Paging Mr. C. O. Jones! You're Needed for Policy KG.

We live in a school district with many things.  But one thing we mot definitely lack is any administrators with cojones.  As Metallica would sing, "Sad, but true."  The district office is populated by eunuchs.  We thought that Joe Palooka might bring a pair with him to Buildings & Grounds, but apparently the rule is that one's cojones must be tuned over in order to obtain your district ID.  Lord knows that Tim Culver grows evermore like Tootles, constantly in search of his lost marbles.  Phil Frei is a fiscal wizard, but don't ask him to hold anyone accountable for paying their bills.  Sad but true.   One would think that collecting money due would be the prime directive for a Business Manager....wouldn't one?

Now we understand that money due to the district--and UNPAID--- for camps and such exceeds $40,000 just for the past school year alone.  And the usual suspects are all whining and moaning about how to collect it.  Or even whether to bother collecting it at all.  Just tack maintenance costs onto the tax levy.  After all...it's all for the kids, right?

Here is yet another version of 10 Things We Think We Think about field/facility rental:

Is it too much to ask?

1. 40K of unpaid bills.  How much RTI assistance would $40K buy?  $40,000 represents 5% of the purported cost of turfing Ashley field.  And that's just fees unpaid for 2012-13.  That's lot of money we're throwing away.

2. The only "groups" unhappy about being charged for facility usage is coaches holding "for profit" camps.  You don't see gaggles of blue haired old ladies screaming, "Don't charge the coaches for using the fields!" There are a lot of folks in the district without kids, and when they hear about this, they get angry, too.   But that anger comes from the opposite position.

3. Are coaches employees of the school district over the summer?  They retain their keys to buildings and use of e-mail.  They do not collect unemployment.   They have signed contracts for the next school year.   An employee of a school district cannot profit from  use of publicly owned facilities.  It's against state law.   So why are we enabling (facilitating?) it?

4. Is "negotiation" of fees owed even allowed?  If so, what are the rules governing how one can reduce the fees for facility use via negotiation?  is the same mechanism afforded to all similarly affected parties?  e understand that some coaches have quietly haggling down the fees they owe.   One would think that a Business Manager would understand how that doesn't work.

5. How can we expect ANY coach to pay their required fees if others refuse to pay?  They either all must pay or none must pay.  And the latter must not be an option.  Hell it would violate policy KG as it exists today.

6. Why aren't we simply garnishing wages of those employees who refuse to pay for field/facility use for camps?  We could attach our attorney and court fees for the collection process as well.

7.  The "No Pay, No Play" concept will simply not fly.  Next spring, the district eunuchs will relent and allow the camps to be run despite the coaches having yet another year of unpaid bills.  Hell this has happened for years.  The mantra seems to be, "We'll get 'em next year!"  This has to be the year we get all the money due and start with a clan slate.

8.  If the revenue from these camps truly gets turned over to the booster clubs, and they in turn give it back to the district in the form of equipment or uniforms, why don't we cut out the middleman?   Have the coaches running camps have registration fees sent right to the district and the money be deposited into a sinking fund for that sport  The district could then take a percentage fee off the top for field and facility maintenance.  Then the boosters wouldn't have to spend any time depositing all that money.

9.  And if the money is going to the booster clubs, why is it that the camp fees are mailed to the home address of the head coach running the camp?  Why doesn't it get sent to the address for the booster club?    We get it.  The coaches should get "something" for their time.  How about we tie it into their contracts.  Hold a camp and you get $_____ extra dollars compensation.

10.  Why are we even arguing about this?  And why does it take so long?  Would we allow the Facilities Manager to hold a concert in the PAC without paying a use fee and collect all revenues from attendees?  Would we allow the Pool Manager to earn money on the side teaching swimming lessons in the high school pool without paying a fee?  How about a group of employees to use the field house for a holiday craft fair --free of charge-- and then collect the revenue from charging vendors for booth space?  

Stop pussyfooting around and make these folks --all of them---pony up the fees that are due!  Thy were told they'd be charged...right?  Because this all came to a head in June/July 2012...long before the start of 2012-1 camps.

One Step Forward...TWO Steps Back

OK...so we're doing better with the district's Facilities Use calendar...

But..... now the transparency has been removed. One USED to be able to click on any reservation and view the "permit" information including who the "client" is, any charges which will be assessed and whether or not the user's insurance is up-to-date.

Geee....and coincidentally when things are starting to heat up regarding "Policy KG" (Use of District Fields/Facilities).

Now that Jimmy Mac is gone....who will we blame for this "unintended error"?

Shame, Shame, SHAME!

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.

Time to Pop This Zit

Sorry for the disgusting analogy, but policy KG has gotten so out of hand, it IS disgusting.

What am I? Click to see the classic clip!

As a friend of ours used to say..."it's a grounder...you gotta squeeze it to get it to surface".

District administration (remember...Dr. Culver is ultimately accountable) simply refuses to deal with the issue. There is a policy in place, but nobody wants to enforce it.  It's unfair to hang this on Joe Powelka, who took over Buildings an Grounds last summer.  He's trying to do the right thing.  We think.  But he's getting no support from on high.

We've spoken with people involve in this whole shady deal and we're told of backroom deals and "negotiations"....you know...nudge, nudge, wink , wink....that ensure that the good folks of SPLL will never be charge while we have no trouble at all charging the Madison Downs Syndrome Society.  Shame on you all!

Show us your "Get Out of Jail Free" card
We've heard rumors of past precedent and "the way things work".  Bullspit!  Show us in writing where it says you can use facilities other than high school fields...even on weekends...and before school competition is complete---without paying a fee.  But please...have something tangible...not some story or blaming of past Buildings and Grounds Managers.

Excerpt from the Sun Prairie Little League facility use agreement

Yes, we have an agreement with the Sun Prairie Little League (SPLL) to use the fields. And yes they are paying us $85,000 over time for 23 years of field use. But that is for the HIGH SCHOOL FIELDs....AFTER the competition season is complete.  It does not apply to indoor facilities; nor does it apply to Ashley field, fields at CHUMS, or any other fields.  We're sorry that this weird spring has forced people to head indoors to practice, but your agreement doesn't cover that.

Lost field/facility maintenance revenue:  $27,625 for ONE field!

SPLL "squatting" on softball fields...AGAIN!

The SPLL has laid claim to the varsity softball field from 8 am to 9 pm EVERY DAY between June 1 and August 24th!   At no cost!  Because, of course...they are giving u $85,000.   That $85,000 over 23 years amounts to a whopping $3,700 per year to cover field maintenance and upkeep.   At field usage fees (Policy KG) we are losing $27,625 in potential maintenance/field facility revenues every single year for JUST THIS ONE FIELD!  Suddenly that $85,000 doesn't seem like such a good deal...does it?

And they also have the JV softball field locked up as well.  Worse, yet...they did this last year; it was called out, and nothing has changed.  We're back doing the same thing all over again!

Shouldn't SOMEONE ask about conflict of interest on Jim McClowry's part?
Athletics and Activities Director Jim McClowry (yep...Jimmy Mac is back in the headlights again!) is the personal contact for a whole set of facility uses under the Little League umbrella. And did we mention that he serves on the board of directors for the SPLL?   Doesn't that in some way, shape, or form constitute a conflict of interest?  Dr. Culver?  Ferris Beuler?  ANYONE?

It' no wonder he hasn't taken the time to learn about the potential new sport, lacrosse, or read their application in detail.  It seems abundantly clear that Mr. McClowry is all about baseball.  Hmmmm...even the turf on Ashley Field project is suddenly being hijacked by the desire for a new baseball field at the cost of $350K+. Is it right for an AD to be that involved in a single sport?  More to the point....to be so un-involved in other sports/activities?   It's no wonder why Jimmy Mac is looking to hire a 1/2 time Assistant AD.  He does't have enough time for baseball!

There are also some reservations made for SPLL under the names of certain high school coaches that list the coach's school district address, phone, and e-mail.  Some community residents may wonder whether our staff are doing SPLL business on the district's dime.

Little League Tournaments
We see several SPLL Tournaments scheduled on OUR fields as well.  You suppose they bring in more than $3,700 in revenue from these?

Geee....we wonder what kind of revenue the district could generate from holding ...say... a softball tournament.  Oh...wait...we can't.  SPLL is squatting on the JV and varsity softball fields all summer.

Can we talk about insurance policies (or lack thereof)?
The other thing of note is that more often than not if you call up a reservation, you see a red flag that there is no current insurance certificate on file.  Again...are we following policy at all?

Bottom Line: For $3,700 a year, SPLL gets to use all of our facilities whenever they like?
Are you KiddinG (ing) us?

Policy "KG" Brings Coaches Out in Force

We're baaaa-aaaack!

Who woulda thunk?
The Planning Committee meeting agenda seemed rather vanilla...but lurking within was a revision being proposed to Policy KG - Use of School Facilities.  And someone gave a heads up to school district coaching staff and local youth programs, because a rough head count of 24 attendees --all coaches and youth program folks---was made.

Something smells funky here.
It's almost like someone stuffed a bunch of really damp, sweaty gym clothes in a hole in the wall, spackled it over and painted it up. It's good as new...right?  At least until the temperatures start soaring.     That's what the revisions to Policy KG do.  We have a problem folks, and the district is simply opting not to address it.

Let's charge fees to the Madison Down's Syndrome Society to use our facilities, but let's not charge the coaches that are running a camp that takes in an estimated $17,500...to (air condition and) use the fieldhouse, right?  It's all about the kids, so we shouldn't be charging camps to use our fields/facilities.  It' all about the kids....just not THOSE kids.  How dare you!!!!

Oh wait...NOW you don't want to charge a fee to ANYBODY...right?   The fine taxpayers of Sun Prairie (and yes, some of you are also coaches) provided at least $6 MILLION dollars for athletic fields (no to mention indoor facilities).  These things require maintenance and upkeep, and policy KG simpy charged a nominal fee to cover those costs.  But it's cutting into SOMEONE's profits.

Don't we already have a policy?
Why yes...why yes we do.  And SP-EYE looked at facility/field reservation and use over the past 2 years an we did not see a SINGLE athletic camp reimbursing the district for field/facility use.   Were they even billed?   Hmmm.  We hear that fees were waived.  Is that true?  Because we do not see anything in existing policy that would allow fees to be waived.  No one has that authority.  So if it happened (and we believe it did)...WHO ORDERED THE CODE RED?

Look folks, we have a policy now that is not being followed.  What makes anyone believe that changing th policy is going to result in compliance?  Compliance can only occur when someone is enforcing the policy.  That' not happening.  And it was clear Monday night that the district want to ignore the past and focus on the future.

Phil Frei lacks the information...again
School board member Steve Schroeder very astutely asked Phil Frei what revenues we received for field/facility use.   Frei was very quick wit
h figures for revenue generated by the pool ($24K) and the Performing Art Center ($15K).   Schroeder asked , "What about for fields?"   Frei looked away and said that he didn't have that information.

Really?  You have pool and PAC revenues on the tip of your tongue and at a meeting when all the coaches appear to talk about field rental fees, you don't have that information"?  REALLY?  Once again, the district doesn't look so hot.  One has to ask the obvious question....did Frei REALLY not know?  Or did he know but did not wish to air it publicly because it would not look very good.

We don't want to pay to use facilities!
It was abundantly clear that coaches feel they should not have to pay a dime to use district facilities.  Of curse, we can't find any indication that many coaches have actually been paying. As Brian Kaminski stated, "I'm fine with paying for the lining of fields, but not field use fees."  Really, coach?  Have you PAID for the cost of lining those fields in even the past 2 years?  Ever?

Kaminski admits that coaches DO get paid
Football coach Brian Kaminski may have unwittingly admitted something else that we are hearing most coaches are denying:  that coaches receive payment for their involvement in camps.  Perhaps he got caught up in the moment, but Kaminksi blurted out, "The amount of money we make as coaches [at these summer camps] is minimal".   Well, Brian, I guess what constitutes "minimal" may be in the eye of the beholder.  But you DO receive pay.  You DO profit.  What we're wondering is: how much did it cost the taxpayers to line those fields and then restore them after they were subject to weeks of drought last summer and then your football camp, which includes not jut Sun Prairie, but Waunakee football?

Taking Title IX a little too lightly?
At one point the spectre of Title IX was invoked.  There are some folks concerned that if we do not know where the money is going for these camps, then we run the risk of developing inequity in funding for male vs. female sports and activities.

Coach and SPEA president Brad Lutes responded to the resident's concern by stating that the SP Quarterback Club recently donated a number of new football helmets for the football program.   Lutes indicated that he did not believe that the girls volleyball or softball teams would have any interest in an equivalent number of football helmets.

Mister Lutes (we think) was being funny, tossing in a wisecrack.  Forgive us if we do not share his the humor in light-hearted jab.  Title IX is serious business.   No, perhaps the girls teams have no use for football helmets, but we bet they WOULD leap at the opportunity of securing funding equivalent to the cost of those helmets!

We see those cool "Gators" being used to drive (what else) Gator Aid and other equipment onto the football field.  We've often wondered who paid for those?  Are they just reserved for football use?  Because  we're pretty sure that the girls softball team might appreciate the use of them to drive bats and balls over to their field, assuming they don't already.

That's what Title IX is about, Brad...making sure that program equities exist for both boys and girls (and coed) sports.

Being Purposely Obtuse?
God bless the STAR for they don't seem to get it.  The article about this meeting wasn't even bland...it aspired to be bland.  Despite the concern raised bout Title IX, no mention was made.

In the end, the committee wisely decided to table the issue.  Of course, then the question comes back to...why haven't we collected money for field use by camps over the past 2 years?  Hmmmm...we smell an Open Records Request simmering on the front burner.  Cn you say, "Open Records Request" boys and girls?  There.  We knew you could!

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.

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.