Difference Makers: School Board VP Welke and Police Chief Anhalt

Understandably, our attentions have been diverted to the tragedies which occurred in Boston and Texas over the past week, but we'd be remiss if we didn't highlight this recent action.

In the wake to the Newtown tragedy, school board VP John Welke, who has a law enforcement background linked up with Sun Prairie police chief Pat Anhalt to see what they could do for our community.  The result is a program to offer free gunlocks to community members.  And it doesn't raise your property
taxes.

Sometimes guns are too accessible, and during an emotional upheaval, things can go wrong in a hurry.  Often deadly wrong.  People....please make use of this opportunity.  Keep your guns safe and secure.

If this program saves even one life, it will make it all worthwhile.  Sometimes it's the little things that speak loudest; and this one speaks volumes.

Here's to Mr. Welke and Chief Anhalt for making things happen....for making a difference.

Read the complete letter

Read the complete letter

3 More Years On the Crazy Train

There ain't no gettin' off this crazy train!
This ride will last another 3 years.

It's official:  three school board members's seats are up in April (Caren Diedrich, Steve Schroeder, and John Welke).  They each submitted nomination papers and declarations of candidacy.  No other candidates crawled out of the woodwork.  Not one SPARCle.

That means Mr. Schroeder and Welke can continue to forge a new path for this board and this district; it also means we have another three years of Caren Diedrich's zany comments.

A Ozzy would say,

Mental wounds still screaming 
Driving me insane 
I'm going off the rails on a crazy train 
I'm going off the rails on a crazy train 

I know that things are going wrong for me 
You gotta listen to my words 
Yeah 

...and on the 6th day of Cringe-mas

The hat contains only  few names.  Santa SP-EYE pulled board VP John Welke's name.
What doe Santa have in hi bag of goodies for Mr. Welke?  Well...he's gotta a few things.

First off, Santa has a "Shock Doctor" mouthguard and a Barry Alvarez autographed mini-helmet.   These are reminders that Mr. Welke is serious about holding people accountable and is not afraid to tip even sacred cows.  He's on a mission to right this ship from a whole lot of things that have strayed off the path for far too long.  He boldly --and rightly-- championed (with Jill Camber-Davidson) reducing the ridiculous hockey fees (275% proposed increase to $550).

In addition, he's working to fix the Ashley Field boondoggle legacy left by David Stackhouse, working to fix problems with facility use rental, and has worked to ensure that the Sound of Sun Prairie program can continue to be all it can be.  There are serious weak links there, not the least of which is that SPASD receive a boatload of revenue from DPI because SOSP is considered summer school, yet we cannot seem to make the numbers of registered students add up.  Welke has also expressed concern that the district may be lacking in  documentation required under Title IX.    That is more than a handful, people; and all of these are tough tasks that could get underneath the skin of those involved...you know...the good old boys and gentlemens' quiet agreements.  With Welke, those folks that willfully stray off the beaten path need to understand that they better have helmets on and mouthguards in.

In line with that, Santa also left Mr. Welke with some light reading that defines his tenure on the board:

• Confronting Reality: Doing What Matters to Get Things Right,
• How Did That Happen? (Holding People Accountable for Results the Positive, Principled Way,
• Making Things Right When Things Go Wrong.

Santa wishes Mr. Welke a wonderful 2013 that includes a landslide re-election for a second term.  No board member in our history of the SPASD school board has ever brought forward the number and breadth of Situation Reports as Welke.  THAT is leading by example.

Time to Blow the Ballast Tanks

Time to blow the ballast tanks and resolve the issue
of field and fieldhouse usage for camps without paying.

This one has been dragging for six months now.  It's pretty clear that at the very least, coaches camps for football, and both girls and boys basketball were held this year as they have been in the past.  These camps are not free.  The coaches use school district facilities, allegedly without paying for them as required by board policy KG.

We reviewed district records of checks and deposits for all of 2012 and most of 2011.  We could not find any indication that these "camps" reimbursed the school district for cost of the fields.

Y'all remember how bad this summer was?  By many accounts, the football fields were in severely stressed state, yet the GridIron camp and Joint Sun Prairie-Waunakee football camps (a)bused these fields.  How much damage was done to these fields?

The problem is that we could find no record of any invoice submitted to those running these camps.  Based on cost per athlete and the number of participants, a significant chunk of change was collected.  Where did the money go?  We'd hate to think that a large portion of it goes to lining the pockets of coaches.  There MUST be rules or even law against that!

To his credit, school board VP John Welke has asked the questions, or at least started down the line of questioning, at public meetings.  Yet we've heard not one peep.  In late September, we heard from one of the coaches, who indicated that all coaches were informed of an intent to bill them for field usage.  Did that ever happen?  If not...why not?  Who authorized use of these fields/the fieldhouse without payment as required by Policy KG? In short...

Who ordered the Code Red?

Who ordered the Code Red?

Someone must have said..."hey...no problem...go ahead and use the fields; we'll waive the fee". Right?  hat would clearly be the code red.  But who ordered it? It sure looks like a duck, and seems to quack like a duck.  There are very few individuals with the access to bypass the system and facilitate usage of district fields and facilities at no cost.   Note that we didn't say "authority" to do so, because we can't find any wording in policy KG that gives ANYONE the authority to waive field/facility usage fees.

Meanwhile, we are hearing unconfirmed reports that other groups within the district are being charged for facility usage when Policy KG would make them exempt from paying the fees.  Why would we be charging groups who meet the exemption criteria but NOT charging the groups that do no?  What in the tarnation is going on here?

This issue has been running silent and deep for far too long.  It's time to blow the ballast tanks, get this one to bubble to the surface and answer the burning questions.  Here's hoping that happens soon.

First look at new school board committee structures

Tomorrow evening (November 5), the first meeting of the new school board committees takes place.  The "Planning Committee" will focus on "down the road", both long and short) issues.  This committee is chaired by board VP John Welke.

You'll note a couple of changes with the new structure.  Committees will be larger, as 4 committees become two.  You'll also note that they have added approximate agenda item start times to their meetings.  That's a nice guideline for folks that wish to hear only a specific segment.  It may also help keep the discussion from getting bogged down.

More good things from a very different school board.

Seabass Smoked; Whalen Shock and Awed

This past Monday, the school board meeting opened with officer elections.

Happy Blind-Side, Mr.President
John Whalen, who has presided for the past 3 years, didn't flinch when Tom Weber's name was tossed out along with his own during nominations.  But when the voting came in 4-2 for Weber as President, Whalen couldn't help but speak in his native tongue: body language.  His face contorted as if he was waging an inner skirmish with serious gas.  This was a blindside of monumental proportions that even shocked Jeff Probst.

VP - Whalen withdraws his name
Then came Vice President and there was Whalen's name tossed out along with current Vice-President John Welke and Jill Camber-Davidson.   In a surprise move, Whalen withdrew his name from contention.   Was he taking his basketball and going home after being denied the top dog slot?  The vote came back 4-2 in favor of Welke.  Hmmmm 4-2 again.  Wonder if the same people were the 4 and the 2.

Clerk - Unanimous!
Only one nomination was provided:  Jill Camber-Davidson, and so the vote of 6-0 was not a surprise.

Treasurer - For All the Marbles
This has been Seabass McCourt's sandbox for the past two years.  In a surprise move, only two names were nominated:  newcomer Mike Krachey (who has a financial background)  and John Whalen (who does not).  Hey!  Did someone forget about Seabass?  The first vote came back deadlocked at 3 votes each for Krachey and Whalen.   Hmmmmm did one of the "4" go another way?  Clearly somebody did something unexpected.

On the second ballot, Whalen received 4 votes to Krachey's 2 and became Treasurer.   Does that seem odd only to us?

Deputy Clerk
Two names were tossed out: Caren Diedrich and Mike Krachey.   Diedrich indicated that she did not wish to be Deputy Clerk, so Krachey's position was sealed on a 6-0 vote.

Wow.  Seabass got smoked.  Skunked.  Denied.  Rejected.  Not nominated for ANY position.  Was this a referendum on Seabass's inappropriate stunt at the annual meeting?  Or did these folks know something we did not?

Elementary Space Task Force Launches this Week

(Thursday) Feb 02, 2012 - ELEMENTARY TASK FORCE, 6:00 p.m. 

at the District Office (Room 100), 501 S. Bird St., Sun Prairie. 

Chair: John Welke

A.  Call to Order

Chairperson John Welke will call the meeting to order.

B.  Roll Call

School Board Members - John Welke (Chair), Jill Camber Davidson

Committee Citizen Representatives - Mike Krachey, Steve Schroeder

Community Members - Rick Mealy, Al Slane

Elementary Administrators - Craig Coulthart, Kathi Klaas

---

We're still not certain why this is called the "Elementary" Task Force, because the Ad Hoc Committee's charge is certainly not simple.

But, thanks to school board member John Welke, who brought this task force to fruition, the community will finally have a transparent mechanism to vet out ALL options for dealing with anticipated space needs at the elementary level.  This time, we're not going to consider only building another palace.  This time, ALL options will be explored, vetted and discussed in public.

And that is a good thing.

We look forward to the fruits of this task force.
But the group needs a more fitting moniker, dontcha think?
Elementary Task Force?  Does that really help the community understand the charge of this group?
There's that whole transparency thing again.  This school district needs to do a much better job of clearly communicating what the mission of a committee is and what will be discussed.  How does the public decide whether they wish to attend if they don't know what the meetings are about?

How about "SPACES"
Sun Prairie Assessment of Capacity for Elementary Students

"Our View" In Need of Corrective Lenses

In this week's editorial ( Our View: Finger Pointing) Sun Prairie STAR editor Chris Mertes jumped on the school board for indecision on the Ashley Field project.

• The school board thought the Cardinal Quarterback Club was raising money. 
•  The Quarterback Club found it difficult to raise money for something that had not been approved by the school board. 
•  It’s time for a directive from the Sun Prairie School Board -- one that will be clearly understood not only by everyone who uses the field, but also so the public knows the issue will be put to rest and not simply hanging out there. 

 --Chris Mertes, Sun Prairie STAR editor 

 Perhaps Editor Mertes needs to read his own newspaper .  
A quick look into the archives finds that the STAR reported the following:

June 17, 2010 STAR- "Board authorizes fundraising for Ashley Field project"
 At the Sun Prairie School Board’s Monday, June 14, meeting, the board followed the committee’s recommendation to allow the Quarterback Booster Club for the football program to begin fundraising for the project.


Stackhouse said he wanted to be clear that the improvements to Ashley Field were not going to be just for the football program.


“This is brought forward by the football program, but it’s for all the students,” Stackhouse said. “We want to make this truly a community field. It’s not just for football. It’s for the community.”  
He said soccer, youth football, lacrosse and baseball programs can use the field and benefit from the improvements.


The amount to be fundraised by the Quarterback Club is approximately $839,000. The amount of money the district is being asked to commit is about $475,000.


Stackhouse said the number one priority from the football program is the locker room facilities and then the turf, but “it’s a project that needs to be combined together to get the savings.”


“They’re [the football community] willing to do their part if the district is willing to do their part in all of this,” Stackhouse said. “Essentially, we’re not saying, you’re building locker rooms by approving this motion. This motion is saying go start raising funds, and talk to administration about facts and work on the plan and figure out the district obligation.”


The board approved the motion to allow the Quarterback Club to begin fundraising for the improvements. Diedrich voted against the motion

 9/29/2010 STAR - "FTT to QB Club: 'Step Up To The plate' "
 Committee member John Welke said that the community members he sat nearby at last week's home football game had no idea of any of the proposed improvements.


“The community won't support it if they don't know about it,” Welke said. “I'm not sure what more support they [the Quarterback Club] need. The Quarterback Club should have been at the game with a table saying this is our vision. I love this idea, I love this concept, but somebody has to take the bull by the horns and lead it, and I think that's the Quarterback Club.”


Stackhouse agreed with Welke, adding that the Quarterback Club has to “step up to the plate.”

 3/24/11 STAR-
The board voted unanimously to approve the lowest bid for the architect work at Ashley Field and for the FTT Committee to establish the priorities for the Ashley Field project. The estimated cost for the architect fees for conceptual drawings of the locker room facility upgrades at Ashley Field is about $4,500. Diedrich did not vote, as she stepped away from the board table before the vote.

SP-EYE Level View
While we're not usually the biggest cheer squad for the school board, the school board has been abundantly clear regarding the "Ashley Field Project"--as reported by Mertes' own staff reporters.  Over 18 months ago, authorization to conduct fundraising was granted.  The school board paid $4,500 for architect work on the project. The Sun Prairie Cardinals Quarterback Club has done nothing.


School Board meeting minutes and STAR online history clearly indicate that the majority of funding for this project has always rested squarely on the community. It wasn't the school board that said, "Hey, let's spend some money and re-tool Ashley Field".  The "football program", with former board member David Stackhouse as its spokesperson, came forward with the idea.  And notably, they came forward only AFTER discussions were held regarding what to do with a surplus of $1.2M in referendum dollars.  It sure looks like people pushing for the project are only interested if the taxpayers fund it and they don't have to lift a finger.


Sure, the project price tag has increased, but that doesn't mean that the tax payers need to take up the slack...or all of it.  No one ever said this all falls on the shoulders of the Quarterback club, as the goal was to make Ashley accessible by many sport teams.  But the Quarterback club needed to...well...quarterback the effort.  Sadly the Quarterback Club's "quarterbacking" skills seem more Ryan Leaf than Tom Brady.  


Coach Hamilton very quietly and pointedly spearheaded a hugely successful effort to upgrade Summit Field, raising over $300,000.  And he represents only the baseball program.  We always hear about "Sun Prairie" football.  Well, they're not making any noise on this effort.  And imagine what they could accomplish if they worked with the soccer program, the lacrosse program, the Sound of Sun Prairie...just to name a few.


But they've done nothing in 18 months.  No one even attends meetings when Ashley is being discussed. Even the agricultural program had students and supporters present when the greenhouse was being discussed.  And they raised more than the vaunted football folks.


If you ask us...the board needs to halt any discussions regarding Ashley Field upgrades until someone starts waving a pretty substantial check...or a lengthy list of funding commitments.

Culver Gets His 2%

We grow weary of McCourt's antics 

On Monday, the school board voted to grant District Administrator Tim Culver a 2% pay raise.  The board vote was 6-1, with John Welke the lone "NO" vote.  Welke offered no comments to explain his position, but did he really need to? Welke has steadfastly spoken from the big table that the budget is too much of a hit on a struggling community.  People in Culver's tax bracket are the least in need of such a pay raise.

Our hat's off to Welke for standin' tall in the saddle.  It's tough to be the lone ranger when you have Caren Diedrich gushing over Culver, and Jim McCourt serving as his personal cheerleader.

While on the subject of McCourt....when is someone going to say something about McCourt's class-less body language at the board table.  If anyone says something contrary to McCourt's personal feelings/opinion, he flops, makes noises of disgust, and rolls his eyes.  Does he realize that the cameras are sound sensitive and often pick this up?

McCourt's behavior at meetings?   Check!

Bad form, Jim.

The Other Side of the Fence - Climate Change Hitting Sun Prairie?

Has anyone else noticed that over the past year or so, our school board is slowly showing signs of reality? There has been a subtle shift, starting with the spring 2010 election. We've gone from a 7-0 board of rubber stampers, who simply smile for the camera, speak in superlatives, and bow to each and every desire of Dr. Culver and his Administration.

Over time, however, we've seen more and more split votes. Recently, we've seen a spate of 4-3 votes coming down on the side that the majority of the community supports. Is this the new norm? Unfortunately, when the vote is 4-3, SOMEONE needs to be the swing vote. That individual rides the fence until forced to commit to one side or the other. Our fence sitter is none other than Terry Shimek. The swing vote holder becomes the most powerful individual on a split board. One side or another may try to sway them outside of the public eye. Anyone wonder how many calls on Shimek's cellphone have come from Whalen or McCourt recently?

Shimek represents the swing vote because he has had such a fascination for waffles over the past year. Listen to him during board discussion and he leans one direction, only to inevitably vote the opposite. He could play Harvey Dent in the next Batman film. Shimek claims to be a fiscal conservative and for the most part poses logical questions in response to budget initiatives. What we need to figure out is how to keep him on that track.

Case in Point: The Human Resources Specialist position
Shimek waffled quite a bit during the lengthy discussion phase(s) of this issue. When pressed, he voted in favor of staying a vote. Ultimately, however, when John Welke made the motion heard round the district, Shimek was all in.

This past week, however, we learned that the district believed that even though they have decided not to fill the Human Resources position, they still get to keep--and spend-- the $75,000 earmarked for the position ion the 2011-12 budget. Excuse us! But what part of "NO NEW MONEY" did Culver, Frei, and McCourt not understand?

Motion & Voting

Hire up to 1.0 FTE, 260 days per year, Human Relations and Recruitment Specialist as soon as practical using the approved job description. This position would be a "project position" expiring at the end of FY 2012-13 unless specifically reauthorized by the School Board after January 1, 2013. This position would be in the Administrative Support Staff group with a salary not to exceed $55,016 ($26.45 per hour) per school year with funding coming only from grants and/or existing or reallocated administrative or administrative support staff FTE.

Motion by John M Welke, second by Terry Shimek.

Final Resolution: Motion Carried 3-2
Yea: David Stackhouse, John M Welke, Terry Shimek
Nay: Caren Diedrich, John Whalen

Now it sounds as if McCourt and Culver have been plotting to re-consider the position again. Do these people EVER lose graciously? The community heard discussion, and the district made it abundantly clear that they are not willing to sacrifice anything to have this position that is as the top of their want list. Could it be that even THEY don't think that one position is going to solve the cultural disparity in this district? And if they decide they don't want the position, they still want to spend the $75,000!!!! Terry Shimek seemed to be waffling again, as his comments seemed to be moving to support either re-considering the position or allowing the district to spend the $75,000 elsewhere. That's not being fiscally responsible. We've seen over $1M in surplus in each of the past 2 years despite "tight" economic times. No bloodflow has been staunched by belts being overly tightened.

The Rubber Stamp Gang
The "old guard", who've never heard a Culver recommendation they didn't love, consists of Caren Diedrich, John Whalen, and Jim McCourt. These folks so live in fear of being labeled "micro-managers", that they leave everything up to Culver. If he says the district needs it, they're conductors on his train. They seem to believe that if they do not vote "YES" in support of every district desire, that quality of education in Sun Prairie will shrivel like....like...a raisin.

The Voices of Reason
Then we have the "new blood", consisting of Jill Camber Davidson, John Welke, and now Tom Weber. These people LISTEN to the community, carefully WEIGHT the benefits of any district request against the costs of such a move, without compromising the quality of education provided.

The Man in the Middle
That leaves Mr. Shimek. It's gotta be painful straddling the fence like that. Where will he come down?

The Motion Heard 'Round the District

At last Monday night's school board meeting, the Minority Recruitment HR position came before the board for the umpteenth time.  Each time, a decision has been made not to fund the position.  Back in February, the position was about to die, when a Hail Mary move was made to postpone a decision until more information was available on the 2011-12 budget (a good call).  That motion was split with Camber-Davidson, Shimek, Stackhouse, and Welke voting to table and Diedrich/McCourt/Whalen voting against (wanted to move forward to hire).


So here we were in the bottom of the 9th with 2 outs (Camber-Davidson and McCourt were absent).  Would Charlie Waffles make an appearance and vote to approve the position?
>
Instead, right out of the gate, board member John Welke asked board president if he was planning to summarize the issue.  If not, Welke added, he had a motion to make.  Whalen invited Welke to proceed and make his motion.  And that's when the game changed.

Motion

Hire up to 1.0 FTE, 260 days per year, Human Relations and Recruitment Specialist as soon as practical using the approved job description. This position would be a "project position" expiring at the end of FY 2012-13 unless specifically reauthorized by the School Board after January 1, 2013. This position would be in the Administrative Support Staff group with a salary not to exceed $55,016 ($26.45 per hour) per school year with funding coming only from grants and/or existing or reallocated administrative or administrative support staff FTE.

Motion by John M Welke, second by Terry Shimek.

Tim Culver about fell out of his chair. "Are you telling us to eliminate one of these vacancies [Spec. Ed. Program Manager, Admin.  Assistant]?", Culver asked.

Welke responded that his motion did not direct Administration to eliminate anything.  It simply offered a choice to fill the HR position, but to do it within the existing Admin/Admin Support FTE allocations.  It offers the District Office flexibility.  "Everyone needs to tighten their belts", Welke added.

Culver responded, "I'm trying to understand..." and "If Administration decides that they cannot live without filling the two vacancies...".

Dave Stackhouse countered by noting that all administration has agreed that the HR position is a top priority and willing to make cuts to have it.  Stackhouse added that the reason he would be supporting Welke's motion is that he doesn't believe that this one position is enough to make a difference.

John Whalen commented, "I said I was willing to make cuts  [to fill the HR position] but I likely will vote 'No' on this.  I want the position, but I'm not comfortable with the strings attached."

Back to Culver again, " I want to be really clear--you are not directing us to cut an Administrative Support position.  In my mind [hiring the HR position is dead on the vine...but we'll talk about it.  You are taking it out of the [2011-12] budget, even though it fits the board parameters.  It's not about what we want...we just present the need.  I don't want an expectation that this [position] is going to happen."

Diedrich commented that she felt, " ...like I'm on a sinking ship and I have to choose between saving my twin sister or my mother."

Stackhouse called the question.

Motion & Voting

Hire up to 1.0 FTE, 260 days per year, Human Relations and Recruitment Specialist as soon as practical using the approved job description. This position would be a "project position" expiring at the end of FY 2012-13 unless specifically reauthorized by the School Board after January 1, 2013. This position would be in the Administrative Support Staff group with a salary not to exceed $55,016 ($26.45 per hour) per school year with funding coming only from grants and/or existing or reallocated administrative or administrative support staff FTE.

Motion by John M Welke, second by Terry Shimek.

Final Resolution: Motion Carried

Yea: David Stackhouse, John M Welke, Terry Shimek

Nay: Caren Diedrich, John Whalen

The Beauty of Welke's Motion
Welke crafted a motion that addresses all angles of this discussion.  It is taxpayer friendly by not introducing a new $75K position into the budget.  It does not use any SPEA or Local 60 FTE allocations that had been previously discussed as a means to fund it in the current year.  It allows the position to be filled immediately, hopefully taking advantage of this opportunity, with 71 openings to be filled, to increase the diversity of the teaching staff.

It comes with a sunset clause.  If the position is not successful in increasing staff diversity and cultural acceptance within the district, then we are not "stuck" with the position.  Nobody is placed in a difficult role of cutting the very thing we are trying to implement.  If it's not successful, it will not be renewed.  That simple.  At the same time, the motion allows the position to be renewed and made permanent if significant positive impact is observed.

Finally, the motion offers flexibility.  The district has loudly and clearly proclaimed that the position is their top priority.  They have it in their diversity action plan.  It's time for the rubber to hit the road and administration to buck up and make the hard decisions for which they get paid the big bucks.  Big boy (and girl) pants time!

Culver Exposed
It was abundantly clear that Culver wants to both have and eat his cake.  While all along he has emphasized what an important piece of the puzzle this position is, he backpedaled quicker than Darrelle Revis Monday night.  The only way this position would be allowed on Culver Island is if the position came as a NEW position, ADDING to the total Administrative salary pool.

Culver's simple statement, "In my mind [this HR position] is dead on the vine." spoke volumes.
Welke can play with the big dogs!

A good compromise, a good piece of legislation, is like a  good sentence; or a good piece of music. Everybody can recognize it. They say, 'Huh. It works. It makes sense.' 
---Barack Obama 

Budget Session: Which School Board Members Tried to Lower Your Taxes

Referendum Surplus:  (~ $80,000)
John Welke: Other than the money reserved for the greenhouse, we have about $80,000...couldn't that be applied against the debt levy?
Jim "Seabass" McCourt:  I say none [be applied to the debt levy].
John Whalen:  The feedback I got was, "we approved it so spend it all".
John Welke: I wouldn't restrict yourself to a figure of $80,000.  I'd say whatever the surplus is we apply it against the debt levy.  Suggested the board needed to decide whether or not to commit to the greenhouse.

School Board Salaries (Budget calls to re-instate the 5% cut made at the annual meeting last October)
John Welke:  We need to do some more whittling.  I think restoring board stipends would be a mistake; the community was clear.  We should freeze board salaries at 2008-09 levels.

Contracts vs. Budget (Board recently settled with Administrators for a 1% increase; 1% increase in health insurance premium co-pay; 2% increase in dental premium co-pay.  Amount budgeted has not been shared, but word is that the budget planned for a 2.5% increase and NO increases to health/dental premium co-pay.
John Welke: Some contracts have been settled at a savings over what was budgeted; where is that savings?
[Phil Frei:  We haven't made that adjustment yet]

Enrollment (Budget called for 133 new students).  We get about $6,000 in state aid for each new student.  But the accounting is based on a 3-year average, so "new" students count only 1/3.    
John Welke:  asked where we are at with enrollments and how that factors into the budget.
Phil Frei:  As of today the count is at +291 students, but we don't know yet how many won't show up.
Welke: Are there any proactive efforts we can take to identify those that might be leaving the district?

SP-EYE note:  if the number stands at 291, that means the state aid revenue increases by approximately $300-$325,000.  IF the new students do not require hiring any additional positions, the tax levy COULD be reduced by that amount.

$1.3M Surplus from 2009-10
John Welke:  When are we going to see where we saved the money?  Can we apply some of the surplus against the tax levy?
Jim McCourt:  Proposed using $500K of the surplus to apply against the tax levy and $200K for property tax chargebacks.
John Whalen:  "My thought as well...the message was loud and clear that people want something from fund balance".

Attendance at State School Board Conference (Budgeted amount ~ $4500)
Jim McCourt:  I would suggest we not attend the conference; cut $4500.
David Stackhouse: I disagree with taking the school board budget for the state conference out.
John Whalen:  I agree [with Stackhouse]

SP-EYE note:  Hmmm...maybe Stackhouse just liked the looks of those sea bass dinners that McCourt had.

Chamber of Commerce Membership (~$1300)
John Welke:  Any thoughts on that Tim [Culver]?
Culver:  The chamber is a little disappointed.  It's an opportunity to work with the business community.
Welke:  We can still work with them...we don't have to be a member...right?
Decision: Postpone for input from Terry Shimek, the Chamber liaison.

SP-EYE note:  What's the point?  Shimek will probably find a reason to abstain from any vote.

Early estimate of the 2011-12 budget picture
Caren Diedrich:  Phil, do you have an inkling of what the tax levy for 2011-12 might be?
Phil Frei: "It can't be good given the state budget picture".

Legal Representation at Expulsion Hearings
Caren Diedrich:  If we're still looking at reductions, we've had about 30 expulsion hearings in the past 2 years.  Do we really need to involve an attorney at those hearings?

National Travel Budget ($15,000)
John Welke:  $15K for national travel...what would that be for?
Phil Frei: 2 board members used to go to the national school board conference; the national Math conference.
Welke:  If we don't attend the state school board conference, is there really value in attending at the national level?  I'd be in favor of at least reducing the budget by the amount for board members.
John Whalen:  I'd rather set some $$ than no $$.
Jim McCourt: I don't want to see us fall beyond by not attending [and catching on to the latest information].

Substitute Teachers
Caren Diedrich:  Administration should give a little more scrutiny to when we need substitute teachers.  At the high school level...send them to study hall.

Staff Development [Budgeted $20,000]  Curriculum Development [Budgeted $10,000]
John Welke:  Is there any opportunity there [to reduce those budget items] without directly impacting students?

Building and Department budgets [restored 5% budget cut, costing ~ $200K]
John Welke:  How much of that $200K would go directly to teachers and their classrooms? [about 50%]
Welke:  Instead of restoring the full 5%, could we restore 2-3% [of non-school budgets]
Welke:  I'm nervous about restoring too much too fast.  What if property values [equalized value] drops by 1% instead of being flat as budgeted?

Purchasing
Jill Camber-Davidson:  Is there anything we can do with purchasing, for example buying at Office Depot [where we have a purchase contract discount] rather than Walmart?
....................................................
So...when push comes to shove...how did your duly elected representatives try to help you out? The tally:
John Welke: Identified 9 budget line items ripe for reduction (didn't get much support).
Caren Diedrich: Raised 3 budget areas that could be targeted for cuts...but most were pretty out there.
Jill Camber-Davidson: Not very vocal.  Only spoke about one area to make reductions.
Jim McCourt: Net Zero.  Wanted to make 2 cuts, but voiced opposition to 2 others.
Terry Shimek:  Net Zero...because he wasn't there.
David Stackhouse:  Minus 1. Not very vocal.  Did not support cutting school board budget to attend state conference....which we find intersting since, based on "policy", he wouldn't be eligible to attend.
John Whalen:  Net Minus 1.5.  Supported 1 reduction, opposed 2 others.  On a 3rd we gave him only half (negative credit) for wanting to spend "some".

All in all, not much was accomplished because no votes were taken.  It's really not clear what impact this session had on the budget.  The two things that were clear: (1) the tax levy will be reduced by $500K out of the $1.3M surplus, and (2) John Welke was the only board member targeting areas for budget reductions.  And all he spoke about were administrative areas that do not affect the education of our kids.

Cut the Budget Fluff...NOT Safety

Newly elected school board member John Welke will attempt to get at least three other board members to see reason at tomorrow night's meeting. We know...fat chance..right? But we appreciate that he's making the effort. That's more than can be said for other board members.

While other board members are desperately seeking ways to spend more money on athletic fields, Welke's message is a simple one: Safety first. Those among you with kids -or friends/neighbors with kids-- in the high school or upper middle school know that that one of the dark, scary secrets is that Sun Prairie High is no Beverly Hills 90210. Adding fuel to the already smoldering fire within is that next fall, high school freshman will be situated in the new "CHUMS", while grades 8-10 will go on to the new high school. Including the "Prairie Phoenix Academy (SOAR) alternative high school, that means THREE buildings for ONE Police Liaison Officer to monitor. Let's not even talk about the two middle schools.

The board already approved adding Youth Advocates numbers 3 and 4 for the upcoming school year, so clearly they see the need for increased monitoring and involvement. Youth Advocates are nice. They represent the touchy feely, kinder, gentler approach to dealing with what can frequently be a powder keg of young adolescent emotions. But they cannot ever be a police presence, and sometimes we need that. Today's schools are not the schools of the 60's or 70's. Times have changed.

Welke is right on. The priority should have been hiring a 2nd PLO over ANOTHER Assistant Principal. The cost of a 2nd PLO is about $60K, about half the cost of the assistant principal. The district has already announced unexpected savings from increase in SAGE class sizes of $200K. The board has only quietly begun discussing raises for administrators. An expected 3.8% raise will cost the district--and taxpayers-- about $100K.

Bottom line people...would you rather spend $100K (further) lining the pockets of (already) overpaid Administrators? Or would you rather spend only $60K NOW to ensure the safety of our kids? And, unlike the administrator raises, which only cost us more each year as they in turn get "raised", the district has already committed to adding the 2nd PLO NEXT year. So all Welke is talking about is a one-time $60K investment to bridge the gap.

Makes perfect sense. No wonder why the other 6 board members don't get it.

Welke Recommends Adding a 2nd Police Liaison Officer for THIS year (2010-11)

In his situation report available on BoardDocs, Welke recommends:

For the reasons cited above I am recommending that the School Board:

A) Approve the 2nd SPLO position for the 2010-11 school year and use SAGE program savings to fund the position.

B) Direct administration to write a letter of intent to the City of Sun Prairie Police Department indicating the SPASD’s desire to add a second School Police Liaison Officer by the beginning of school in the 2010-2011 school year (i.e., after July 1, 2010) so they can consider how to plan for their portion of the budget for this position.

C) Direct Administration to continue to seek out and apply for grants that may offset the costs of the SPLOs.

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

Excerpts from SP STAR 5-26-10 "City, SPASD discuss ways to cooperate

The liaison officer interfaces with prevention and social services and is proactive to prevent violence. Wilkinson is responsible for working with staff at the high school, both middle schools and the alternative learning center in the former junior high.

“Our way of thinking is that when the new school opens, [he will be responsible for] five buildings,” [Police Chief] Anhalt said.

Beyond the additional responsibility, the SPPD favors it because of community priorities. Anhalt said he is asked constantly in the community about the schools, drugs and gangs.
“I get a sense this is a priority for the community,” Anhalt said. He said he also believes it is a great place to devote more resources because the officer provides prevention. The chief said he also support it because it fits with the mission of SPPD and that a second liaison officer is a big part of that.

“What [Police Liaison Officer Wilkinson] Jack does so well is he really builds those positive relationships with kids,” [Sun Prairie High Principal Lisa] Heipp said. Wilkinson is in the school during lunches, and is visible with kids to build positive connections.
“He is actually that supportive person who can help problem-solve with kids,” Heipp said. But when Wilkinson is spread so thin, the officer turns into reactive position.
“The more area he has to cover,” Heipp added, “the less powerful that proactive presence is.”
Board members and District Administrator Tim Culver reiterated the previous discussions about the position, which was essentially that the board has planned to add the second liaison officer for the 2011-12 school year.

New board member John Welke disagreed, saying the district needs to hire another officer. “I’m very concerned about how watered down . . . that’s going to get,” Welke said.

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

Quotable Quotes

[Deputy District Administrator and Business Manager Phil Frei] "... the board voted to forego adding a second police liaison officer for the 2010-11 school year due to budget concerns."

--Phil Frei, Budget Hearing May 20, 2010

“It’s a lot of money for the second liaison officer, know we’re trying to get it under a grant, but long term, I don’t think we need a second officer.”
--former board member Al Slane (4-12-10 School Board meeting)

“Youth advocates great, but liaison officer I’m not totally convinced. That’s a bigger price tag.”
--Board member Jim McCourt (4-12-10 School Board meeting)

“[the district should go a year without the officer first to see if it is really necessary.] With the youth advocates, we might not have that need,”
---Board member Terry Shimek (4-12-10 School Board meeting)

[ the board has been asked for years for a second liaison officer and] “we’ve always said no. [ the message the board should send the city is that they’ll go without a second liaison for 2010-11, and then see if a second officer is needed. ]”
--Board member David Stackhouse (4-12-10 School Board meeting)

The board approved the letter of intent for a second police liaison officer for the 2011-12 school year 5-2. Shimek and Slane voted against it.

Election Aftermath...What Happens Next

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.

Candidate Wordles

They're called "tag clouds". The theory is that they can give a good representation of what someone is all about. Or ....at least...provide some interesting insight...kind of a "come inside my mind".

How they work
The more frequently a word is spoken (printed) the greater that word's size appears in the 'tag cloud'. What one can glean from that is that the larger the word, the more importance it holds for the speaker.

How we did it
We took candidate answers to questions posed by the STAR, the Isthmus/League of Women Voters, and SP-EYE. Obviously, since Diedrich and McCourt refused to respond to the latter two, we had less to work with. So...keep that in mind.

We also removed any references to other candidates (admittedly, it was kind of creepy that Diedrich and McCourt must have frequently referred to one another....make of that what you will).

Finally, we removed the words "school, schools, and board" because they kept popping up.

What was left, we found...well...interesting. Here they are...

ok...so maybe McCourt never really said "seabass". How did that get in there!

Not ONE Thin Dime...

Last Monday the school board played their own version of the once popular gameshow "Supermarket Sweep". This was more like "Referendum Sweep". As reported previously, just shy of $1.2 MILLION dollars was left after all construction was completed and we took over ownership of the $100M new high school, pool, and conversion of the existing high school to an upper middle school for grades 8 and 9.

Given the demeanor of taxpayers who came out in droves to the annual meeting last year, you might think our school board became educated enough to "throw 'em a bone" and return some of the surplus.

Not happening.

In fact, the only non-incumbent candidate for election to the school board next Tuesday, John Welke, has made a case for returning SOME of the surplus funds to the taxpayer. OK...Al Slane has more quietly discussed the idea...but no one heard ANYTHING about giving any back to the taxpayers last Monday night.

Of course, the board will tell you that it's not a good thing to do because it cuts your taxes by only pennies. What they don't tell you is that is we put some of that $330,000 "reserve fund" against debt services, we would reduce 20 YEARS of interest. And that, folks, matters.

Endorsements Are All The Rage...

Yep...it's that time .... anyone who's anyone is handing out endorsements.
Well....maybe it's time that SP-EYE got in the game.

Let's start with a summary look at the candidates...

John Welke
John made a more than respectable run as a write-in candidate last year. Since then, he's kicked it into overdrive. He secured a position as citizen representative on the school board's FT&T Committee, and presented more situation reports than any board member in the past 3 years. This is a guy that not only wants to TALK about the issues affecting Sun Prairie, but also DO something. What he doesn't puff his chest out about is even more credit-worthy. He IS involved in the schools as a WATCHDOG and with the community through youth ministries. In addition, his law enforcement background makes him a top-shelf candidate that is beyond reproach. He's clearly a proactive guy vying to change the operating philosophy of a very reactive board. Welke will demand accountability from district administration and will speak loudly and clearly for board transparency and being good stewards of our tax dollars.

Al Slane
SP-EYE has had a "Love-Like-Wanta Smack Him Upside the Head" thing going with ole Albert. There are many times when Al has stepped up to the plate, and a few others where we want to throttle him--figuratively speaking, of course. Mr. Slane took a brief vacation a few weeks back--first in some time, we understand--and he seems to have come back all re-energized like a US Cellular battery swap. Subsequently, we like what we have seen. The fact that he and his ideas are not getting a lot of love from fellow board members perhaps underscores the merits of his ideas. They want the status quo...and Al seems to be stepping out from their shadows. Good for him. We are very hopeful for Al's future, but need to see a little more from him in terms of making sure that things get on the table and discussed.

Caren Diedrich
When she's not sitting at the board table, Caren is a genuinely likable woman. Unfortunately, when she IS at the board table, the Koolaid flows mightily through her veins. On the one hand, we like that she speaks her mind freely...rather than some other board members that just look at what the majority does and then echo that sentiment. On the other hand, a lot of what she says is really out there. Or...if things don't go her way, she gets a little bit pouty with a "I'm going to take my basketball and go home" 'tude. Case in point the vote this past week regarding the piano. Seeing the other 6 had voted to fund a piano (which she did not favor), Diedrich's response, when called for vote, was , "It doesn't matter...I'm not going to vote". We also have a bit of a problem with her recent statements that she and the board "shut off certain community members when they get up to speak". You may not like their message, Caren, but they ARE community residents and you OWE them your attention. Ms. Diedrich also did not provide any response to questionnaires provided by both SP-EYE and The Isthmus/Dane Co. League of Women Voters. That indicates either a sense of entitlement, or less than valiant effort to be reelected. Neither is good. Finally...we think 12 years of one person's opinion on ANY board is enough.

Jim McCourt
It's abundantly clear that Mr. McCourt would much prefer to be either dining on sea bass or working on his latest business project than putting in even a half-hearted effort on the school board. He misses too many meetings (more than 25%) without a real reason. He's been absent for some of the biggest issues taken up by the board. We simply have too many significant issues to resolve in the district to continue to accept a board member that can, at best, offer only 3/4 of his attention. Like Ms. Diedrich, McCourt also did not provide any response to questionnaires provided by both SP-EYE and The Isthmus/Dane Co. League of Women Voters. He is also is quoted to have been very lukewarm about even running for re-election. He clearly is not actively campaigning in any way. Actually, only Welke is showing any real interest in running for the position. Perhaps all 3 incumbents are running on a sense of entitlement. This is not a guy that is serious about the school board...so why should we seriously consider him as a candidate?

...and the vote goes to...
Whatever you do, cast a vote for John Welke. This board needs change, and Welke has proven that he's a leader that can effect positive change within the district.

IF YOU WANT TO SEND A MESSAGE LOUDLY & CLEARLY:
Vote John Welke
Write-In: Al Borland
Write-In: Jill Taylor

Which ONE Incumbent Deserves your vote?
Al Slane clearly and distinctly has earned another kick at the cat. He's only had a year, and has shown the most growth as a board member. Toss Albert a bone, but either leave that last space blank...or better yet...cast your 3rd vote for Al Borland or Jill Taylor. You know those two are not afraid to say, "I don't think so, Tim!"

SP-EYE's ballot
We're sending a message to the board. We're afraid the board might have forgotten last fall and the fact that WE elect THEM to represent US. We think ole' Al(bert) Slane will be just fine without our vote. Unlike the board, SP-EYE has faith that the community is far smarter than the board gives them credit for, and we're sure the community knows that Al Slane is worth saving.

School Board Candidate Questions - Their Answers

...well...half the candidates responded, anyway.

Frankly, it came as no surprise to us that we didn't receive responses from Caren Diedrich or Jim (Seabass) McCourt. Ms. Diedrich even said quite clearly recently (on a Talk of the Town candidates segment) that "we" [the board] ignore certain community members. She also says she doesn't "do e-mail", yet we caught her publicly state that she sent e-mails to state representatives regarding school funding. Hmmmm.

As for Seabass....well...he's probably busy setting up his business. Heck...if I guy cant even make more than 2-3 out of every 4 school board meetings, how can we expect him to have time for trivial matters such as this...right?

YOU be the judge, people. And judge with your vote on April 6th. Which candidate(s) will best serve us --you--- for the next 3 years?

Besides...we figured you needed a break from all the girls basketball sappy crappy.

2010 SP-EYE School Board Candidate Questions and Answers

1. Please assign the school board a letter grade for its efforts in Community Engagement. Discuss the rationale for awarding that grade.

Al Slane: Grade: B-

The Board has made some strides since having the engagement task force, but has failed to make enough progress on the items that we took away from that process. I think we have done a better job of getting and listening to input as well as getting information out to the public. One issue is people are busy and don't tend to get involved in yet another activity unless there is an issue that directly affects them. When we talk about changing class size or dropping HS electives, people come out of the woodwork. One good thing that came from last years annual meeting and the cost cutting, is more people realize they need to be involved and be informed about what is going on. The Board can do a better job of keeping everyone involved.

John Welke: Grade: D
The only community engagement activity the board is involved with are reactive activities such as returning phone calls and emails and listening to district residents concerns at school board meetings. I believe that the board knows that this is a weakness for because in 2008 they authorized a group of community members to form the Community Engagement Task Force (CETF). The CETF was charged with making recommendations to the board on ways to increase the communication between the school board and the community. After a number of meetings and brain storming sessions the CETF made 6 recommendations to the school board that they thought would increase communication between the board and the community. Unfortunately, to date the board has not implemented any of the 6 recommendations. Normally I would give the board a “C” for at least being accessible to the public via phone and email but I cannot ignore the fact that they went to the extent of asking the CETF to give them ideas to increase community engagement and have not implemented any of their recommendation in the last 17 months. For that I give the school board below average grade of “D”.

Caren Diedrich: Did Not Respond

Jim McCourt: Did Not Respond
____________________________________________
2. If it were solely your decision (i.e., not a board of 7), what would your ideas be to address the growing socioeconomic diversity inequity in our elementary schools?

Al Slane:
I don't pretend to have the answer, but I think we need to be looking at how we address this issue as it continues to spread across the district. First we need to decide if SAGE is the answer or not. If it is, how do we maximize its benefits, since we can only have two SAGE schools. If it is not the answer, how do we restructure things to get the best outcome for all of the kids.

We also need to consider how inequity is creeping into the schools due to the ability of different parent groups to raise more or less money, and the fact that some schools are new. Equity is considered as items are updated, but we may need to be a little more creative in funding of school budgets to make sure things remain equitable.

John Welke:
To best address socio-economic disparity one must understand that there are short term and long term ways to address this issue.
Short Term: For the short term there are programs such as SAGE (Student Achievement Guaranteed in Excellence) and Schools of Hope that are designed to address schools with a high poverty rate and lower student achievement. Student achievement should be actively monitored and the staff and administration in those schools should be regularly consulted to see if there are any resources above and beyond the norm that the State or School District should be providing these schools to level the educational playing field.
Long Term: Several years ago the school board attempted to adjust the socio-economic imbalance between elementary schools during the redistricting process to populate Creekside Elementary. At the time the Board ignored the recommendations from the Boundary Task Force and the community and came up with their own boundary changes that they argued were to make long term socio-economic changes to balance out students of poverty. This process was flawed from the beginning because there were no clear objectives and the board rushed to make a decisions with unreliable information. Now the elementary schools are in a worse imbalance than before the boundary changes.

Looking ahead and working proactively, Elementary School number 8 will likely be needed for the 2014-15 school year which is not that far off. If balancing socio-economics at a time that there is already going to be boundary changes I would begin work immediately to identify the areas that were flawed in the last boundary change process. I would work towards identifying primary and secondary objectives for the next boundary change. I would have the district administration begin assembling information so that the board will get the most current information by which to make a well informed decisions. Perhaps the most critical piece of this preparation process would be to begin communicating with students, parents and community members that a boundary change is on the not-to-far horizon so that they can prepare for potential changes.

Caren Diedrich: Did Not Respond

Jim McCourt: Did Not Respond
__________________________________________
3. As we know, hindsight is 20:20. Look back on the past 3 years, tell us 3 things that the school board could/should have done differently.

Al Slane:
Unfortunately, not much hindsight is needed to know the previous boundary changes were not handled well. There are always unhappy people when boundaries are changed no matter how good a job is done, but the previous changes were handled so poorly, that we split up the community. Moving forward, there needs to be more of a process instead of making quick decisions because we are out of time.The pool was not treated as a first class citizen when it was forced to be a separate question on the last referendum. By doing so, it was never fully integrated into the high school, and we are now forced to add a pool hallway after it is completed in order to complete the task.

The lack of a football stadium at the new high school is another cost cutting decision, that with hindsight, appears to probably be the wrong decision (home games become away games at Ashley Field because there is no locker room facility at Ashley). Moving forward we will have to live with the decision until another solution presents itself.

John Welke:
The three things that the school board should have done differently over the last three years are:
1. Ensured competitive bidding for the architectural work on the New High School, pool and remodel of the “Upper Middle School”. For some reason the school board deemed the architect that was used was a “sole source provider” and did not utilize a competitive bidding process. This was a lost opportunity to potentially save taxpayers’ dollars.

2. Increased community engagement. In 2008 the Community Engagement Task Force (CETF) gave the school board 6 recommendations to increase community engagement. Unfortunately none of the 6 primary recommendations were implemented by the Board. The 6 recommendations from the CETF were:
Establish an on-going community engagement standing committee
Improve Board member accessibility
Leverage the Web (it is the future)
Establish on-going communication committee
Produce a professional, district-wide, visually appealing newsletter
Increase Key Communicator usage

3. The process to populate Creekside elementary school and establish new elementary school boundaries in 2007 was flawed in many ways. The decisions made by the board did not achieve the stated objectives other than populating Creekside. This process pitted district residents against each other and created a situation of diminished trust with the school district. I hope that the board will use lessons learned by the mistakes made with this situation as they move forward in preparation for the opening of elementary school #8 in 2014-15.

Caren Diedrich: Did Not Respond

Jim McCourt: Did Not Respond

_______________________________________________
4. 60% of middle schoolers earned honor roll status recently. Some feel it is a reflection of grade inflation. Do you agree? Do you feel that grade inflation is a significant issue in the district? Why or why not?

Al Slane:
Perhaps, but if you look at the WKCE data, the number of kids in the proficient and advanced category exceed the numbers of kids on the honor roll. The disconnect is should grading be based on a bell curve or based on what kids know. From there, you have to decide if proficient and advanced are equivalent to B's and A's. This is where the jury is still out for me, as proficient is a pretty wide sale.

I think grade inflation becomes more of an issue as you get into high school. This is something we can measure, as core grades should correlate to ACT scores, and we are doing more ACT-type testing moving forward (EPAS passed at 3-8 Board meeting). It is also important because kids going to college need to be prepared for how things work in the real world, where there is a curve, and sometimes, good people don't make the cut.

John Welke:
Grade inflation is an issue that has come up recently. During my campaign I have had an opportunity to talk with a number of district residents who have expressed their concerns in this area. There is no doubt that if one were to simply look at the number there are quite a few students that make the honor roll. I do not feel that I have enough information on this issue in order to make a well informed decision/opinion. I will say however that up to this point much of the focus has been on the seemingly high percentage of students making the Honor Roll. I guess what I would like to see is the grade distribution of the students NOT on the honor roll. I believe that bit of information would go a long way in providing a clearer picture for everyone whether or not there might be a valid concern over grade inflation.

Caren Diedrich: Did Not Respond

Jim McCourt: Did Not Respond
________________________________________________
5. Each year electors in the district have an opportunity to actively participate in the Annual Meeting. In October 2009 the community voted to reduce the proposed tax levy by $2M. The economy is not in that much better condition and the proposed levy will increase 8.6% to about $48.05M. If the community again reduces the levy from the proposed amount what will your position be?

Al Slane:
I would not be very happy, as the proposed budget is under the cap while opening two new schools, which was not easy to do. A large portion of the increase is due to the increase in the debt levy and the increased expense of opening the schools (more people), all of which the community voted for. If we had not added 4K last year, we would be in a much worse situation then we are today. I am in favor of trying to bring the budget in more by finding some more permanent cost savings, but it becomes increasingly difficult without cutting services, which many have been very vocal about maintaining. More important, in my opinion, is making changes to prepare for potential state cuts in future years.

John Welke:
First let me say that I was pleasantly surprised to see the active participation and higher than normal attendance at the 2009 Annual Meeting. Typically the Annual Meeting is poorly attended with little community input. At the 2009 meeting the message was clear that the community was hurting economically and they wanted some tax relief and voted accordingly. Fortunately the approved tax levy coupled with budget cuts and use of Fund Balance will be sufficient for the district to make it through this school year.

The current projected 8.6% levy increase for 2010-11 has me a little worried. As you accurately stated the economy is not in all that much better shape and I’m sure community members, now better informed about the annual meeting, may show up in force to try and trim the school district tax levy even more. If too much is cut at once from the tax levy it may not be sufficient to operate the school district without significant cuts in areas that will negatively affect student achievement.

I think that the school district budget can and should be trimmed and that this should be an ongoing process throughout the year. The school board should be involved at every step in the budgeting and planning process and the administration should be more creative in finding areas to trim. In addition, I believe that increased community engagement will garner better support and trust by the community in the school board and district administration. This increased trust will benefit all parties involved.

Caren Diedrich: Did Not Respond
Jim McCourt: Did Not Respond
________________________________________________

John Welke added the following to his response. We offer the contact information as a measure of equity, as the other candidates have prominent school district phone numbers and e-mail addresses:

Thank you for the opportunity to answer questions for your readers. If you or your readers have any further questions you may contact via phone at (608) 825-7960 or by E-mail atJohnMWelke@Gmail.com.