Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
CFLF Proposal 5 Public Information Forum to Air; UPDATED BROADCAST SCHEDULE!!!!!!
Topic Started: Oct 13 2006, 06:51 AM (1,016 Views)
Grant1
Member Avatar
We have just begun to fight!
[size=5]Citizens for Livonia ’s Future[/size]
Proposal 5 Public Information Forum


Running Length: 1 Hr 23 minutes

Broadcast on Livonia Bright House Channel 12
Monday, Oct. 30th: 8:00pm - 9:30pm.
Friday, Nov. 3rd thru Sunday, Nov. 5th: 6:30pm - 8:00pm
Playing again every 6hrs(from previous start time) for the entire weekend.
Monday, Nov. 6th: 6:30pm - 8:00pm.

Also watch the entire show streaming online at Google Video by clicking HERE ;)

The prop 5 video is also now airing on "Video on Demand" for those who have Digital cable. Instructions to view it 24/7 are as follows:
1. Go to Video on Demand
2.Select: "Local"
3. Select: "Around Town"
4. Select: "Livonia"
5. Select: "Proposal 5"

Guest speakers of the show include:

Ballot Proposal Opposition
* Michigan Association of Counties – Tom Hickson
* Michigan Chamber of Commerce – Tricia Kinley

Ballot Proposal Support
* Michigan Association of School Boards – Justin King / Executive Director
* Michigan PTSA – Donna Oser / Executive Director

As a registered voter you have an opportunity to cast your vote for several important ballot proposals. We urge you to review the Proposal 06-5 ballot language and watch this informational forum addressing School Funding.

Click HERE to review the Proposal 5 ballot language
and get links to other information regarding this ballot proposal.

[size=7]The Citizens for Livonia’s Future would like to remind voters of the 2006 General Election to be held on Tuesday, November 7th.[/size]

As a registered voter you have an opportunity to cast your vote for several important ballot proposals. As a Citizens Advocacy Organization striving for educational excellence within the Livonia Public Schools School District, we urge you to review the Proposal 06-5 ballot language and attend our informational forum addressing School Funding.

[size=7]Citizens for Livonia’s Future [/size]
Hosts:
[size=7]A “Proposal 06-5” Public Information Forum[/size]
Thursday, October 19th 7:00PM – 9:00PM
Livonia City Hall Auditorium
33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia


Guest speakers include. . .
Ballot Opponents
*Michigan Association of Counties - Tom Hickson - Representing County Governments
*Michigan Chamber of Commerce – Tricia Kinley - Representing Community Businesses
Ballot Supporters
*Michigan Association of School Boards – Justin King / Executive Director - Representing School Board Leadership
*Michigan Parent Teacher Student Association – Donna Oser / Executive Director - Representing the PTA Leadership
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Administrator
Administrator
I moved all of the Proposal 5 discussions over to the "November 7 General Election" forum. We had several topics on the issue, so I merged them all into one topic. It may seem a little out of sorts at times, and the merge is the reason why. Click this link to go to that topic....

http://z14.invisionfree.com/Hull_Neighbors...?showtopic=2112


This topic will provide you with a wealth of information. Many, many links are provided pro and con that will help you make a fair and educated decision. Please try to read as much as possible before you vote in the poll.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Grant1
Member Avatar
We have just begun to fight!
Excellent Forum...Excellent Speakers...Excellent information on Proposal 5

Can't wait to see it on BrightHouse and Comcast

Keep checking your local cable directories for broadcast times and dates

You don't want to miss this one!!!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Administrator
Administrator
If you really want to get both sides of an issue, watch this when it comes on TV! This is what truly informed and open minded folks will want to watch. It was excellent information and I would just like to thank Citizens for Livonias Future for putting this together. Great and refreshing! A little politicking, but with the facts presented, most people should be able to see past it. This is truly "Must watch TV"!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ILIkeLI
Member Avatar
Principal
We need more of this! It was really good! I can't believe Justin King can actually sit there and say we have accountability in our schools! The accountability is at the voting booth?? Give me a break! If you want true accountability don't schedule school board elections on such crazy off dates and do everything you can to discourage voter turn out! Another point was that Michigan teachers are the third highest paid in the entire country. I hope we rank at least close to that when it comes to student achievement in the country. Remember that next time someone pleads poverty. Justin King tried to say that proposal 5 was not a money grab, and that some money would make it to the classroom. Then someone pointed out that in the new Detroit Teachers contract there is a stipulation........IF PROPOSAL 5 PASSES, THEY CAN RE-OPEN THE CONTRACT!! You don't need any more proof that the money is NOT going in the classroom.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ILIkeLI
Member Avatar
Principal
http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR924/index.html

http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR924/index.html
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Administrator
Administrator
Last December I signed that petition at Churchill High School before the public hearing on the Legacy Initiative. I not only signed that petition, I signed up to be a petitioner and recieved petitions myself. This was before knowing all the facts, and going simply on emotion. Much has changed, and I will always keep informed from now on. I will vote no on this proposal. All they needed to do to get my YES vote, was to put a stipulation in that mandated any savings would be put into the classroom. They did not do this. It does not seem like much to ask, since the proposal itself mandates where someone elses money goes. The Detroit Teacher contract is the thing that pushed me over the edge. VOTE NO ON PROPOSAL 5.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Administrator
Administrator
Oh, and now I know why the guy gathering petitions at Churchill looked at me funny and asked if I was a teacher when I asked to help with the petitions.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
fyi
Principal
The Legacy Initiative has opened my eyes to all the wasteful spending in public schools. Giving them more money is not the answer. Until there is accountability with the system, I will vote "No" to any increase in educational funding. Proposal 5 allows public education to side-step Proposal A at the expense of other State services. If you want guaranteed tax increases every year to fund teacher pensions and health care, vote [size=1]"Yes."

[/size]We can't afford Proposal 5! VOTE NO!!!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lkilmister
Principal
Decades of Dollars and Disappointment
It is not surprising that Michigan voters might hope more spending would improve the quality of public education. A July opinion poll revealed that 79 percent of us believed that spending "whatever it takes" to make Michigan's workforce the nation’s best-educated would be at least "somewhat effective." The survey also revealed that 70 percent supported Proposal 5, which would guarantee inflationary state spending increases for public schools and public higher education.

However, the survey's results actually reveal a multibillion-dollar failure. After spending more than most other Americans for decades, Michigan voters are not convinced the state has exceptional schools.

And for good reason: Michigan’s rankings for public school performance reveal mediocrity. In 2005, the American Legislative Exchange Council ranked states by various student test scores for 2003. Michigan college-bound high school students ranked only 25th on ACT scores. Our eighth-graders scored 34th in math on national exams and 27th in reading. According to U.S. Census Bureau data for 2005, Michigan ranked 34th in the nation for persons over age 25 with a bachelor’s degree and 21st in the percentage of high school graduates over age 25.

But Michigan has few spending rivals. ALEC compared per-pupil public school district spending among the states and ranked Michigan seventh highest in 1984, seventh in 1994 and ninth in 2004. Our teachers were the nation’s third highest paid in 1984, fifth in 1994 and second in 2004. The average Michigan teacher salary for 2004 exceeded $54,000 — 25 percent above the national average. Since implementation of Proposal A in 1995, state spending on public schools has increased nearly 44 percent, compared to an increase of about 31 percent in inflation. State government will spend more than $11 billion for Michigan public school districts in 2006 — the largest state spending program.

So what do taxpayers get for decades of top-dollar spending?

Just one-third of private employers offer a health care benefit to their retired employees, and those who do – such as General Motors and Delphi – are being forced to cut back because skyrocketing costs are creating financial crisis. Likewise, the health care benefit for retired public school employees is consuming rapidly escalating percentages of public school budgets. Total retirement fund cost increases over the last three years cost the average school district $178 per pupil, exceeding the state’s total basic foundation allowance increases during the period by $3 per pupil.

Health benefits for active employees also carry excessive cost. Most school districts still purchase this service through the Michigan Education Special Services Association (MESSA), a third-party administrator affiliated with the Michigan Education Association. Some districts spend $16,000 per teacher annually for health insurance, but a Kaiser Family Foundation survey shows an average cost of $11,900 for American workers as a whole. Districts that have dropped MESSA in favor of competitors report hundreds of thousands of dollars in annual savings, and the Michigan Legislature estimates that hundreds of millions of dollars per year could be saved under various forms of competitive bidding and bulk purchasing.

Likewise, despite credible evidence of cost savings, more than 60 percent of school districts do not competitively bid out transportation, custodial or food services. East Lansing schools report saving between $680,000 and $800,000 annually after privatizing the district's custodial services, a per-pupil savings of roughly $200.

Michigan’s prevailing wage law requires that state-funded construction projects, including public school buildings, must pay a wage that is established through a collaboration of labor unions, unionized contractors and state government. This is a mandate to waste money. In 1997, Ohio exempted public school construction from a similar requirement and saved 10.5 percent. A 2001 Mackinac Center estimate projected $150 million annual savings if Michigan enacted this reform.

Proposal 5's spending mandates would actually reduce the pressure on public education to spend money more effectively. Absent a requirement for spending reform, which is not part of Proposal 5, more money would be a mandate for more disappointment.

http://www.mackinac.org/article.aspx?ID=7969
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Anna Krome
Principal
More money does not equal "quality education." Higher taxes are no panacea.

Many, many assume our education system is mediocre, because the "teachers are underpaid."

I believed this also, before I began researching.

The BOE is again on the wrong side of this issue. How can we trust our "leaders" to spend the $$ wisely after all we have learned about school funding and mismanagement?

Where's all that LOTTO cash going?

No on 5. There's got to be a more responsible solution.

AK
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
49chevy
Member Avatar
Answers questioned
Anna Krome
Oct 23 2006, 10:06 AM

Where's all that LOTTO cash going?


That's the same thing I keep saying.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
fyi
Principal
http://www.mackinac.org/article.aspx?ID=4379

State Lotteries vs. Truth-in-Advertising

Thirty years ago, anyone caught "playing the numbers" in Michigan would be in serious trouble with the law. Today, the residents of Michigan spend over $1.7 billion annually on a variety of legal, state-run lottery games: the Daily 3, Daily 4, Michigan Millions, the Big Game, Michigan Roll Down, and Instant Tickets. But the reality of state lotteries and the way they are marketed would make a snake-oil salesman blush.


The state's lottery was presented to Michigan voters as a vehicle to raise state revenues without having to raise taxes. Objections to filling the state's coffers through a gambling scheme were countered with three arguments: 1) People are going to gamble no matter what; 2) The lottery is one of the most benign forms of gambling; and 3) It's for the children. In 1972, Michigan voters chose to adopt the lottery by a 2-to-1 margin in the belief that it would add substantially to the funding for education.

As in almost every other state that created a lottery in recent years, the Michigan Legislature didn't treat the proceeds as an add-on for education; rather, it more often than not simply reduced appropriations for education by roughly what the lottery put in. What the lottery produces for education is hardly a windfall anyway—accounting for a puny 4 percent of the total funding for Michigan public schools.

Despite rather dismal odds, states routinely promote their lotteries with get-rich-quick slogans that sometimes denigrate the values of hard work, initiative, responsibility, perseverance, optimism, investing for the future, and even education. Here's a sample:

"All you need is a dollar and a dream" (New York).

"Work is nothing but heart attack-inducing drudgery" (Massachusetts).

"How to get from Washington Boulevard to Easy Street" (Illinois).

"His [Martin Luther King's] vision lives on. Honor the dream—D.C. Lottery"

An ad in Illinois actually featured a man mocking others who invest in stocks and bonds; the lottery was depicted as the more fashionable and respectable preference.

The state of Michigan spends over $18 million annually to promote its lottery—and its ads and press releases aren't any better than those cited above. They applaud people with "persistence" and urge them not to "give up" buying lots of tickets. They urge people to "pool your resources" not for productive investment in wealth-creating, entrepreneurial ventures but for the purpose of realizing the American Dream through lottery tickets. One particular Michigan ad showed a man standing at a lottery counter complaining that he has a better chance of being struck by lightning. Zap! A lightning bolt leaves his hair singed. He responds, "One ticket, please."

State governments go to great lengths to sugarcoat their lotteries, stressing their voluntary nature. But it remains true that lotteries depend most on those least able to afford them. While the average player spends $313 per year on the lottery, those with incomes of less than $10,000 spend $597. African-Americans spend $998 compared to $210 for whites. High school dropouts spend four times as much on the lottery as do college graduates. More than half of all lottery tickets are bought by just 5 percent of those who play. The National Opinion Research Center estimates that problem gamblers (those addicted to gambling and whose families often suffer as a result) account for 14 percent of total lottery revenues.

When it comes to lotteries, governments actually wear three hats: They are the promoters, the regulators and the enablers of self-destructive gambling behavior. To help rectify this situation, the Michigan Lottery actually provides $1 million in funding for compulsive gambling programs annually. While government does not have an especially good track record when it tries to remedy social ills, should we celebrate when it succeeds in doing the opposite? A strong case could be made that the state of Michigan should not even be in the gambling business at all.

At the very least, citizens ought to know that when all the hype and hoopla is cleared away, state lotteries aren't the bonanza for education they were sold to be. States that would prosecute you or me for similar promotions are guilty themselves of some rather morally dubious marketing.

#####
(Michael E. Heberling, Ph.D., is an adjunct scholar with the Mackinac Center for Public Policy in Midland, Michigan. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is hereby granted, provided the author and his affiliations are cited.)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Anna Krome
Principal
What an eye-opener. Thanks for the above info.

AK
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ILIkeLI
Member Avatar
Principal
But Michigan has few spending rivals. ALEC compared per-pupil public school district spending among the states and ranked Michigan seventh highest in 1984, seventh in 1994 and ninth in 2004.
They don't need more money to secretly stash away.

Vote NO on Prop. 5.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
Learn More · Register for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Livonia Neighbors Archive · Next Topic »
Add Reply