Time to Move the Timetable Up for Secure Entrances

The recent horrific event in Connecticut has touched us all.  This time, it was mere babies.  As difficult as it is, we do need to step away from grieving and take this opportunity to ask whether all our schools have secure entrances.

The reality is that two schools remain on the list for modifications to improve security.  For obvious reasons, we'll not identify those schools here.  These modifications are on the schedule for this summer and next.  That's no longer good enough.  The time is now.  Yes, it will cost upwards of $360,000, but the board has to direct administration to either find the money or take it out of fund balance and COMPLETE THESE PROJECTS ASAP.

This is not an expense with which anyone can take issue.  These are our children...our future.

Dear School Board....

Let's make this happen.

Readers Write: How Would SPASD Fare in a Columbine-Like Scenario?

This from a concerned community member in response to a district-wide failure of phone and internet connections during the week of December 21.


"Interesting decision making yesterday...entire district had no phones or internet...some buildings get no cell phone reception...yet there was no thought into what would happen in the event of a major emergency.


What if some crazy lunatic enters a school with a gun?

Can't call out, can't use cell phones, can't e-mail.


That is why [Administration] get the big bucks huh!

Food for thought?

Thank Goodness the SP4K Kids Weren't Affected!

Last Thursday, staff at Rock-A-Bye Child Care Learning Center, one of the sites for Sun Prairie's "SP4K" 4-Year Old Kindergarten Program, found a camera concealed in a staff bathroom.

Luckily, according to the information available, no cameras were found in bathrooms used by children.

A criminal complaint filed on [10-16-09] said a female staffer found the phone on Oct. 8 in the bathroom. The phone was hidden inside a tissue box and it had [the custodian's] name on it and real-time images of the bathroom. A tissue box in another adult bathroom also had a hole cut in it, according to the complaint.

Day care owner Mandy Kuenster said that while the incident is very upsetting, she said children were never in any harm.

-- Channel3000.com

Channel3000.com: Day Care Worker Accused Of Planting Camera In Bathroom - Authorities Say Arrest Warrant Issued

Final Plan for Youth Advocates Goes Before Board Monday

Costs to increase 14.8%

On Monday, August 10, the Administration's' final plan for Youth Advocates instead of Security Guards at the high school will go before a vote of the school board. Wanna bet that the board will vote 7-0 to approve it? We hear Vegas is laying odds of 20-1.

Administration found a group that operates via the United Way that will provide us with two Youth Advocates at a cost of $45,000. At 7 hours per day and a 175-day contract, that works out to $18.37 per hour for each. That's $5.00 more per hour than the $13.27 per hour the Administration planned to pay Youth Advocates hired under Local 60. It's also $2.37 per hour more than we paid the contracted Security Guards. Gee...don't you just wonder why the sudden change of heart and move away from hiring staff? They were so adamant about that in our last episode.

Notably, a large part of the rationale for hiring FTE Youth Advocates as district employees was that the security guards were not authorized to touch any student, making it difficult to quell physical confrontations. But...wait...don't we have the same problem with these contracted "Youth Advocates"?

Read the Situation Report for the 8/10/09 meeting

Board Votes to Hold Off on Cutting Security Guards at the High School

At Monday's board meeting, the school board listened and came to the conclusion that the best decision was to table the Security Guard issue for its Tuesday May 26, 2009 meeting. We appreciate the votes of Jill Camber-Davidson, Caren Diedrich, Al Slane, David Stackhouse, and John Whalen to table the issue. Jim McCourt and Terry Shimek voted against tabling the decision. Do we detect a change in board philosophy? If so, we like what we're seeing! It's not about voting to support or slam what any citizen presents. It's about listening to what's being presented and asking if it makes sense. Then it simply defaults to doing what's right for the community.

To recap, the root issue here was buried underneath the innocuous agenda title, "Youth Advocates Job Description and FTE". [SP-EYE: C'mon....did ANYONE without fore knowledge read this agenda item and realize that it meant no more security guards at the troubled SPHS???] It sure seemed like Administration was playing a clever game of bait and switch wanting us to believe that the agenda item SOLELY involved approving the job description, allowing HR head Annette Mikula to formally negotiate salary with the Local 60 union. David Stackhouse, however, correctly pointed out that never has he seen a case where once a job description was approved, administration did not immediately move to hire.

And that brings us up to the "ulterior motive" behind this agenda item.....remember ulterior motives, Dr. Culver? You should, since you accused a citizen of operating similarly last fall. What could NOT be gleaned from the agenda item was that behind this proposal is the idea to discontinue the employment of two contractor security guards at the high school. Instead, the district plan is to hire two "Youth Advocates" whose role will be more of a counseling, supporting, advising, rapport- development one. Call them walking social workers. It's a Dr. FeelGood, kinder gentler approach. We're just not sure how the emphasis on "Non-violent Crisis Intervention" strategy plays out when one of the frequent "altercations" breaks out at the high school.

Youth Advocate: "Excuse me, kids? Could you please stop altercating?"

Sure...this MIGHT work (emphasis on MIGHT)...but the community has been very concerned about safety at the high school; and, from our conversations, most folks are a little leery about the prospect of success for this change. So...community members...if you care...

...mark your calendars for Tuesday May 26. Please attend the school board meeting and have your vice be heard. If you cant attend, please phone or e-mail (at right) board members with your comments/concerns.

Once again...THANK YOU, school board members (well...the five of you) for seeing the logic in delaying any decision for two weeks. It does no harm to sit back for 2 weeks and think this through carefully before proceeding. The proposal certainly isn't cost neutral...but delaying action doesn't cost you a thing and quite likely buys back a notch or two of community trust and support.

Security Guard ⇒ Youth Advocate

And you thought the age of political correctness was over!

Let the DAMN Meeting Begin
At tomorrow night' s (May 11, 2009) meeting of the School Board (excuse us, it's probably more politically correct to call it the Affirmation of District Administration Management Needs -- or A DAMN! meeting), a seemingly innocuous agenda item appears, entitled " Youth Advocate Job Description and FTE". It's buried down in the meeting agenda---we almost missed it ourselves.

Yet it reflects a fundamental change in the way of handling security at the high school. Something we're all pretty sensitized to. Certainly, change is in order. But this represents a radical change that should NOT be simply rubber stamped into existence. We need to think this one through. A hint of malingering odor is detected from the smell test.

Instead of just forging ahead with a job description at the HR committee...shouldn't the issue be discussed FIRST in public forum by the school board where the public can watch it , attend it, or obtain a video copy?

Once again, this "idea" is a plan that is ready to be rubber stamped, with opportunity for 3 minutes of public input only IF you are savvy and engaged enough to read the meeting agenda and realize that something very important is at stake here.

An audible emission of intestinal gases is still a ...
When we first read this situation report, our first thought was that the parallel here to the world of water treatment is both ironic and comical. Nobody likes to talk about poop. We live in a 'flush and forget' society. What began as Sewage Treatment works has slowly morphed into Wastewater Treatment and even to Water Pollution Control management. There is even one local community that has named its facilities the "Water Recycling Center" . Look...we get that. Totally. But let's do it with a conscious focus and do it with some structure and abide by some rules. Let the public in on exactly what we're doing. Let's give them more than just a slim shot at providing input, and let's tell them exactly what it means in terms of costs. Hey...what do you know? The community might even get on board with the DAMN idea. But if you try to slip one by the goalie...even unintentionally...the reputation of the A DAMN board will only continue to grow.

What's in a Word? Morphing from Security Guard to Youth Advocate
So we start with Security Guard.
Security: means freedom from danger, risk, etc.; safety.
Guard: means to give protection; keep watch; be watchful.

...now consider 'Youth Advocate'
Youth: we get it...it means 'kids"
Advocate: means: one that supports or promotes the interests of another

So, we're transitioning from having trained security guards being watchful over and protecting safety to employees whose role is to support or promote the interests of the kids? Huh? We're all for building rapport with the kids, but security does not equate to social work. Those are two very distinct issues.

Security Guard? Youth Advocate? Social Worker?
Things get more disconcerting when you look at the job description for these "Youth Advocates". Are these "requirements" really in line with what's needed at the high school? Here are just a few tidbits:

• Must have experience in similar backgrounds as the youth who are being served.
• Must have experience in or full understanding of urban cultures, diverse cultures, and/or large high schools.
• Must have knowledge and appreciation for adolescent development and a desire to serve young people.
• Must have completed or willing to be trained in Non-Violent Crisis Intervention.
  

SP-EYE: This seems like pretty specific experience...whose got it? Does that mean that anyone who graduated from like Deerfield High need not apply? And do they have to have a degree? taken a class? in adolescent development? What's that mean? And the only REAL training required is "Non-Violent Crisis Intervention"??? Hello? Have you BEEN to high school lately?

Or, how about this from the Essential Duties And Responsibilities section of the position description. Doesn't this sound more like a Social Worker? If we can get this kind of social work for $13.27/hr....WOW!

• Identifies, monitors, and assists students who may be disengaged from school.
• Meets with students who are chronically late to school.
• Contacts home and/or makes home visits to help identify issues affecting poor attendance.
• Refers students to community agencies or student services as needed.
• Participates in teacher-student, parent-student, and student-student mediation scheduled throughout the day to identify and resolve issues causing disruption within the school and during class time.
• Builds relationships through presence, visibility, and student engagement during non-classroom time at school (before and after school, lunch time).
  

SP-EYE- WOW! And NO social worker training is required? These people can --and are supposed to--conduct home visits, mediation, make referrals to community services? Local 60...are you seeing this? SPEA...isn't this more suited to someone with special licensing or training?

• Develops and maintains an awareness of potential neighborhood rivalries or conflicts, potential gang related issues, and other community issues that may impact schools.
• Intervenes in altercations between students, staff and public as needed to maintain safety and security.

SP-EYE--Ah...the "intervening in altercations" part...that would be the non-violent intervention kind...right? Just speak firmly and logicallylike Spock and they'll stop altercating...right? Or is it a Jedi mind trick kind of thing? Oh...and they have to become knowledgeable in gang activities, too? And we're going to get this for $13.27 per hour????.

What's it going to cost?
The plan is to discontinue the practice of hiring two private contractor security guards. Instead, we'll create two positions, called Youth Advocates, with the funding coming from what historically was used for the security guards.

Let us be the first to state this CLEARLY. Economy bad. Creating positions good. Got that? We like the idea of creating jobs. It's the rest of it that is giving us some heartburn (or was it those peppers in the omelet this morning?).

If one looks at the biweekly check register...one sees that we spend about $2,500-2,600 every 2 weeks. That means about $1270 per week....which translates to about $31.25 per hour. Divide that by 2 security guards, and you get about $16.00 hr that we pay for them. We do NOT pay for benefits. Those are paid out of what we pay the contractor.

The plan (which hasn't been approved by Local 60) is to hire 2 full time (FTE) "Youth Advocates" at a beginning salary of $13.27/hr (again, IF Local 60 agrees). But that doesn't include benefits which typically cost the district (taxpayers) about 50% of salary costs. That means 'bennies' will cost another $6.63 per hr...for a grand total of $19.90/hr. $19.90 per hour X 2 Youth Advocates X 80 hrs per two weeks comes to a cost of $3,184, which represents an increase of 22.5%.

So...let us get this right. The national economy is still faltering, the state budget has gone down the point-of-use waste recycling outlet, and management wants to increase the cost of doing business by 22.5%???? Hold on to that thought while you learn the rest of this scheme.

And if we decide this isn't going to work, we then have to cut positions (people) and then pay unemployment? HELLO! Can you say "TRIAL BASIS"? Did you think to maybe do this as an LTE (no benefits) initially? Those are both fiscally sound procedures for handling untried plans.

---

Dear school board:

Let's put this in simple terms.

Economy bad. Generating jobs, good.
Costing more not so good.
Job descriptions that sound like 'Social Worker' but paid far less not good.
Plan needs more thought and public input.

In other words, and please forgive our concerted tact avoidance, proceeding with an affirmation of the Decorum Maintenance Coordination plan known as "Youth Advocates" without additional public input represents an act of cranial-rectal inversion. The plan is factually unencumbered, and fecally plenary.

Got all that? We now need to proceed expeditiously to conduct an unplanned re-examination of recent food choices.

Love,

SP-EYE