$45,000 to re-locate school board meetings. Why?

One of the school board's pet projects for some time now has been to slowly position things so it can move board meetings to the District office. At the last FT&T meeting, this issue was raised as an action item. The advantages and disadvantages as presented by District Administration--along with our comments---are provided below.

The disadvantage of using City Hall for School Board Meetings.
1) Will need to provide access to Internet and wireless router. Estimated Cost: $700 per year. SP-EYE: Seems like a small cost in comparison...but perhaps we can access the City's hook-ups for free.
2) Lights take 30 minutes to come on, if turned off during meetings. SP-EYE: Someone suggested an inexpensive "cage" over the light switches to resolve the issue.
3) Limited access to set up before meetings. SP-EYE: How much time is really needed?
4) Will need to transport laptops to meetings and back to District Office. SP-EYE: Hence the name, "LAPtop"....as in small *transportable* computer that can fit on one's lap.
5) Projector and computer must be transported and set up for meetings. SP-EYE: See LAPtop
6) No equipment to show videotapes or DVD recordings. SP-EYE: Videotapes are old technology. All new laptops have DVD capabilities. See LAPtop
7) No computer or video integrated into board meeting broadcast. SP-EYE: Perhaps aim a projector where a camera will pick it up???
8) Poor HVAC controls. SP-EYE: It's as good as the air handling at the District office room 100.
9) Information about checks is limited due to the fact that the documentation is at the District Office. SP-EYE: Checks are discussed in literally the closing few minutes of Finance committee meetings, half of which are only 15 minutes in length. The District can continue to follow-up on questions as needed.


The advantages of using Room 100 at the District Office for School Board Meetings:
1) Internet access is available for board member laptops and access to BoardDocs. SP-EYE: It would be hard to believe that there is no Internet access available at City Hall. Must it be wireless?
2) Projector and screen is in place. SP-EYE: Projectors and screens are quite portable these days.
3) Meetings could be streamed live via Internet. SP-EYE: But how easily will people with a dial-up connection be able to access them? This aspect of Board Docs (already purchased by the District) has not ever been tested in Sun Prairie.
4) Wireless network access is in place. SP-EYE: We need an Internet connection, wireless is simply a luxury.
5) Video, DVDs, and computer presentations can be integrated into the meeting broadcast. SP-EYE: But it requires a body with knowledge to do so....when will we be seeing that request to hire come through?
6) District staff can more easily provide support before and during meetings. SP-EYE: Has anybody noticed the side table full of District Admin folks at City Hall? What are they there for...if not to provide whatever they would provide at meetings held elsewhere?
7) District can record any meetings, presentations, workshops, etc, for live or stored streaming and broadcasting. SP-EYE: Ummmm...this may not be so easy. External trainers very likely will not allow taping of their presentation due to copyright issues. They DO want to sell their presence, right?

The estimated expense of the technology for video equipment and microphones is $40,000. The
estimated construction cost of a raised floor is $5,000. (for a total cost of $45,000)

Sounding much like former board member Mary Ellen Havel-Lang and her spending cry of, "It is what it is", lame duck board member and FTT chair Jim Carrel simply stated that, "These are the times in which we live" in response to questions about the cost of the plan.

Sun Prairie STAR editor Chris Mertes gave the idea of spending $45,000 to move meetings to the District Office two thumbs down. Read his Opinion column here.