Some reflections from the Pastor: Feb. 5, 2012

The study is now in the messy phase. That’s the phase where concrete proposals have been floated and reactions and counter-proposals are generated. I have read most of the feedback and there is certainly a lot of passion around the issue. But what I found interesting is the reasonableness of most of the feedback. Financial reporting from various parishes has shown that they cannot sustain their schools all by themselves. This was discovered by the Urban School Study done locally last year. Tuition cannot be raised substantially or more students would be lost and the consequent income is lost as well. Subsidies from the parish cannot go up because the money is just not there. Fundraising is maxed out. Our parish school is 92% at capacity using the 25 per classroom formula from Meitler. If you use our 30 per classroom policy we are at 76% capacity. Our per pupil cost is $4250. Among the 18 schools in the study area this puts us in 11th place, with a high of $6,692 and a low of $3,937. If we did have 500 kids (about 80 more than we presently have) in our school our per pupil cost would plunge to $3400.

I had instructed Mr. Garland to not take in anymore kids from the schools affected by the present plan until we know that it is really the plan. I am trying to support them. We will, naturally, take in any students that have moved here or are coming from other places.

Right now the proposed plan is a proposal, a draft. Who knows how this will all wash out. Listening is a very difficult process because out of the input must come a second draft. Discussion was had at the recent pastors meeting (pastors in the study area met with Archbishop Lucas on Feb. 2 so that he could hear from us our perceptions of the process and the possible outcomes) where it was suggested by some that this moratorium be put in place across the board until such time as a new plan is actually initiated. It looks like this idea is gaining traction as a statement from higher up for everyone to do the same. We shall see.

There are pros and cons to any move. Whether we are part of a multi-site/one school system or not, the changes in the South Omaha Catholic School structure will have an effect on us. I would like to offer a couple observations that I believe will help us look at this thing from a broader perspective.

1) Parents have to become more educated on how their school is run and financed. In particular, too many parents really think their tuition is what pays the bills when in fact is often pays less that 50% of the cost of running the school.

2) Parents and benefactors who do not support the parish and who do not even come to church on the weekend succeed in dealing a most debilitating blow to the health of their school. Without consistent practice of the faith the life of the school gets separated from the parish and the key reason for its existence is diluted. Only in a crisis does one see the true colors. Some pastors have observed that the most angry parents are those they never see in church on Sunday. Only those really educated about how their school works, how it is part of a larger mission of Parish and Archdiocese, can fathom the ins and outs and whys of this Meitler study.

3) It is the role of the larger church to help us make decisions so that the Education Mission of the Church does not suffer death by a thousand cuts. Like any business, reorganization to sustain the mission is sometimes called for because demographics have changed and are not changing back to the glory days.

4) There is evidence of #1 and #2 in St. Gerald. In fact, I would say, because of the largeness of our parish base, (practicing and contributing Catholics) we can carry those who are part of the school but almost never volunteer and almost never contribute to the church. But it is frustrating. At present we are just barely getting by. Necessary improvements happen only when we go out begging for it.

5) If we become part of a multi-site school system there is fear on the part of parents that the tuition will go up too much to afford it. Here is something I can say for sure. Parishes that have become part of a system where their parish children attend such a Catholic School have options. In one place the parish held a yearly fund-raiser that contributed so much per child to help parents pay their tuition. In one parish I know, it is part of their regular budget. At present our parish pays $500 per student to Archdiocesan Catholic High Schools for each student from her that attends. Our parish could find a way to supply scholarships to help parishioner children attend the Catholic Grade school or High School of choice.

6) No matter what happens our buildings remain our own. And it will be our responsibility to take care of the building. Sure, we will be compensated from the system for the use of the building but improvements of any note would come from the parish budget. And we would what to do that because they are still our kids and it is still our school—building or entity. When I was in Elgin the gym for the six-parish High School (Pope John XXIII) was owned by my parish. We had to maintain it and the school paid us rent. One of my favorite memories was the 3500 hours summer project where we put in a #1 grade maple floor with almost total volunteer labor.

7) We are in the process of planning for a campaign to our parish to make some improvements in our parish plant. And planning for future capital improvements is part of this campaign. If major things need to be done (like bathroom renovations or roof replacement or ventilation needs, or Heating/AC upgrades) because our building is over 50 years old I want to get the best advice and best planning put towards this.

8) Finally, a comment from the Archbishop lends a positive bent to all of this. He said he would never suggest a change or accept a plan that will not make us better, that will actually allow more kids to be educated in a Catholic School and that will strengthen the schools to be better yet.

There has been some discussion of us having a meeting of any parents that would like to have more information and maybe provide input to the process. I provided you with information via Sycamore and our parish website. You can have access to the information there. You can have access also to our school committee’s response to the proposal. If we put together a meeting, we will let you know but more than likely it won’t take place until later in February or early March, depending what comes from the next round of consultations which will take place in the first part of March.

---

January 2011

Dear Parents and Parishioners:

Last week I posted information about the present status of the Meitler Study in the bulletin, on the parish web site and on sycamore. Here is a brief followup.

There is much information that can be garnered by going to www.meitler.com and clicking on Client Access: type in Omaha for all the information that led us up the present proposal. When you click Omaha then look for Draft strategic directions for schools. You can also type in OmahaListen and you can review all the feedback that has been given both in round 2 and round 3 of the consultation. Our feedback is posted as well.

The following is a list of those who have represented our school at the various major consultation meetings. These people have met also by themselves to discuss and complete various homework assignments as well as feedback assignments.

Nick Steinbach, Joan Luebbert, Lori Bauer, Lou D'Ercole, Mike Rasmussen, John Bolas, Mike Conzett, Katie Rinkol, Jeanette Manley, Bill Wachtler, Wayne Reed, Bob Kment, Dan Buck, Mary Jo Thompson... besides our two administrators and myself.

- Fr. Korte