local teachers have threatened local business owners (themselves retired teachers) who spoke out against TRI-Days and teachers are conning students in school about school revenues.  Educate yourself and then vote “no”. The teachers are militant and the levy is a scam.”

Kevin Kindelberger WNT Forum Post

Oak Harbor High School social studies teacher Kevin Kindelberger makes his feelings known about folks who disagree with him about the proposed levy

 

OHEA Facebook Page Excerpt Oct 2012

Proof-positive as to how our local teachers’ union swings politically.

Other relevant articles about this proposed levy include:

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

11 comments

  1. avatar

    The only reason why I think anybody should even consider voting for this levy is the cut in federal impact aid that may come.

    I know in Sedro, we were told of dramatic cuts in 2/2012 and fell for it. OOPS – no cuts but property taxes $150-250 dollars higher annually.

    At least in Oak Harbor’s case, the answer(s) will be clear before February. I encourage them to vote wisely and the OHEA to tone it down. The only thing keeping Oak Harbor afloat is the US Navy, I don’t see the OHEA fighting the progressive agitators on the WN-T forums for their country & their jobs!

    1. avatar

      Pigs might fly, too.

      Federal Impact Aid has been flowing into OHSD coiffures since 1950. It has flattened out the last couple of years, but we now have about 5,200 students versus about 6,000 some 10-15 years ago.

      The data on Federal Impact Aid for the last 15 years is at “Oak Harbor School District claim of “massive cuts” is phony baloney: Reject the 2013 M&O levy that would increase by 100% the local M&O property tax for schools”

      At that article, the graph labeled “Total Federal General Purpose Funding” is the Impact Aid trend line/graph. With a 1oss of 1,000 students (about 16%) over the last decade or so, we are still receiving 43% more Federal Impact Aid then we were a decade ago! The “shrinking” Impact aid claim is BOGUS.

      1. avatar

        Duly noted and I agree except for sequestration. We’ll see Bill… I doubt Federal Impact Aid will be eliminated in Congress’s 11th hour negotiations.

        That said, I agree the Educational Industrial Complex has a “doom and gloom” agenda right out of 1964 and an LBJ ad called “Daisy”: http://youtu.be/dDTBnsqxZ3k Or the other ad about nuclear testing: http://youtu.be/U-VzZQGWOqA

        I’m sure those kind of ads are in the OHEA’s arsenal, ready to cook off in flash on the Whidbey News-Times. They will say the most ridiclious things to further their progressive agenda – and tell me, did the War on Poverty/throwing more money on welfare work? NO.

        The war on drugs work by throwing many innocent lives and good money after bad? Likely no.

        The EIC likes you to think that if you just throw more money at it and don’t ask too many questions, you’re a good community member.

        No the solution to me is make EVERY public school a charter school, strengthen parent-child relationships & accountability, and focus on a real education of reading, ‘riting and ‘rithmetic + basic patriotic civics.

        1. avatar

          ALL the money should be attached to the child. That is, a voucher.

          “The Case for School Vouchers”
          http://youtu.be/gmBNvnTUrfM

          In any case, sequestration at the federal level is NOT a reason to raise property taxes at the local level. The same goes for temporary “tough times” at the state level.

          1. avatar

            Bill, we can try vouchers – I doubt that’s best though.

            Also Bill I’m not ready to nuke the kids’ education. I just don’t want the providers of it to feel entitled to tax Whidbey Island or Sedro-Woolley like a Greek island or a Spanish town!

            1. avatar

              The idea that competition would “nuke” a monopoly is bogus. The same kind of silly arguments get made about charter schools, too (which the voters FINALLY approved, albeit only for 40 schools in all the state of WA).

              Charter schools are not going “nuke” anything.

              The educationists perennially argue for “MORE MONEY!” to fund ALL KINDS of different “programs” within their monopolistic system, yet as soon as anyone suggests funding ANYTHING not 100% under THEIR control, they DEMONIZE IT AND the people supporting it.

              1. avatar

                You respectfully misunderstand -> nuke = cut and gut education funding.

                I agree 100/100 with:

                “Charter schools are not going “nuke” anything.

                “The educationists perennially argue for “MORE MONEY!” to fund ALL KINDS of different “programs” within their monopolistic system, yet as soon as anyone suggests funding ANYTHING not 100% under THEIR control, they DEMONIZE IT AND the people supporting it.”

  2. avatar

    The education system today is more about indoctrination into the Progressive Democratic Socialist ideology than actual education.

    (video) NYC school teacher: Here’s how you promote socialism in the classroom

    1. avatar

      That’s an amazingly insightful video explaining how soooooo many teachers in our classrooms think and also use their positions to supplant parents’ authority and push their own social agendas.

      I also used that same video as the “YouTube” “anchor” video for the article “Teacher Militancy Increases as Teachers Campaign for 39% Increase in Local Supplemental Pay + Video: Union Teachers Advocate for Marxism in the Classroom“, which got more than a few local people upset when they first saw it.

      I had forgotten to add that article to my bulleted list (above) in this main article, so thanks for the reminder: I have now added that one to the list in the article.

  3. avatar

    Bill, I am posting a very interesting real world example of what the
    “proposed 2013 Maintenance and Operations (M&O) levy”
    will do “TO”, not “FOR” the owner of rental properties and his renters . I got this from Jim Pace and you/we have his permission to use id if and when needed
    Jim Pace said,
    “Here are a few tidbits I have gleamed in my search of public records and meetings with OHSD officials:

    (1) I have seven rental houses along with some duplexes and fourplexes. In my research I just took one single resident house and used that for my model.

    (2) To keep it simple when I make my presentation to Nathan at the WNT and to the kick off ceremony on the l4TH I just used one of the single resident houses.

    (3) On my 2011 Property Tax for that house it was valued at 184,000 and I paid $469.88 in school taxes. In 2012 the same house was valued at 177,000 and I paid $491.69 in school taxes.

    (4) Now fast farward to the 2013 levy. The school tax will go from 75 cents to $1.98 in assess value of $1000 increments. That means for the Operation and Maintenance portion of this levy that house will go from $165.00 to $356.00 in the first year and if the house assess value was to remain the same it would be (give or take a few dollars) $377.00 in the last year. These are figures given to me by OHSD. They are not made up. There are no fudging of the figures or guess work – just facts.

    (5) Now in my meeting with OHSD I mention that a nice couple, both work, they have three children that go to the school district I would have to inform them that their rent – which I have not raised since they moved into the house – would have to go up $25.00 PER MONTH to cover this increase. I also made the case that they are extremely nice people, great parents involved in their childrens’ education and most of all live payday to payday. In other words they do not work for the federal, state, county or school district but in the private sector. Their response was to say it just has to happen.

    (6) I then got a copy of the levy “proposed” breakout – and you know how those numbers can change quickly – and found numerous things that make you go hmmm. The most glaring item is that only $600,000 is scheduled for school books which is going to be the main focus of the levy committee. I mention to them that it did not make sense to me that such a small amount was being alotted for new testbooks. Did that mean that we were going to increase teacher John and Mary paycheck and keep teaching old material and since John and Mary were going to make more that would equate to the children learning more? That is when I turned into a toad instead of someone asking questions?

    (7) Here it is in a nutshell – This levy is a 128% increase. It will cost the average renter $25.00 per month which I know most landlords will pass on to their renters. I ask them why so much at one time and the answer (without them saying so in so many words) was we can. It only takes a 50% plus one vote to pass it.

    The main reason I got involved and researched this back to 2001 to the present is simple – My renters can not afford it and when you take houses within the city limits and the sewer bill hits them their tiny rowboat in life will sink.

    1. avatar

      That IS an excellent real-world example, and the because “we can” is the sad truth of the situation. The 60% super-majority HAD provided some protection against property owners (and renters) being gouged in such a manner. Thanks to politicians like Barbara Bailey, who perennially voted for doing away with the super-majority until it finally passed, we now, as Jim Pace correctly states “a 50% plus one vote to pass”. (Actually, I think the “plus 1″ is even unnecessary).

      “SECTION 1 PREAMBLE. It is the paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for the education of all children residing within its borders, without distinction or preference on account of race, color, caste, or sex.”

      http://www.leg.wa.gov/lawsandagencyrules/pages/constitution.aspx

      It says the “state” – not the “local property owners” or “renters”.

Comments are now closed.