To the editor,

I appreciate the columns from Rep. Petryk and Sen. Smith that run in the paper each week because they help me stay up to date with goings on in Madison.

On Aug. 23, Sen. Smith called for collaboration from our Wisconsin legislators. Hear! Hear! I am far from alone in being tired of the partisanship that dominates Wisconsin politics. The people of

Wisconsin suffer while politicians continue with their power games. If you agree with me, please call your legislators and ask them to put party aside and collaborate for the best budget for all of Wisconsin.

Rep. Petryk’s column focused on the education budget because he said, “every child in our communities

deserves to have access to the greatest education they believe is best.” Hear! Hear! again. Certainly, we all wish that for our children, but some of the data he cited to show his support for education gave me pause. Granted the budget for the next biennium increases spending on education, but I have also read that the amount of money allocated still falls far below the support our children need because education has been so severely underfunded in previous years.

Wishing to clarify how the budget supports Wisconsin kids, I met with Jamie Benson, Superintendent of River Falls Public Schools. Mr. Benson doesn’t agree that the dollar figures mentioned in the column reflect the support community schools need, and he explained to me the shortcomings in this budget and what it will mean to school districts, students and taxpayers going forward. It’s not a pretty picture.

The four main areas Mr. Benson talked about that the budget doesn’t take care of are: an antiquated funding formula that severely restricts the amount of money River Falls is allocated relative to other

school districts, a formula that doesn’t keep pace with inflationary costs for any school district, the RF district revenue “cliff” caused by inadequate funding from 2021-23, and the underfunding of special education students which means they will not get adequate services unless money is pulled away from the regular (and already underfunded) operating budget.

Additionally, my understanding of Gov. Evers’ veto, which increased school funding $325 per student, was not for tax hikes, but because it was the only way he could get more money for education into the short-sighted education budget.

There is much more to understand about this topic, but not room in an LTE. I encourage the editors of the Journal to talk to our area superintendents and take more time and space to explain what kind of funding our students really need for a quality education. And I encourage Rep. Petryk to talk with these superintendents as well to find out what funding great education needs.

Ann Leake

River Falls