Ashley Field Proposal: Lots of Handouts; Few Questions Answered

So many questions surround the 11th hour Ashley Field Artificial Turf/Locker Room Proposal.
The more you dig into it, the more questions arise...questions that are not answered in the documents provided.

But of course not.
That is status quo with the world in general.
When something is being given the full-court press, it's human nature to point out the POSITIVE aspects, and ignore the negative. Sometimes, in our haste to get things moving, we even forget to include some costs or facts that perhaps need to be considered.
And that's the case with the Ashley Field proposal. Sure...now....3 years after the high school decision...a case is being made to improve the quality of facilities at Ashley Field.

Question No. 1: Why weren't these same concerns raised earlier?
Costs could have been built into the $100M project which is now winding down.


Timing

Clearly plans for this were drawn up last summer. Question#2: Why is it that not a peep was heard until now?
...even AFTER any opportunity for referendum money?


The Busing Problem
So the issue seems to be the concern over the cost of transportation from the new high school to Ashley Field.

Problem #1:Athletes from the new high school will need to be transported from the new high school to Ashley Field for competitions. The locker facilities that have been used in the past will now be used for the Upper Middle School. The locker rooms in the SOAR building are too small to allow an entire team to meet, so many members are left out of the team meetings and need to congregate in the gym area. The cost is estimated at $3,000 to $5,000 to transport the athletes for home games. Athletes and officials have slipped on the floor in the gym, which can expose the district to liability.

Here's another newsflash. Madison has 4 high schools and only two of them have fields. LaFollette has Lussier Stadium which [ahem] was donated by the Lussier family. How do you suppose the other schools get to their "home" field?

Question#3: Why, again, do we need to dress at the new high school and bus over to Ashley?
Players now drive separately up to the high school dress in the locker room. Why can't that continue to happen? Can't the equipment be shuttled over to Ashley on Friday afternoons? Certainly we have enough district-owned vans and trucks...right?

The Locker Room Space Problem
Question #4: Why, again, can't players dress at CHUMS---just as they have in the past?
SPHS has locker space for 1800 kids. CHUMS will have less than 1000. Did we delete locker space as part of the renovations? And....even if they did...locker space for 1000 kids HAS to be enough for 80 football players....right?

“I’ve been told there’s inadequate locker room space for the teams to change into their uniforms” at the upper middle school"
--David Stackhouse

You've been "told"? Oh, REALLY"....Isn't that nothing more than conjecture, then? Don't we make DATA-driven decisions in this district?

Liability Problem? Really?
"Athletes and officials have slipped on the floor in the [SOAR building] gym, which can expose the district to liability."

Umm...did we miss something? The proposal appears to be to design a new locker room for SUN PRAIRIE...NOT for visiting teams or officials....right?
Question #5: So how does this proposal even address the liability issue?

Use of Ashley Field By Other Groups
Question #6: Seriously...would Ashley Field EVER be made available to other sports groups in the community?
The Ashley Proposal Situation Report opens with:
It is our goal to respect the wishes of Mr. Ashley and create a field that will be used by more youth in the community, as well as an additional focal point of the excellence in Sun Prairie Schools and Athletics.

That's OUR goal too! [ when you read that, if you've seen the film "Stakeout", recall Emilio Estevez and Richard Dreyfuss crying in unison, "Stickley's OUR favorite too" to Rosie O'Donnell]

Seriously...people have screamed for years to use Ashley field...and always been rebuffed. Thou shalt not play on thy hallowed ground! How exactly does putting turf on it increase the likelihood of letting other teams/groups use the field? The next thing we'll hear--after it's installed--- is that we have to minimize the utilization to prevent costly tears in the surface. And don't say that want happen. Let's keep it real and not offer any pronouncements that--after all--can only come from the school district.

Inflated Savings Estimates?
Question#7: How realistic are the "rough" estimates of maintenance costs?
The "rough cost estimate" shows cost of annual maintenance of current field to be $60K per year. Are you kidding me? Web-based estimates and case studies show more like $20-30K per year...Are we REALLY spending $60K/yr (and if so, why?). If not...why is the budget inflated?
The proposal doesn't include any annual maintenance costs for a synthetic turf field.....cost are estimated at LEAST $5K/yr. The proposal doesn't include cost of disposing of artificial turf (8-10 yrs) of about $130K. That's $13-16K/yr to budget for right there!

Maintenance cost savings over 15 years........................$240,000 (that's a far cry from $600K/10 yrs)
--Schuylerville Schools, IL (Feb. 2010)

There ARE maintenance costs for artificial turf:
---Repairs (seams)
---Replacement every 8-10 years
---Disposal cost upon replacement – Infill systems filled and topdressed with crumb rubber material that is typically made from ground automobile tires may require special disposal. Disposal costs are estimated to be $130,000 plus transportation and landfill charges.

Just Keeping Up with the Jones...er...Middletons...and Waunakees...and Veronas?
A funny thing happened while reading the paper this morning...we came across
this article about schools looking at turf fields

Waunakee: A $700,000 field — part of a proposed $1.5 million remodeling of the district’s outdoor facilities including seating, a visitor’s side concession stand and lighting — would be paid for entirely with donations, just as the field at Middleton’s Breitenbach Stadium field was.

Well...it seems the Joneses are doing THEIR projects entirely with donations. Hmm...fancy that.

LOST: One school board member, reported to be fiscally conservative
Where is the fiscal conservative David Stackhouse who said this:

[on Charter School] Where I have a problem with this right now, we’re opening a new high school, we just opened 4K, we have enough things going on in my eyes. We need to take a step back and bring it under control before we go forward with another. I think a year from now we’ll be in a better situation to look into it.”
---STAR 1/14/2010

or this:
That seems like an awful lot of fixtures for baseball and softball,” Stackhouse said. “That’s a lot of energy.” He added that the district with 56 lights around the track and soccer field, “it sounds like we could host football games there.”
STAR 3/11/2010

or this:
Stackhouse voted against the recommending these projects to the board because he believed the bleachers still had life in them. "I don’t think that’s a wise investment at this time. Other projects need to get done,” he added.
STAR 3/11/2010

Suddenly Stackhouse is all onboard with spending money again. Hmmm.

More on the Artificial vs. Natural Turf Debate

Another ViewPoint: Natural Turf is Better

In 2008 survey conducted to evaluate the preferred playing surface among NFL players, Out of 1565 players from all 32 teams, 71% preferred to play on natural grass fields.
---Sportsturf Managers Association

Another cost analysis:

Yet another maintenance cost comparison

---

Look...you'll get no argument here. The field turf looks nice....arguably a little TOO nice for high school (makes us think Badger lite)...but nice. If the quarterback club is game, we say, "Have at it!" Rob Hamilton didn't come looking for money when turf was desired for the baseball field...he just went out and quietly raised it. That being said, if the locker rooms are truly the issue, the QB club wants to invest its fund-raising on building the locker room they seem to desire, and leave the turf for the future.

Whatever is decided...
Let's agree to be 100% above board.
Let there be NO undisclosed or "forgotten" costs.
Consider a FAIR 10-15 year cost comparison.

Stackhouse pushing for a $475K Ashley Referendum?

Good news, folks...the recession's gotta be over.
"What?", you say. You didn't get that memo?
Well...it must be over if School Board member David Stackhouse is pushing for the district commit $475,000 MORE money to improve Ashley Field.

Read the Situation Report for the Monday 4-26-2010 meeting

Ok. Stand down (for now, anyway). It's only an "informational" agenda item--meaning the board cannot take action on it---but it's clear that the intent is to bring it BACK for action at the Board's May meeting.


But this is one loaded potato. The Stackhouse-Kaminski Report contains 13 attachments (several with multiple parts) and a total of over 50 MEGAbytes in downloads. Geez...think of all the Itunes you could get for that!

Seriously...we get it. We love football too. But you know what? Here's just the top tier of reasons why the school board needs to politely say, "NO, but thank you for bringing this forward".

1. The initial intent was to siphon off some of that referendum surplus (Hmmm...does that explain Stackhouse's opposition to several of the other projects proposed?). But the legal opinion was that referendum funds cannot be used for Ashley Field. Stay tuned though, because we hear that "they" are asking for a second opinion on that.

2. Talk is turning toward a referendum specifically for Ashley Field improvements. Stackhouse asked Tim Culver to research how much revenue could be generated by a one-year tax levy equal to $12 on a home valued at $200K. A referendum SOLELY to improve a sports field? Is Sun Prairie trying to be a great SPORTS district...or a great SCHOOL district?

3. Contrary to popular belief, there ain't no fat lady singin' and the recession most definitely is NOT over. The budget was tough to swallow last year, resulting in an unprecedented taxpayer vote to slash the levy by $2M. Newsflash...the economy isn't much better, and the proposed budget already calls for a nearly 8% rise in the mill rate!

4. The locker rooms at the existing high school were always sufficient. How could there be LESS space when the school will now house 50% fewer students?

5. If these changes were so sorely needed...why were they not part of the CHUMS modification plan 2 years ago?

---

A good school board separates "wants" from "needs". Like Caren Diedrich once said, There are many wants; [the board] provides what is needed".

As Al Borland would say, "We don't think so, Dave"

Is This BBallGate the next episode?

UPDATE

*** MEETING/HEARING CANCELED! ***

We have just learned that last Friday the grievance hearing below has been canceled due to "some new info the lawyers and SPEA wanted to review"

Stay tuned for further developments

Meeting:
04/20/2010

SPECIAL SCHOOL BOARD MEETING (Closed)

6:00 p.m. at the District Office (Room 220),

501 S. Bird St., Sun Prairie.

President: John Whalen

Category: 2. Closed Session

Agenda Item
2.01 Go into closed session for the purpose of conferring with legal counsel regarding a Level III SPEA grievance, followed by hearing and deciding said grievance; and taking action on closed School Board minutes of March 15, 2010, and April 13, 2010 [Wis. Stats.19.82(1) and 19.85(1)(a), (c), (e), (f), and (g)].

But....won't that be heard by a school board member who will no longer BE a school board member after the swearing in on April 26th? (and technically one whose term ended on election night?)

More concerns...are there other sitting board members who have a conflict of interest? Hmmmm?

Now a sudden rush to justice? How much sense does it make to take such significant action with the concerns raised here....which by the way, for you school board members who are reading this...are well known within the community. You may THINK the community doesn't know "all the facts"....and certainly there ARE things that are unknown....but a scant few. If you don't think people talk, think again. Mayhaps this might be a meeting you wish to postpone until all your little ducklings are walking single file.

Chooo! Chooo! Is that the sound of the railroad that we hear?

Please Sir, May We Have some...More?

"Reality Rocks" ( see STAR article by Gina Covelli) is a spin-off of truly one of the coolest and most "real" learning that the Sun Prairie's school district offers to its students. Without a doubt, there is a vast array of excellent learning opportunities at SPHS. We single this one out because it is one of the very few opportunities kids get to learn the realities of life.

The upcoming "Reality Rocks" event for 200 seniors is kind of a "live fire" exercise of one project segment contained within the graduation requirement "Economics" course.

I first learned about the classroom project angle when our son took Economics as a senior 5 years ago. He came home with what he called, "the Marriage Project". As part of the project, he and another student partnered up and were "married". They had to choose "careers" and then research what those careers earned. They had to choose and "purchase" a home and obtain a mortgage. They had to start investing for retirement. They had to purchase a car. They had to decide on how many children they would have and what it would cost. I also recall that they had to build into their "dream world" a real life tragedy (I recall he and his "partner" dealt with the death of one of their children. All in all, this was --for me-- one of the highlights of his education at Sun Prairie.

Why was this a highlight? Because like many, I was raised by loving parents who opted to "shield us" from all the financial aspects of life. It took many years to "figure things out" (and I'm not too proud to admit that I still work at it). While I appreciate everything my parents ever did for me, I only wish I had been prepared for the realities of life: mortgages, interest rates, credit cards, investing, tax preparation

Real Life Example
True Story. Set the Wayback Machine to 1984. Our subject--let's call him Waldo--- exits college life and accepts a position with the University of Georgia Athens. Awesome! It pays $16,800/yr. Waldo thinks he's rich. In fact he's so rich, he almost immediately buys himself a brand new (no frills) Nissan PickemUp truck. Cost: $8,995 (seriously).

Dealer: "How much do you want to pay per month?"
Waldo: (thinking VERY quickly) "I can afford about $250/month"
Voila....a 48 month loan for exactly $248.06 per month
First mistake? Waldo paid the sticker price (Isn't that the cost? Nobody ever talked to him about "negotiating" the price).

Oh...the interest rate? Waldo never asked...but it turned out to be 14.5%. Waldo religiously made hi payments...but paid nearly 33% more for that truck. The interest alone cost him over $2900. But he was oblivious. And... oh those credit cards! They came in the mail daily! Waldo could buy whatever he wanted. If only he'd taken the time to read the fine print and see that the interest rates were generally about 20%.

A few years down the road, Waldo bought a house. Interest rate was a whopping 10.5%...he at least knew about that by then. What he didn't know was about this thing called property taxes. Imagine his chagrin when THAT bill came in December! Later Waldo moved to switch jobs and had to sell the house (and buy another). Hmmm...seems no one had ever mentioned that funny little thing called a real estate commission. Waldo just thought that was one awful nice lady who sold his house for him. Later, Waldo learned about re-financing.

The bottom line is that Waldo never learned anything related to money from his parents either. He recovered and managed fairly well, but probably would have fared much better with a little knowledge.

Please sir...can we have some more?
The only criticism I have...and it can't really be called a criticism...is that there is an incredible need to build upon what we do offer. Some suggestions (partly mine and partly those of my son from his 5 years post-high school vantage point).

• Could we separate out the "project" aspect from the Economics" class and make it a semester long course?
• Cover the details of managing a checking account--particularly in a debit card world and the spectre of identity theft.
• Cover the details of credit cards: the good, the bad, and the ugly.
• Have the students actually "file" taxes---even a very simple 1040 with a mortgage and investment income.
• Build in health insurance costs.
• Set up a computer simulation to track deposits and spending...basically squeeze a tax year into a semester.
• Make this course a graduation requirement.

In sum...the Reality Rocks event sounds like truly an awesome experience...but is living it for a day enough for these lessons to "sink in"? That's where the value of a semester long course---a graduation requirement--comes in. Expanding this would truly make Sun Prairie stand out from the rest.

Parents, in the meantime, please talk openly with your kids about the financial realities of life. If your child is one of the 200 starring in "Reality Rocks", then please have a great conversation with them afterwards about what they learned. They may actually make it through life without ever using geometry or trigonometry...but every last one of them will deal with (or suffer the consequences of) the financial aspects of life. Let them be prepared.

Rick Mealy for SP-EYE

Does Madison Property Assessment Decline Affect Us?

The headline of today's Wisconsin State Journal rang loud and clear:
property assessments declined for the first time in 35 years . The average drop is 3.1%.

That's bad news for homeowners on two fronts:

1. If you're trying to sell your home, plan on getting less for it.

2. Also plan on paying higher property taxes.

What? Hold on a sec! If my property is assessed less, don't I PAY LESS property tax?
Wrong. Dead wrong.
Property taxes don't go down unless spending is increasing at a rate less than that of property assessments. This includes, of course, both existing properties and new (from the previous year) developments/construction. When that happens, the costs are spread over a larger tax base, meaning each individual property owner pays a smaller share.

New values don't directly bring higher taxes but shifts the burden among taxpayers, said Todd Berry, president of the Wisconsin Taxpayers Association. "Falling assessments don't mean falling tax bills," he said. "We're probably going to be paying more property taxes.

Because the recession deepened last year, assessed values for every type of real estate - homes, condos, apartments, commercial buildings - dropped for 2010. Only personal property assets, like business equipment, which account for a sliver of the city's value, rose slightly for 2010.

Mill Rate Review
The mill rate is calculated as: Tax Levy ÷ Equalized Value
Tax Levy (of the taxing authority)
divided by
Equalized value (of all real estate in the district)
...and remember, the units are dollar per dollar of assessed value.
You typically see the mill rate expressed in dollars per $1,000 of assessed value.
To get this figure, simply multiply the calculated mill rate by 1000.

All things being equal...
If the Tax Levy does not change
and the Equalized Value DROPS 1%
then the Mill Rate RISES 1%

so if we do not want a drop in equalized value to affect property taxes, the only solution is to REDUCE the Tax Levy by the same amount as the reduction in Equalized Value
...and that means the budget needs to be trimmed.

Simplified Property Tax Scenario
Imagine a fictional school district:
• 1000 houses each valued at 200,000; total property value = $ 200,000,000
• 25 businesses, total property value = $200,000,000
• Total Equalized Value=$400,000,000

• School district budget: $8,000,000
• State Aid (remains constant from last year) = 50%, $4,000,000
• Tax Levy= $4,000,000 (make up difference between budget and state aid).

• Mill rate = 4,000,000/400,000,000 = 0.01
• Mill rate = $10.00 per $1000 assessed value
• $200,000 home pays.........$ 2,000.00

If property values drop 2%
Now Equalized value= $ 392,000,000

…and school spending doesn't change…
• Tax levy (unchanged from proposal)= $ 4,000,000
• Mill rate is now $ 0.010204
• Mill rate (per $1,000 assess value) $ 10.20
• $200,000 home now pays $ 2,040.82
…which is 2% more than if Equalized Value stays flat

Does this affect Sun Prairie?
The school district budget --at least the "rough draft" we've seen to-date---is based on the assumption of a 1% rise in the "Equalized Value" (which is the total value of all property in the district). If Madison property assessments are dropping an average of 3.1%, what's the likelihood that Sun Prairie assessments (and Equalized Value) will RISE 1%?

Obviously, we don't know the total yet (although the individual cites and towns in the district could give us their projected totals--hint, hint).

BUT...what we CAN do is check the Sun Prairie city assessor's website and look at the property assessments which are now complete and on-line.. A cursory glance of a handful of properties seems to suggest a FLAT assessment....meaning a 0% increase.

That means that the school district "rough draft budget" (for lack of a better term) is planning on spreading the tax levy over 1% more value than will actually result. Since the denominator (equalized value) appears to be lower than expected (0% growth vs. 1% growth), that means the result of the mill rate equation will INCREASE. Begging 1000 pardons for forcin' y'all to remember your long division rules.

Monte is Disturbed...Film at Eleven?

From the Poking the Bear Department:
Having published the following letter in the STAR, it seems that Monte Couch wanted the world to know that he is disturbed... so we'll reprint his little missive here.

Monte is a nice guy....really. He's just gotten a little cranky of late.
Now that Mealy character....that impish hack.....he's something else!

We think, however, that some of Mr. Couch's own words might be tweaked a bit and be cause for his own introspection:

"Those who write cheap shots to try to aggrandize their assumed lofty position in the scheme of things may attract limited attention but do not in our opinion contribute anything useful."

If he's so disturbed...offended...whatever....we suggest Mr. Couch refrain from sneaking peeks at the SP-EYE blog. Life is too short.

...............................................................................................................................

4-8-2010 8:55am

Howdy Al !

Some of the results of the election were a bit of a surprise to me. Thinking it over, it my be that because you were set up as the lead guy, promoting just before the election, more heavy spending, it cost you some votes. That led me to wonder why in the world, those decisions were timed as they were.

We thank you for serving on the board. You offered some needed common sense in a number of situations for your fellow board members consideration. Your sincerity and efforts on various matters compared to the light hearted efforts of others was pronounced. None of us agree on the positions others take from time to time, but you made your analysis of the information available, and quietly offered your decisions. Often you offered your reasons why or how you arrived at the decision you made.

Someone suggested I look at the current posting by Rick Mealy on his blog following the election as it was worth a laugh. I looked, and was disturbed he would use the web to belittle like that. Trying to post facts, offer careful analysis, is one thing. Those who post cheap shots to try to aggrandize their assumed lofty position in the scheme of things may attract limited attention but do not in my opinion contribute anything useful. Just want to make sure you know I do not support the blabbering of Rick Mealy.

Some people may think former board members should hunker down and go away. I do not subscribe to that idea. We thank you for serving, and I hope you will as a former board member, continue to follow board activities , offering your considered thoughts from time to time.
monte couch

CHUMS? Really???

so...it is going to be Cardinal Heights Upper Middle School. Do you think anyone will notice that their sweatshirts will say "CHUMS"? Seeing as it will actually house the "freshmen"...wouldn't it have been a good idea to use "Junior High" in the name? Did we really need administrative time worrying about this? Cardinal Heights sounds like an elderly home or a ghetto....

But...on the plus side...perhaps we could get Chumlee, of the History Channel's "Pawn Stars" fame to come out for the deication...perhaps be the honorary mascot?

From one community resident:
"Did they honestly think that that cutesy name [Cardinal Heights Upper Middle School., aka CHUMS] was a good one to put on the Upper Middle School? "

From another resident:
" I'm sorry; I don't know what your opinion was on that name, and the name (Cardinal Heights) is fine as far as I'm concerned. However, that acronym is just asking for trouble. I'm a bit disappointed that Davidson and some of the others took such a whimsical attitude toward something that may well be a point of ridicule for kids. Who knows, maybe I'm the only one that sees it that way, but it just seems to be a bit risky given how these things go some times. "
...and yet another:
With a bit more levity - a mascot suggestion:
How about Chumley of Tennessee Tuxedo fame?

...and one more?
Or perhaps [getting Nickelodeon to pop for] naming rights for the cafeteria at CHUMS?
Name the cafeteria "Chum Bucket" a la Spongebob?

Last but not least
" Sorry to make so much light of a serious issue and potentially treading on your opinion, but I've got to tell you, it's not the best name. Considering the issue there, and perhaps as a way of increasing the "stature of that school", we should consider changing that to Cardinal Heights Junior High School before we print too many things up with the name on it. "
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SP-EYE's 2 cents:
Perhaps its just too close to that awful 80's sci-fi movie, C.H.U.D. ("Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dweller")....Cannabilistic Humanoid Upper Middle Schoolers???? Seriously board members...we get the almost-too-cute "CHUMS" acronym....but you DO realize that the world has changed ...don't you? I mean...chums, meaning "buddies" is a tad anachronistic, dontcha think? And you DO realize that CHUM also is the word used for fish guts used to draw sharks...right? We don't even have the chutzpah to print it here...but you might wanna also see how the word "CHUM" is defined/used in street slang according to the [word of warning to the faint of heart or those easily offended] Urban Dictionary. Newsflash...that's something the kids use all the time. We hope you're absitively, posolutely certain you want to go with that name before you spend a fortune printing signs and t-shirts, and whatever.

Operation "End Around": 1st Impressions, 2nd Thoughts, 3rd Degree

The more we think about Stackhouse's little shenanigans--we'll call it "Operation End Around", the more we think it stinks on multiple levels.

SP-EYE post: "Referendum shenanigans Afoot?"

Stackhouse's plan
It's pretty clear that Stackhouse is interested in emptying the piggy bank of leftover funds from the referendum. Assuming that's not enough, he's looking at a one-time special levy to fund his soggy reverie. How much is he looking for? Well...his plan for a $12.00 tax on a 200,000 home translates to a mill rate of $0.06. 6 cents....that's pretty harmless...right? Wouldn't you pay 6 cents per $1,000 for football? Hmmm? Assuming an equalized value of $3.9B for the tax base, a mill rate of 6 cents translates to about $235,000.

Board of 7 or Board of 1?
Stackhouse's e-mail is clearly directing Culver to take some action. Giving Stackhouse the benefit of the doubt, SOME of what he asks for could be considered an "Open Records request", which can be made by any citizen. Of course, what he's asking for could involve a lot of paper...and we don't see any offer to PAY for his request, as other citizens are required to do.

On the other hand, unless legal opinions already exist, Stackhouse is requesting that the district consult with legal...at a cost to the taxpayer of $250 per hour. Certainly, a legal opinion must be sought regarding whether or not the district MUST use Findorff.

More importantly, shouldn't such a directive come for the board itself? Wouldn't this have to be a specific board agenda item...open for discussion...and then a vote by the SEVEN board members regarding whether or not to direct administration to do anything?

Culver covers his bee-you-tox
You gotta love Culver's "Get Out of Jail Free" respond. By copying all 7 board members on his directive to McLowry/Frei, he is essentially telling the board to "speak now or forever hold your peace". That is...if no board member says, "Wait a minute, Tim...", and only LATER questions Culver....then Culver can say..."but...but... I alerted you to what I was doing. If only you had said something, I would have stopped." This is the old "It's better to beg forgiveness than to ask permission" philosophy.

But...he's brilliant...because NONE of the board members will actually take issue with this and call Culver out on it. And Culver knows it.

Culver SHOULD have said, "Mr. Stackhouse, I'd be happy to do what you request, but I really need you to get this on the board agenda and have the full board make a motion".

Conflict of Interest?

"I have been approached by the football community to
spearhead a campaign to upgrade the facilities for Ashley field. "
--(Schoolboard member) David Stackhouse

Whoa! Since ultimately Stackhouse, as a board member will vote on this issue, won't he have to recuse himself?

" [The football community] will present at Monday's board meeting and I will follow-up with
a situation report for the April 26 meeting. "
--(Schoolboard member) David Stackhouse

Isn't this a tad presumptuous? We all remember board President telling us that the board cannot discuss, respond to, or take any action on anything raised via community resident comments. Yet Stackhouse seems to imply that the board will add this as an agenda item for its April 26th meeting. Oh wait....the board doesn't vote or discuss future agenda items publicly, does it? The board president (which mean Culver) sets the board agenda. Hmmmm.

Seabass, the athletic supporter?
This is "where the rubber meets the road" as Caren Diedrich likes to say. So...will she continue to vote as a fiscal conservative [as she professed during the elections] and vote this down? Will Seabass McCourt, now that he's been re-elected, vote like the budget conscious guy he claims to be? Or like the athletic supporter we all know him to be? Being decidedly sans cojones, we know that Whalen will vote to support Stackhouse's proposal. Hmmm...does Stackhouse have 4 votes?

This just smells increasingly rank the more we think about it.

WKCE - The Flipside of the Coin

Traditionally --religiously, in fact-- people focus on the bright side of the WKCE results, i.e., that percentage of students scoring as either "Proficient" or "Advanced" for a particular subject area. If we're truly concerned about education for every child, however, shouldn't we be taking a walk along the dark side of WKCE? That is, that percentage of students scored as only "Minimally Proficient"?

According to WKCE materials, "Minimal" is described as:
Limited achievement in the content area. Test score shows evidence of major misconceptions or gaps in knowledge and skills tested in the academic content area.

" Minimal Performance: Demonstrates very limited academic knowledge and skills tested on WKCE at that grade level. "
--- http://dpi.wi.gov/oea/pdreading.html

Rose-colored lenses definition
Demonstrates an emerging understanding of the academic content and skills tested on
the WKCE at that grade level.
-- http://dpi.wi.gov/oea/pdf/stprntbrochure.pdf

As a community, however, we need to be concerned not only with the numbers of kids scoring as "Proficient or Advanced", but also those scoring as only "Minimally" Proficient. For these are the kids most at risk. These numbers tell us both the strength of our district in terms of how well we are preparing kids, or how great a challenge we have ahead of us. Since these are numbers for grade 10, we have 2 more years to cultivate these young seedlings.

So...as Jeff Probst woulds say, "Let's get to it".
What follows is a series of 4 tables:

(1) How Sun Prairie ranks against other Dane County districts in terms of PERCENT of kids scoring minimally proficient,

(2)How Sun Prairie ranks against other similar-sized districts in terms of PERCENT of kids scoring minimally proficient,

Then we turn the heat up a notch:

3) How Sun Prairie ranks against other Dane County districts in terms of NUMBER of kids scoring minimally proficent,

(4) How Sun Prairie ranks against other similar-sized districts in terms of NUMBER of kids scoring minimally proficient.

Here we see that SPASD ranks 4th among the 16 Dane County districts in terms of percent of kids scoring only minimally proficient on the WKCE (grade 10, average of all 5 subject areas).

Then you look at the class sizes and say..."Jeez...some of those are pretty small". So, this time, we look at how SPASD ranks when stacked up against the 20 state school districts closest in size in terms of percent of kids scoring only minimally proficient on the WKCE (grade 10, average of all 5 subject areas). Wow...here we continue to rank 4th....but now we have an apples-to-apples comparison. This is good news, folks.

OK....time to start getting beyond the statistics, and into the sociology...the true demographics. Percentages often mean nothing. A 2% minimally proficient score means something very different for a district 10% the size of Sun Prairie. So...it's time to even the odds and bring this analysis down to its root level: How many KIDS are we talking about? Because any kid scoring only minimally proficient in any subject area is a kid to whom we need to reach out. We took some liberty here. In determining the "minimum number of kids at risk", we took a conservative approach and used the maximum number of kids scoring "minimal" in any given subject area. Similarly for the "maximums" we used the sum of all kids scoring minimally proficient in any subject area. Certainly there will be kids that score minimally proficient in more than one subject area...perhaps there are even those who do so in all subject areas. Therefore the true number of kids "at risk" lies somewhere between our minimum and our maximum.

Here we see that SPASD ranks 4th among the 16 Dane County districts in terms of percent of kids scoring only minimally proficient on the WKCE (grade 10, average of all 5 subject areas).

So, this time, we look at how SPASD ranks when stacked up against the 20 state school districts closest in size in terms of percent of kids scoring only minimally proficient on the WKCE (grade 10, average of all 5 subject areas). We remain high (5th) with the apples-to-apples comparison. This is good news, folks. Biut the number of kids potentially at risk is much scarier.

For those of you interested in grade inflation (as we are), we can look at these as very likely indicative of those kids that are in the "sub C" grade level....or D and below. If we consider that for Sun Prairie, that means somewhere between 33 and 125 kids at the grade 10 level, and we extrapolate those numbers across the whole high school, we're looking at somewhere between 132 and 500 kids...or between 8 and 30%. And THAT number seems a little more like the bell curve that Dr. Culver dissed recently.

As educators, parents, and community members, we can't be complacent because of the number of kids that make the honor roll or the number of kids that score as Proficient or Advanced on state tests.

Every kid must count. Let's keep "priority Goal #3 in mind:
Improve and expand learning opportunities so that every graduate is prepared and inspired to successfully and productively pursue any option after high school.

Referendum Shenanigans Afoot?

Such questions!
A school board member SPEARHEADING a campaign to wrestle referendum dollars? Is that something an elected official WHO WILL VOTE ON ANY SUBSEQUENT NMOTION should be doing? Or worse yet...to create ANOTHER referendum? Here we go again...quiet Monday night shenanigans, hoping that only those voices "in the know" and who will support this movement will be in attendance.

Concerned Taxpayer has a valid point. Perhaps it was NOT a good idea in the first place. Why did we build a high school with new sports fields with the intention of playing football on Ashley Field? And more importantly...who declared this recession over with? Are people in any better financial shape to be spending MORE money? And why is it that---without community pressure---the music people would have had to pay 100% of the cost for a concert grand piano, yet Stackhouse wants to spend MORE tax dollars on sports?

It is time to blow the dust and cobwebs off of the mystery behind Ashley field. During the high school planning phases, several times comments from the school board table indicated that, as part of the Asley family agreement, something along the lines of "If the SPASD varsity football does not hold its home games at Ashley Field, then the school district loses the ownership of the land". It's time to tell the truth and tell it publicly. What legal holds are there on Ashley Field?

---

Here is something that needs to be blogged and squashed IMO. The football people made a decision to use Ashley field, and now they want to upgrade it when there is some extra money laying around. There is no way we get that money back just so the players can dress at the stadium. I think the original decision was dumb, but I don't think this is something that we should be dropping $600K+ on!

Concerned Tax Payer
.....................................................
Begin forwarded message:

From: "Tim Culver"
Date: April 10, 2010 8:09:39 AM CDT ......on a Saturday, no less!
Subject: Re: Ashley Field/ Football questions

Phil [Frei] & Jim [McClowry]:
Please prepare the response to David's request. Please put together and deliver your report to him (and the whole Board) by Friday April 16.

Thank you,

Tim

"DAVID STACKHOUSE" 4/9/2010 1:50 PM >>>
Tim, Phil and Jim,

I have been approached by the football community to spearhead a campaign to upgrade the facilities for Ashley field.
They will present at Monday's board meeting and I will follow-up with a situation report for the April 26 meeting.

Information that I am looking for:

Referendum presentation material for the new high school.

Bond counsel's opinion on using referendum dollars for improvements to Ashley Field.

Attendance at home football games for a typical season:
1. Number of paid attendees.
2. Dollar amount of admission receipts.

How much does the district anticipate it will cost annually to transport athletes from the new high school to Ashley field for games?

How much does it cost the district annually for maintenance and preparation at Ashley field?

How much revenue can be generated by a one year levy based on $12 increase to a house valued at $200,000.
I.E.: If a referendum was offered for a one year period that the average house paid $12, how much total dollars would we receive?

On construction at Ashley:
1. If we use referendum dollars, are we locked in to using Findorff?

2. If the funds are generated separately, are we locked in with Findorff or is another contractor acceptable?

I believe I will most likely have additional questions, but this should get me started.

Thanks,
David

No April Fool: We have GOOD News!

Statewide WKCE scores were released this week. Everyone is scrambling to put their best feet forward. Tim Culver has donned his rose colored lenses and is busy as a beaver moving to point out everything that is good about the scores. As with everything else, the not-so-good news is not discussed (well except on this site that is). That's why, when we offer good news, you can take it to the bank.

Apples to Pineapples

How Sun Prairie Compares to Dane County school districts.
Sun Prairie High School (Grade 10) moves up to #2 in Dane County! We slide a bit down to #7 of 16 when grades 4, 8, and 10 are combined, however. While we get a little concerned that the lower grades appear to be slipping, we are excited that the high school is performing so well.

While even Language Arts (!!!) have improved such that 80% are either proficient or advanced, we'd still like to see scores move out of the 80's and into the 90's.





Apples to Apples
How Sun Prairie Compares to similar sized districts.
Here's an analysis you won't see from the district. If you look at ONLY Dane County, there are a number of very small districts. Com paring Sun Prairie to these districts is like comparing apples to pineapples. So SP-EYE wants to know how we stack up against districts of similar size. Sure...Culver will wax philosophically about how we can't compare to these other districts because they don't reflect the same conditions or demographics. Pshaw! You simply cannot compare a district of over 6,000 kids to ones with less than 1,000. Similarly, you can't compare Madison at 24,000+ to SPASD.

So we compared the 10 districts that are just smaller than SPASD and the 10 that are just larger than SPASD.

Surprise! Sun Prairie ranks 4th out of 21 at Grade 10. District-wide, we still rank in the upper one-third at #5 (tie with Wauwatosa). Now that's something to be excited about.

District Perpective
Tim Culver sent this e-mail to District "Key Communicators" this past week. We could not find it on the web site, so we'll just re-print it here.
District E-News to Key Communicators

The 2009 Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Exam (WKCE) results were announced today and again reveal strong academic achievement for students in the Sun Prairie Area School District. Annually, all school districts in the State of Wisconsin administer the WKCE to students in grades 3-8 and grade 10. The tests are administered in November of each year. Individual student results are mailed home early in March and the State of Wisconsin embargoes the release of school, district, and state
summary data in the spring. This year that release date is today, April 7, 2010.

This past November, Sun Prairie administered the WKCE to over 3,300 students in grades 3-8 and grade 10. Students in grades 3-8 and 10 were assessed in reading and math. Students in grades 4, 8, and 10 were also assessed in language arts, science, social studies, and writing.

Even as the student demographics change in the Sun Prairie Area School District, our students continue to perform well above the state averages at all grade levels and in all subjects. Combining all grade levels, 87% of Sun Prairie students are proficient or advanced in reading and 84% are proficient or advanced in math. A great deal of effort will be spent in analyzing these and other assessment data in the months to come. WKCE is just one indicator and a “snapshot in time” of student
achievement.

Attached, you will find additional information and the breakdown of 2009 state, district, and school results.

For further information please contact District Administrator Tim Culver at 834-6502 or Instructional Program Manager of Assessment and Accountability Kris Mueller at 834-6531.

SP-EYE's past Reviews
SP-EYE on 2008-09 WKCE results

SP-EYE on 2007-08 WKCE results

See for yourself the data on DPI's site

Election Aftermath...What Happens Next

Behind Closed Doors: Appliance Fee-ass-co Update

You'll recall that in our last episode, the school board stood firm and voted to retain the appliance fees as previously established.

Weeeelllllllll...it seems that there've been some changes. You didn't hear about them either, did ya? Nope...no discussion from the board table...YET we find that some changes have indeed been made.

SP-EYE sidenote: dontcha just HATE it when the board and the district make a big public fuss of something --usually moving to quickly cover what for many are quite ample derrieres, we might add. They staunchly defend the position du jour and THEN the shenanigans begin. Quietly, behind the comfort of closed doors, they DO take action. You see, while they like to put on a good game face in public, in reality, they don't particularly like to have their drawers a-droopin. Why? cuz inevitably they get made out to look like big sillies. And we can't have that...what with decorum and all.

You remember them buying like $300 of KitKats per year from employees' birthdays? Publicly supported. Privately: that policy has been given the boot. Those silly, inconsistent class supply lists? Gonzo. Pizza? Not being ordered.

Our only question is this: why do they make such an effort to make the citizens complaining about the silliness look silly, when it is the admin that ends up with egg on their faces? That's neither decorum, nor logical, people!

Ok...commercial over...back to the appliance fee-ass-co. But...you guessed it, they did all this stuff outside the public eye. They must enjoy eating crow in private. Of course they wouldn;t have to eat crow if they'd simply learn to say, "You know what? You're right...it's dumb and we're not gonna do it". That Pavlov guy never got the dogs to do that.

Many thanks to the individual who provided this update on the silly appliance fee-assco:

[Administration] have now determined that microwaves and coffee pots are okay...and refrigerators are only going to be $15 [not $30]. Great news, but proves the point that nobody did any kind of research on the true cost of running these appliances...they just grabbed numbers from who knows where. And I would be surprised if they have yet calculated the cost of truly running these appliances. So to get your microwave money refunded, here are all of the hoops you must jump through...(taken from an e-mail sent to all employees):

The following is the text of an e-mail sent out to all staff:

I jusfound out yesterday that we are refunding teachers who paid a microwave appliance fee for this year. This is the procedure that needs to be followed:

1) Teacher will contact School Secretary and ask for a refund

2) School Secretary will make a copy of the personal appliance fee form and give it to the teacher

3) School Secretary will direct the teacher to fill out an expense reimbursement form and attach the copy of the personal appliance fee form to it

4) Completed forms will be sent to Rhonda Page for an account code and payment
**In order to get a refund by April 26th all forms must be turned into Rhonda by Friday April 16th.

So what I would love to see is the actual calculations for the amount of manhours spent on originally collecting the fees, issuing stickers, the cost of the stickers and printing, and now the cost of all of this paperwork...both printing and paper costs, but also manhours spent filing and cutting checks. Not to mention the hours accumulated by all of the teachers having to take time to complete yet MORE paperwork to justify the over abundance of admin and secretaries in the district.

According to ( this website ) ONE compact dorm fridge should cost about $36 to run in a year. Assuming it is used 9.5 months of the year..that would be a pro-rated cost of $28.50. So the fact that the district is charging $15 to break even on energy cost means they did no calculations and this is nothing more than punishment and politics. If energy costs were truly a concern, they would:
a. charge for ALL appliances and not just refrigerators
b. they would have done their homework and calculated the true cost
c. they would also charge employees who work in the office for their extra energy. The offices are ALWAYs warm in the winter and cool in the summer. Ever wonder why?

SP-EYE: What an awesome insider look at more of the silliness. Thanks again for sharing.

Suggested motto for administration:

Learning by Doing: We just make it up as we go along.

Al.... The Tribe Has Spoken

...and the latest school board member voted off the island is....

Al Slane.........1695
Jim McCourt......2343
Caren Diedrich...1988
John Welke........2861

You need to bring up your torch and leave the school board table right away.
Fire represents life. When your fire is out, so are you.

Time To Tally the Votes

It's Time To Vote...

Who will be left without a chair?

Moon shining for McCourt?

Who didn't notice that the moon was quite full this past Tuesday, March 29, 2010.

Is this some celestial prophesy regarding next Tuesday's election?

With the moon at it's peak fullness this Tuesday, that will set the stage for a waning 3/4 ----that's right, 75%---- moon on election night next Tuesday.

Rumors abound that even normally stoic yard gnomes have become crazed with election anticipation. Naughty little yard gnomes.

Could it be a sign that bodes well for our very own 3/4 school board candidate, Jim McCourt? Is it a sign that, like the full moon that will have faded by next Tuesday, Caren Diedrich's tenure will also fade?

We shall see...