Monday, February 14, 2005


Voters in Millard Tuesday will decide whether to commit another $78 million on top of the annual $87 million or so in operating money that’s spent annually in the Millard Public Schools (2003-04 figures, the latest available from the state).

New schools would be built, which will of course balloon that operating budget considerably in future years. So it’s a pretty big chunk they’re biting off, if the bond issue succeeds; most observers think it will, for lack of enough time to mount an effective opposition campaign.

Millard’s spending per pupil is actually a bit less than the statewide average: Millard spends $7,341.48 per child (average daily attendance), vs. the average of $8,235.37, according to annual financial reports on file with the State Department of Education (

You can navigate to that site to see where the millions go in Millard, or any other Nebraska school district, for that matter. For example, in that west Omaha district, teacher pay is over $46 million and employee benefits cost over $16 million. Special education is costing $15 million. Principals cost $7.8 million. The superintendent pulls down $161,569.32.

Oh, it’s interesting reading. How many Millard voters tomorrow have an accurate idea how much the annual budget really is, and where the money really goes in that district? I’d guess less than 1 percent; how about you?

They’ll be voting in new taxation without mental representation . . . and, because we all will be paying for increased spending in Millard since they will clamor for increased state taxes to help cover their increased expenses, it’s something we all should learn more about.



Did you know more than 700 children in Nebraska have autism, one of the most difficult disabilities parents have to deal with, and one of the most expensive, mega-million dollar special-education conditions facing our schools? Did you know a lot of smart people believe a huge cause of the autism epidemic, with nine out of 10 victims little boys, is mercury in our childhood immunizations? And that, for an extra $1 per dosage or so, we could have prevented all that by using a preservative in the immunizations that did not contain mercury?

LB 569, to remove mercury from vaccines, was up for public hearing Thursday in the Unicam, and a vote is expected as soon as today. Many thanks to Sens. Landis and Stuthman in this matter. Please, please contact these senators and urge them to vote to have Nebraska join California and Iowa in protecting babies by banning this toxic substance:

dcunningham@unicam.state.ne.us (402) 471-2801

dbyars@unicam.state.ne.us (402) 471-2620

jjensen@unicam.state.ne.us (402) 471-2622

perdman@unicam.state.ne.us (402) 471-2616

ghoward@unicam.state.ne.us (402)471-2723

jjohnson@unicam.state.ne.us (402) 471-2726

astuthman@unicam.state.ne.us (402)471-2715

dlandis@unicam.state.ne.us (402) 471-2720

For background information from a letter from a congressman who’s a medical doctor to the Washington, D.C., newspaper, The Hill:




A Go Big Ed reader sent this story from the Lincoln Journal on an extremely expensive security system, 10 times what they’re spending now, being put in place that presages Big Brother. Next down the pike, no doubt, will be implanted RDIF tags. Oh, well, for today’s teenagers, what’s another piercing? Coming soon, to a school near you:


Comments: Post a Comment