Sound of Sun Prairie...not off the hook

We may have been mired down in the field/facilities usage and AD Jimmy Mac shenanigans, SOSP...but we have not forgotten.  In fact, the fields/facilities usage ties in with y'all.

Those old enough my remember those adds for Certs candy/breathmint (the only mint with Retsyn&reg).  What?  The only one with retsyn!?  We must have it.  Except retsyn was the food additive equivalent of smoke and mirrors.  One of the greatest advertising coups of all time.  They literally made something from nothing.

There's a lot of smoke and mirrors associated with the Sound of Sun Prairie (SOSP) too.  Except we believe there's something behind this one.  There's simply too much hand waving and cries of , "It's a great program for the kids and the community".

• SOSP is a school sponsored activity.  
• It's a summer school option (except not available through the on-line registration).
• The district receives between $300 and $400K of state aid for the summer school attendance. 
• We're just not certain exactly how much of the detail has been shared with DPI.
• It's one of those things where you wonder if the aid would be there if the right questions were asked.

• We pay the leaders a stipend.
• The band boosters are believed to also financially award the leaders.
• Kids are required to pay a hefty fee ...to the band boosters...not to the district.
• Yet they use our fields and facilities free of charge.
• Isn't summer school supposed to be at no charge to students?
• Then why do they have to pay an enormous fee?

• Will the SOSP open its books for inspection to the district (we seriously doubt it)
• Where does all this money go?

And if we are now (in theory) charging coaches running summer athletic camps and using fields/facilities...
...why aren't we charging SOSP?

We still have a lot of questions...
...and we think answers are in order.

As we've said before...SOSP IS a great opportunity for kids.  But that does not relive them of their responsibility to pay for the use of facilities.

How Does One Make a Decision Without New Information?

Tomorrow night's agenda for the School Board's HR Committee included the following agenda item:

Sound of Sun Prairie Stipends

But....there are no documents attached. This is basically EXACTLY what was presented previously when the item was tabled.

RECOMMENDATION:
The Executive Director of Human Resources recommends that the Sound of Sun Prairie stipends as stated above, be approved and forwarded to the full board.
ATTACHMENTS:
None

HR Committee Minutes from 8-6-12

Caren Diedrich moved to approve and forward to the full board the 2012-2013 Athletic/Activity Payment Schedule with noted changes except for the Sound of Sun Prairie payment stipends.

Why is it that we have to look to the Sun Prairie STAR to learn WHY this item was tabled--an unusual move?  Shouldn't this have been included in the HR minutes?

Stipends were not approved for the Sound of Sun Prairie Marching Band, as a full report on the program is due to come before the board at a later date.-- SP Star 8-15-12

OK...so if a full report was requested and there is no such report attached to the agenda item, what specific new information will the committee now use to make a decision which they did not have previously?  What's the point of even having the discussion.

Or...did the HR Committee members --but NOT the general public--get a copy of the aforementioned report?
If that's the case, then double dog shame on the district for once again avoiding the light of day.  Who needs Twilight when we have our very own daylight shunning vampires here in SPASD?

Or has the sacred cow used its powers to sweep information that it does not wish to see the light of day underneath the rug?

Oh, so very many questions.  At first glance, [withholding information] is not something we would expect from Ms. Mikula.  So one big question is: if documents were withheld from the public eye, WHO ORDERED THE CODE RED?

The very simplest question we have is this:

How come we pay the SOSP folks MORE than athletics coaches, MORE than activity advisors...and most egregiously...almost 3 times MORE than we pay those teachers who are working on new curriculum????

Please, please tell us that there's a rationale we can support for this apparent nonsense.

Hell's Kitchen, 53590

We've got our own quasi-Olympic logo going, complete with flames.
The school board is going to have their hands full juggling all these frying pans.
Someone(s) may wind up grilled and charred before the smoke clears on these issues.
Memo to board members Whalen and Diedrich:  THIS is what happens when you're asleep at the switch armed only with a rubber stamp.

Who's in charge of this zoo?  Tim Culver likes to say that he's accountable.  But all this has either happened or festered under his watch.  Perhaps instead of spending so much time pushing for trips to China and full-immersion language (sssh...Mandarin Chinese) programs, he needs to do a little housework.  There are a couple of closets beginning to smell ripe.  Should it be the school board's job to police this stuff?  NO!  But sadly, Mr. Whalen, you never took any action regarding the inaction, so now it's a whole lot messier.

So that we're all on the same page, let's re-cap what we've learned over the summer so that you can see why we believe it's hotter than Hell's Kitchen here at SPASD:

2 fields x 13 hrs/day x 67 days is TOO MUCH!

Policy KG (Field Use Rental)
Thanks to school board Veep John Welke's attention to detail and investigative prowess, the public learned that the high school softball fields had been reserved ALL SUMMER LONG from 7:30 am to 8:00 PM.  Talk about a monopoly.

Um...who's paying for the exclusive use of those fields?  Sure the SP Little League ponied up $75,000 initially, but how far does that go?
The cost of reserving the varsity softball field for 67 days at $300/day (12 hrs/day x $25/hr)= $20,100.
Add in the JV field and that comes to $40,200 JUST for the summer of 2012.

Shouldn't SOMEONE be
saying "Nay, Nay"?

We didn't receive a dime. Who's watching this?  Who would have allowed one "renter" to reserve two complete fields for 12 hours or more EVERY day for 67 days this summer????  We're think that SOMEONE with some common sense should have said, "Nay, Nay".

 AD McClowry
The whole hockey fee fiasco hasn't settled completely yet.  Add to that the fact that Mr. McClowry not only personally reserves fields for his own use (for which we could not locate a record of payment), but he's theoretically in charge (to some extent) of all these athletics/activities listed here AND Title IX compliance.  So we think he's got s spot reserved in the center frying pan.

 Athletic “camps”
We also heard publicly this week that a large volume of athletic camps use SPASD fields and facilities, yet we haven't found the deposits we should see for the cost of using these facilities.

Another doubled edged sword here.  We appreciate the value of these camps and the dedication of the coaches.  But at the same time, all evidence points to the fact that fees charged for these camps are paid directly to the coaches.  It's great extra income for the coaches, but where is the taxpayers' share?  We ALL paid for these fields and facilities, and we look forward to revenue generated to help defray the cost of upkeep.  Oh yeah....and according to district policy KG, Procedure KG-R, and exhibit KG-E, they should be paying for the use of these fields.

Sure, it lightens the wad of bills in their pockets, but at the end of the day, those fields and facilities were not built for the purpose of generating personal income for anyone.

 Title IX
We haven't even begun to explore this one, but it is a major issue.  Again, kudos to Veep John Welke for taking the time to ask the question (although many may have missed it). There are a lot of aspects to Title IX compliance.  Are we confident that our school district administration (gulp) has been paying attention to the information below?  Based on the quality of information and level of detail we've seen to date, we're at little concerned that this may be another weakness.

Compliance is determined as follows:
The Policy Interpretation sets forth a three-part test: 1) whether the number of male and female students participating in athletics is “substantially proportionate” to their respective enrollments, or 2) if not, whether the school district can demonstrate a history and continuing expansion of the athletic program in response to the interest and abilities of the “underrepresented” gender; or 3) if the district cannot establish either of the first two circumstances, whether it can demonstrate that the interests and abilities of the underrepresented gender have been “fully and effectively accommodated.”

Title IX: Athletic financing

It is also important to remember that contributions from private entities such as booster clubs are considered public money once they are accepted. Therefore, if a booster club provides benefits or services that assist only a team or teams of one gender, the district is obliged to ensure that teams of the other gender receive equivalent benefits and services, even if that means a reallocation of the district’s budget.

--http://www.asbj.com/MainMenuCategory/Archive/2012/August/Complying-with-Title-IX.html

The Sound of Sun Prairie (SOSP)
 This one we posted....but we don't want to lose sight of the issue.  Love that Sound....but loving it would be  a little easier if we were certain that all the i's have been properly dotted and t's properly crossed.

Sacred Cow Tipping

Oh we defy the very gods on this one... but here goes...

First, and foremost, let us be perfectly clear:  we believe that the Sound of Sun Prairie (SOSP) provides an incredible experience for kids in terms of self discovery, discipline, teamwork, and musical performance.

The purpose of this post is not to point fingers or knee cap The Sound.  Rather, some disconcerting information has come to light following recent school board discussions regarding athletics and activities.  These discussions provide us with a rare window of opportunity in which we can publicly discuss how the Sound meshes with the school district in terms of an educational component and an extra or co-curricular activity.

Is it a candy mint?  A breath mint? Or is it two...two mints in one?

The Certs twins.  Two...two mints in one

Those graying at the temples likely recall the old Certs jingle.  But it's all too fitting here.  Those at the School Board work-study session on July 30 heard that SOSP is a summer school course, and subsequently, we receive state aid because the kids in SOSP "count" towards the summer school enrollment.

What we find interesting, however, is that it seems to be an activity in two parts. It sounds as if the MORNING sessions (8-12) are the "summer school" segment.  After lunch, those kids that return are part of the "extra-curricular activity component".  BUT there is a "pay to play" clause.   In order to participate in the afternoon session, kids must pay a membership fee to the SOSP...a "sliding scale", as told by John Whalen, ranging from $650 to $1,000 or even more.  Ninth graders pay the low part of the sliding scale.  Kinda like marketing a new street high at a discount to hook newcomers.  Once they're hooked, the price goes up.

But...fees are not allowed for summer school classes!

Can a school district charge students for summer school?There shall be no cost to the resident student or parent beyond incidental supplies, textbook or similar items (workbooks) if the district claims state aid under s. 121.14 [State Aid for Summer Classes]. Additionally, if the student is a resident of the district and the class is necessary for a grade promotion, high school graduation, or is given credit toward graduation, the district may not charge for the instruction, building costs or apparatus. If the class is not required, credited or aided, the fees must be based upon the actual cost of the class. 

Ahhhh...see the problem...and the way around it?  The district does not charge a fee for ITS portion, but SOSP does for the OTHER portion.

Is it summer school?
Or is it something masked to LOOK like summer school?  The kids don't get grades or credits.  On its website, SOSP is billed as, "The Sound of Sun Prairie is a voluntary, extra-curricular marching band. "  So does SOSP know its a summer school "course".

So...it's an extracurricular activity?
That's what Jim McClowry labeled it...as a school sponsored "club or activity".  That's what SOSP calls itself.  And fees CAN be charged for activities.  But do we? Consistently?  For all activities?  And if it's an activity--not a summer school course--we shouldn't be receiving any state aid as a result of it (yet we do).  Confused yet?

How come they say the "fee" covers transportation
when the district pays for that???  And what's this about the fee
"covering" the SPASD activity fee?  We looked and couldn't find
ANY deposits to cover this. Hmmmm.

Why so secretive about the "membership fees"?
We searched mightily and could only find an outdated "estimate" of membership fees for 2011.

Well...it's kind of understandable, when they charge that much.  Yes...it's an awesome experience...but isn't it a bit north of the Have/Have Not line?   You know...in the Entitlements subdivision?

Oh...and it covers their "activity" fee too? Can anyone show us where the SPASD summer activity fee has been credited to SPASD?  We could find no such evidence looking at monthly deposits.

And if the school district pays at least $23,000 annually to cover SOSP costs that SOSP says are PART of the membership fee paid by kids, shouldn't those costs be subtracted from the membership fee?  There's roughly 100 SOSP kids.That means their membership fee should be reduced by $230 each (and we haven't even talked about an activity fee yet).  OR...the school district should be receiving a check for $23,000 PLUS an activity fee.  Hello!  Jim McClowry went to great lengths to explain why hockey kids should be gouged to the tune of $550 each because of less than $20,000 in ice time costs.  Here's a group that costs that much AND uses our facilities without paying a rental fee (hey...we charge the Special Olympics for Pete's sake!).....and the district gets NOTHING in return.

We just hope this doesn't jeopardize our state aid funding.  Does DPI REALLY know how this all works?  How could they...when WE don't even know how it works?

If SOSP is charging a whopper membership and the district does not receive a penny, why are taxpayers footing the bill for SOSP costs ?

Just looking at school district check registers over the past year (and we may have missed some) we came up with just under $23,000 in SOSP costs that the taxpayers/school district funded.  Why are we paying for these things when SOSP collects between $70,000 and $100,000 in membership fees annually?

Wait...isn't that MORE than we pay in ice time for hockey?  You know...hockey...as in the ones we were trying to gouge with a 275% fee increase to re-coup our costs?  Oh...that's right, there is no activity for for SOSP.

Perhaps there's an explanation, but without transparency in accounting, we won't have it.

Check run  Check#  Vendor              Inv. Date   Amount       Purpose

8/8/2011  109652  IDEAL CRANE RENTAL  07/08/2011  $55.00    SOSP SKYJACK PICK UP

8/8/2011  109652  IDEAL CRANE RENTAL  07/14/2011  $400.00   SOSP SKYJACK RENTAL

9/12/2011  110111  KOBUSSEN BUSES     07/31/2011  $4,669.59 PUPIL TRANS SOSP JULY

10/10/2011  110634  COLTS DRUM & BUGLE  08/31/2011  $12,655.00 SOSP EQUIP REPLACE

1/23/2012  112790  WARD BRODT MUSIC CO  12/31/2011  $330.00   SOSP EQUIP REPLACE 

6/11/2012  115768  IDEAL CRANE RENTAL   05/15/2012  $455.00   SOSP SKYJACK RENTAL

6/25/2012  115981  IDEAL CRANE RENTAL   05/21/2012  $55.00    SOSP SKYJACK PICKUP

6/25/2012  115981  IDEAL CRANE RENTAL   05/31/2012  $120.00   SOPS SKYJACK RENTAL

7/23/2012  116256  KOBUSSEN BUSES     06/30/2012  $3,926.35 PUPIL TRANS SOSP JUNE

7/23/2012  116327  FRED RENTS LLC     06/29/2012  $300.00     BG SOSP LIFT RENTAL

  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

                                                 $22,965.94

And then there are the "stipends" we pay the SOSP leaders
Are you kidding us?  We pay the SOSP director (assuming 10 yrs experience) $8,700 but building leadership council members only a flat $500?  Or how about Curriculum Leadership Council members?  These are the teachers building the curriculum for...oh...you know...the actual education of our students?
And the most they get is $2,030...or less than what the SOSP "Assistant" receives?

And we also here that the band boosters or SOSP actually pay and additional stipend to the SOSP leaders.

Anything wrong with this picture?

What about kids that want the experience but cannot afford the membership fee?
It is Sun Prairie policy (and DPI rule) that economically disadvantaged kids shall not be charged extracurricular fees.  Since SOSP seems to operate outside of SPASD policies, we need to ask: are these same opportunities afforded for kids wishing to partake of the SOSP experience?  In his inimitable style, John Whalen attempted to put this to rest.  He stammered something like, "um...The Sound can offer scholarships...".  Great!  But having the ability to do something and actually doing something are horses of very different colors, Mr. Whalen?  Do you happen to know if any scholarships have actually been awarded?  Are they full scholarships (like SPASD) or do they just subsidize a few bucks?  What IS the policy?

What's all that spell?
We think it spells something like "needs further review".  Here's hoping the school board looks at this with as keen an eye as they did hockey fees.  And we better make DARN sure that DPI (A) knows the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and (B) there is no monkey business  that jeopardizes our receiving state aid for summer school.