Tuesday, May 13, 2008

Boundary Issue Redux: Board Stubbornly Affirms Its Earlier Decision

As each board member philosophised their individual positions on the March 11th boundary decisions, it became clear where they stood. No vote was needed. Finally. Jim Carrel moved that the board rescind it's March 11th decision, which was seconded by board resident David Stackhouse. The roll was called:

In favor (of rescinding the decision): Stackhouse, Carrel, Camber-Davidson
Opposed: Diedrich, Whalen, Shimek, McCourt


And so it went; the motion to rescind failed 3-4. But let's backup a bit.

The agenda item began with countless members of the public once again imploring the board to reconsider the decisions made on March 11th ( http://sp-eye.blogspot.com/2008/03/sun-prairie-school-boundaries-finalized.html ). Another 62 cards were turned in from those people that did not wish to speak, but who support rescinding the earlier vote. A petition containing signatures of 500 community residents who also supported rescinding the decision was presented.

Yes, many of these folks had "said their piece" at previous meetings. But there was a different feeling in the air. This was not a bunch of "elitists" who simply didn't want their kids going to a different school. This was a community that organized, did extensive research into the issue and numbers, and presented their case firmly.

But most importantly, this group came forward offering to be part of the solution, rather than just voicing opposition. Loudly and clearly, these folks stated that they only wanted a temporary reprieve from the boundary decisions in order that the District take the necessary time to do this job right, rather than slapping on another temporary band-aid. They told the board that if, after properly researching all the issues, the board had clear data which indicated that moving their children made the most sense for the District, then they would abide by that decision.

This was also not just parents...but a number of teachers from Bird Elementary spoke out in support of rescinding the decision. Is this not the definition of community based, data-driven decisions? In most cases, board members need to wrap themselves around a board decision. Sometime, however, they do "get it wrong". (Have the 4 board members forgotten the Madison school board's school naming fiasco?). And in those rare instances, board members need to put on their big boy (and girl) pants and admit their error. They will be bigger people and garner much more respect for it. Unfortunately it's too late.

Some key highlight's from individual board members' soliloquies:

Jill Camber-Davidson: "This move has not just affected the kids, but the entire community. Free/Reduced lunches does not mean a problem child; it's just an indication of need or an achievement gap. There are studies that show obese children don't have problems with achievement. What's next...balancing the district's children for obesity?"

John Whalen : "There's nothing to say that was not said on March 11th. I didn't come here with my mind made up."


Caren Diedrich: [SP-EYE note: Warning. The following quotes have been rated at least PG-13. Ms. Diedrich didn't speak to the audience, she nearly screamed at them, all the while chastising them.] "This pretty much ruined my weekend. I'm tired of the pissing contest...move this kid here, move that kid there. I don't appreciate YOU [the parents who spoke] managing our schools. Bitch at us. He [Culver] manages the schools according to our direction. [after analyzing things] you left me with very few things that it could be [reasons for opposition]. Could it be that your kids just don't want to rub elbows with the Westside kids? "


Jim Carrel: "We 7 serve at the discretion of the voters. If we're doing something that alienates the community, then we're doing something wrong. I did not make condescending assumptions on why you did not want your kids to be moved' I came to you and asked. We didn't listen. We did this...the 7 of us...actually, just 3 of us. The question is not whether to rescind the decision; that is obvious. We are not balancing diversity by moving 13 kids.


Jim McCourt: "I don't think it's obvious. I haven't heard anything new. You can't assume a decision will be rescinded just because there are new board members. To think that [because 40 kids will be moving out of the District as a result of this change] that we'll re-think our decision? I'm not saying it's just a threat."

Terry Shimek: "This is not necessarily the best solution, but it's an equitable solution. Did we choose the best process? No....but in the end it worked. The Bird folks presented some good information. We [board members] can't communicate [outside meetings] so I don't know if everyone read it all...but I think they all did."

David Stackhouse: "My goal has always been to support board decisions. But I disagree with this decision...it was a short term fix. As a district we need to make all our schools equal...to a point. I think we made a mistake and need to pull it back."